As news reports proliferate of multimillion-dollar — and possibly billion-dollar — fraudulent diversions of government funds involving Minnesota’s Somali immigrant community, it may be time at one year’s end and the next one’s beginning to take a longer look at America’s experience with immigration, and to seek the guidance of the first and one of its two greatest presidents.

The Founding Fathers were aware that their new nation was gifted with vast acreage, but only 4 million people were counted in the first decennial Census in 1790. The Constitution’s first words, drafted by the gifted wordsmith Gouverneur Morris, stated that its authority came from “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common Defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

There is a tension in these words: The new federal government is designed to guarantee liberty but also to “insure” tranquility, for the existing citizenry and for their descendants.

Leave aside, for a moment, current controversies over whether and how the federal government can prevent the states from obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The larger point is that the Framers envisioned that it was possible and desirable that foreign migrants enter the U.S. and, under specified terms and conditions, become full citizens.

This was inconsistent with British and European ideas.

The Founders’ attitude toward immigration and citizenship was enunciated best by the man who was elected unanimously as the first president, George Washington. After his election, Washington embarked on carefully choreographed tours of the northern and then the southern states. The story is told vividly in Nathaniel Philbrick’s 2021 book “Travels with George: In Search of Washington and His Legacy.”

Washington was very much aware that Article VI of the Constitution stated that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” And he certainly knew that the text of the First Amendment to the Constitution, which would be approved by Congress in September and ratified by the states in December, provided that “Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

Washington addressed the Touro congregation, in words echoing in part the welcome of its Warden, Moses Seixas, and spoke words that deserve to be remembered today. In the 340 words of Washington’s letter is encased enduring guidance for immigration policy. He endorses the idea of the moral equality of all citizens and contemplates that citizenship will be extended widely, to the benefit of the nation.

But there is also the notion of reciprocity.

Washington’s default assumption is that people of many different backgrounds can be good citizens.

Some look back on the Immigration Act of 1924, which almost cut off immigration from southern and eastern Europe, as necessary for assimilating migrants from different cultures, although immigration fell toward zero in years of depression and war (1930-45) and was partially blocked by the Iron Curtain even longer (1947-89), and assimilation was fostered during World War II and actively encouraged by articulate elites for the first two-thirds of the 20th century.

With elites skeptical of assimilation over the last half-century, it’s not incompatible with Washington’s vision to restrict immigration from cultures that are adversarial to or incompatible with the wide range of acceptable American cultural folkways.

In addressing such issues, it’s worth keeping in mind the counsel Washington provided 234 years ago, and the constitutional framework, including the supremacy of federal laws over state preferences, that he did so much to create.