U.S. Supreme Court Hands Obama Administration Political Loss – Upholds Controversial Provision of Arizona’s Immigration Law

news_img_3198ANN ARBOR, MI – The U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision today in the highly contested case of Arizona et al. v. United States, in which the Obama Administration fought to strike all provisions of Arizona’s strict immigration law.  Although siding with the Federal government on some of the provisions of Arizona’s law, the Supreme Court handed the Obama administration a political loss by upholding Section 2(B), the most controversial provision of Arizona’s law.

The Supreme Court ruled that Section 2(B) of Arizona’s law that requires police officers to check the immigration status of all individuals legally detained on other crimes before being released, is constitutional.  This provision was attacked by both President Obama and Attorney General Holder in public statements claiming racial profiling immediately after Arizona’s law was enacted.  The Court ruled that the remaining provisions of Arizona’s law were unconstitutional, because they were preempted by Federal law already on the books.  Click here to read the Supreme Court’s decision.

The Thomas More Law Center has been fighting in support of Arizona’s strict immigration regulations since SB1070 was passed.  The Law Center submitted amicus briefs both in the Ninth Circuit and before the Supreme Court arguing that Section 2(B) of Arizona’s immigration law was not pre-empted by federal law – the position unanimously adopted by the Supreme Court.  The Thomas More Law Center argued that the upheld provision fell within Arizona’s state policing powers.  Click here to read the Thomas More Law Center’s Brief to the Supreme Court.

Switch to mobile version