Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
On or Fox News senior judicial analysts are good morning to you -- -- initial reaction from you is what.
That the heart and soul of the Arizona statute it's been struck down by the Supreme Court consistent with previous Supreme Court opinions.
That basically say for better or for worse with the elected or not immigration is a federal issue.
To be administered by the United States of America by the federal government and not by the states so that immigration law means the same thing in all fifty states.
As it does in Washington DC and basically the court is saying to those in Arizona who are understandably.
Unhappy with the administration of immigration law by this administration.
If you don't like it vote them out of office but don't try to change the law because you -- essentially without.
Authority or sovereignty to do that one part of the law that stands though at -- of the officer reasonably suspects the person is in the United States illegally.
During an individual stopper detainment.
That apparently still stands in the yet -- Chan -- important makes there is that now your gonna see when an officer does this.
What sort of a court challenge comes from that you're probably gonna see a court challenge the first time the -- does -- -- and in all likelihood you're right but based on what we've heard from the court today -- something like that stand or not.
Well it's unclear us from reading the opinion it's about a 125 pages -- been out for about fifteen minutes it's unclear from reading it.
If of the ninth circuit injunction that's the order issued by the Court of Appeals.
Preventing Arizona from even engaging in this.
Look up on a computer and see if -- person is wanna by the federal authorities for a violation of immigration law still stands in other words.
Will the law -- it is is that to be ordered to section to be automatically on done I suspect.
But the Supreme Court is looking for a factual challenge.
In which a state court can decide whether or not the police are appropriately exercising this authority under Arizona law.
Because of if you look at it in a very narrow way the state of Arizona basically said the police offices.
When you stop somebody see if they're wanted for other violations of law you or automatically do that.
Now you can see whether or not they are wanted by immigration authorities.
But see if they are wanted.
Is an internal police function and the Supreme Court wants to see how that works out -- stop them because they look like they're illegal immigrants.
Is what the Supreme Court -- put a stop.
To -- but the court did say part of the law requiring police to check the status of someone they suspect is not in the US legally could go forward.
And and now we wait to see whether or not that hasn't gotten -- outlets -- probably this afternoon.
In Arizona someone wouldn't exempt for Arabia Gerri -- noon every relevant to some of your job for general -- part of Eli hit there are numerous states that are still going through their own definition of all of this law Alabama you think about Georgia there's a challenge and Indiana South Carolina does any of this today affect those laws.
And others say yes this opinion strikes at the heart of the Arab the of the Alabama -- and I'm unfamiliar with the wanna Georgia but -- read the one in Alabama.
Both the Arizona and the Alabama statute presumed.
But where the federal government chooses not to enforce federal immigration law.
The states may stand in the place of the federal government and enforce the federal law as they in the states understand it to but he.
-- -- the Supreme Court has said the states may not do that no matter how well intended there their motives may be.
No matter how burdensome is the problem with illegal immigration in their states.
Only the federal government can enforce in a traditional way.
Federal immigration -- and pointed question how was Alabama different from Arizona.
-- are you arguing that that there's -- even matter now.
I don't think it matters after reading this opinion because the linchpin of what Alabama and Arizona did was the same we're gonna stand in the shoes of the Fed's.
Cause they're not doing their job the Supreme Court has said definitively with respect to immigration.
The states may not do that judge.
The decision is by Justice Kennedy.
Does that mean anything.
Maybe just haven't got busy week JP.
I don't know -- especially the swing he had he is the swing vote between love for liberal justices and the four conservative ones.
We of course are all waiting I detect this in your in your wonderfully delicious question Jamie.
Where wondering if he's going to be the author of the affordable health care act law are our opinion which will probably come down Thursday if he has he's having a very busy week -- judge don't leave town -- right.
Thursday by the way is the last day for Supreme Court opinion before -- they break for the summer.
-- it is not clear though if Thursday is the only day of possibilities for decision.
Health care could come down tomorrow it might be Wednesday but it will -- for certain come down.
By Thursday of this week judge many thanks to you we've got.
Filter by section