You're watching...
Lis Wiehl and Tamara Holder discuss the legalities of the ruling on the AZ immigration law
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
All right okay let's get to the immigration decision that we got yesterday from the supreme -- I'll play you first.
Some of the sand we heard -- you as you know both sides Democrats and Republicans.
Claiming victory on this let's listen first to.
Arizona governor Jan Brewer who of cost brought up the and a pull together.
The entire legislation which was largely struck down except perhaps in -- -- mind at least.
The most important part of is certainly the most controversial part of it that so called show us you papers.
-- ended his government gambrel.
Arizona.
Did not ask for this fight nor did it seek out the task of having to confront illegal immigration.
We cannot forget that we are here to -- because the federal government has failed the American people regarding immigration policy.
Has failed to protect its citizens has still to preserve the rule of law and has failed to secure.
Our borders.
And here is senator Harry Reid from the other side on the floor of the senate.
I don't think you're going to be carrying your immigration papers with repetition go.
But if you're an Arizona and you speak with a little bit of an accident or your skin colors -- you better have your papers with you.
-- an unfortunate.
That's the political divide what about the legal ramifications of this -- It seems to me that in many ways this was just kicked back to the local.
Absolutely kick back the lower court pick back in the ninth circuit we have with the supreme court's that is where -- saying those three provisions are out all right but one provision repeat saying hey ninth circuit.
You element too quick on that.
There was nobody -- actually have standing or was damaged no one who is actually.
Hold over it asks for those papers and was hurt and or damaged so work -- back to you now here's what I predicted camera didn't weigh in on this.
My guess is that within a week ten days something like that you will have some -- -- pulled over.
Asked for papers get CAC LU or another attorney involved and we'll see it back to -- answer and that it and does it to head back to the supreme would ultimately in -- case through.
Well hopefully I need it it it doesn't necessarily have to go to the Supreme Court they can accept or reject case.
But it but -- is absolutely right it has to do it.
Finding the body.
Rest where are they weren't arguing the -- certain provisions of the walk and at the end of the day regardless of our political affiliation is the Supreme Court essentially -- The federal government and state and local officials can communicate about immigration they've already been able to do that that's what they're doing in this case is -- with this long at least a part of a lot that they -- right now we need.
A body somebody who gets pulled over sized -- I was racially profiled I was pulled over for.
You know a traffic stop or something like you can -- in the drug case -- a block.
Driver right Sunday -- Hannity and we've already had governor brewer give orders to the Arizona.
Law enforcement officials.
Two put this -- in the practice exactly long but on the other hand we've heard from the federal government that then don't gonna help pat in this so.
It's going to be next to -- it's still going to be -- -- I mean it was not a -- decision and that that -- absolutely not a -- decision but I think I think the Supreme Court.
Was saying to the ninth circuit.
Yet just -- and -- here you can't do that and so they were probably legally right on that.
But how it plays out in a practical effect is going to be really interesting really -- him.
-- so.
We get to the other big decision the blockbuster decision from the home Thursday.
I -- There's no way to read tea leaves and it didn't really extrapolate anything from this decision as to my -- over the.
Know people they're talking about that for the last day I don't think so now I covered for Fox News radio all six hours of the argument tonight and an -- Other -- a lot of but.
Certainly I sense from from the justices and in patients.
With the government can't you answer this basic question.
Why can't there be a price that mandate in other words and I -- the government is forcing you as an individual all of us as individuals.
To contract.
With the private company whether we wanted -- -- -- services even if we don't want them.
Can't you answer how that -- under the commerce clause and they really didn't get an answer.
Right.
Yeah hey I've been covering this since day one -- giving might -- -- you're playing and I'm very good yeah.
And all I can say at this point is that I really don't wanna talk about it and -- I know one other thing about it and I went exploring and number two excite.
Let me set it -- you can't it.
Who knows you -- there's so many questions but it did not seen like during during the hearings that there.
That day the justices were excited about about this new law -- all right.
Couple of W is weighing in on the points we've been talking -- back.
Dean guy says I agree to the tennis tournament carries and dusty case.
That suffered so much and it only candidates on dusty is done so much com.
No doubt he's done a lot of palm but there's also some evidence that your opportunity -- -- of the legendary coach.
Termed something of a blind eye to this I guess we'll never know the full truth on that.
I'm on the question of papers -- -- is a fun traveling in from its.
Is it unreasonable for them to require me to carry about possible with me provoked to provided to local or -- -- us is -- a reasonable for them to.
To pull -- -- state my originally stated visit ultra right says if the person stopped has no papers to they have grant's to see you I would think not.
No -- by the way I'm going to Paris with my daughter this evening so your I don't think -- -- -- -- above what about about that point I mean.
Somebody who doesn't have papers isn't gonna take any legal action on this no no because a lot doesn't.
Require that they have to happen on.
And there trusted that's exactly that's in her breast dead end and the police Iraq that we saw Sarah status.
You were supposed hacker papers on you and sent to jail to face court just ruled that may not.
Proper that is not -- -- the -- view -- -- -- the difference is if your pulled over for something else a legitimate.
Stop six purple not a -- like a shoplifting like that as something you know that way and then the question is going to be is -- racial profiling to ask you right.
Papers -- -- superfluous in the eye of the beholder exact answer all right lot of questions will be on -- At some point when as a a -- timers say.
Somebody is actually stopped.
And is subject right to this new lol.
I tell hold criminal defense attorney folks he's contributed thank you very much for being a great to have you at least -- Fox News legal analyst -- he was always -- Thank you too far all you'll com.
