By MARK SHERMAN
Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) - The
Supreme Court struck down key provisions of Arizona's crackdown on
immigrants Monday but said a much-debated portion on checking suspects'
status could go forward.
The court did not throw out
the state provision requiring police to check the immigration status of
someone they suspect is in the United States illegally. Even there,
though, the justices said the provision could be subject to additional
legal challenges.
The decision upholds the
"show me your papers" requirement for the moment. But it takes the teeth
out of it by prohibiting police officers from arresting people on minor
immigration charges.
The court announced that
Thursday would be the last day of rulings this term, which means the
decision on President Barack Obama's landmark health care overhaul
probably will come that day.
Justice Anthony Kennedy
wrote the opinion for the court that was unanimous on allowing the
status check to go forward. The court was divided on striking down the
other portions.
Kennedy said the law could -
and suggested it should - be read to avoid concerns that immigration
status checks could lead to prolonged detention.
The court struck down these
three major provisions: requiring all immigrants to obtain or carry
immigration registration papers, making it a state criminal offense for
an illegal immigrant to seek work or hold a job and allowing police to
arrest suspected illegal immigrants without warrants.
The Obama administration
sued to block the Arizona law soon after its enactment two years ago.
Federal courts had refused to let the four key provisions take effect.
Five states - Alabama,
Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah - have adopted variations on
Arizona's law. Parts of those laws also are on hold pending the outcome
of the Supreme Court case.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor joined all of Kennedy's opinion.
Justices Antonin Scalia and
Clarence Thomas would have allowed all the challenged provisions to
take effect. Justice Samuel Alito would have allowed police to arrest
undocumented immigrants who seek work, and also make arrests without
warrants.
Scalia, in comments from
the bench, caustically described Obama's recently announced plans to
ease deportation rules for some children of illegal immigrants.
"The president said at a
news conference that the new program is 'the right thing to do' in light
of Congress' failure to pass the administration's proposed revision of
the Immigration Act. Perhaps it is, though Arizona may not think so.
But to say, as the court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by
enforcing applications of the Immigration Act that the president
declines to enforce boggles the mind," Scalia said.
The case focused on whether
states can adopt their own immigration measures to deal with an
estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the face of federal inaction
on comprehensive immigration reform, or whether the federal government
has almost exclusive authority in the area of immigration.
Kennedy wrote obliquely about the impasse on immigration reform at the national level.
"Arizona may have
understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal
immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue
policies that undermine federal law," Kennedy said.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer
said in a written statement that the ruling marks a victory for people
who believe in the responsibility of states to defend their residents.
"The case for SB1070 has always been about our support for the rule of
law. That means every law, including those against both illegal
immigration and racial profiling," Brewer said. Law enforcement will be
held accountable should this statute be misused in a fashion that
violates an individual's civil rights."
Civil rights groups that
separately challenged the law over concerns that it would lead to rights
abuses said their lawsuit would go on.
Even with the limitations
the high court put on Arizona, the immigration status check still is "an
invitation to racial profiling," said American Civil Liberties Union
lawyer Omar Jadwat.
Copyright
2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not
be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
