HUNTING LICENSE FOR COPS

THE SUPREME Court’s decision upholding portions of Arizona’s repressive immigration law was unsettling, but not unexpected. The court struck down most of the law. Provisions found to violate the U.S. Constitution include those that would have allowed state officials to arrest immigrants

for not carrying their immigration papers or detain those the police think are here illegally. Under the constitutional notion of federal preemption, those powers are exclusive to the federal government. The individual states may not have their own im-migration policies. The court upheld only the provision requiring the police to check the immigration status of individuals lawfully detained for other-than-immigration violations. that’s similar to what the federal government already requires of states under the Secure Communities program.

The obvious danger in a state like Arizona, with a viciously anti-immigrant state

government, is racial profiling. the fear is that Arizona police will target latinos for arrest as an excuse to check their immigration status. The Arizona law prohibits racial profiling, and the court noted that provision in upholding the law. the court left the door open to challenges if Arizona authorities abuse it. Further, the court noted that it might violate the U.S. Constitution if officials delay releasing individuals while waiting for clearance from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the dreaded ICE.

Immigrants’ rights advocates in arizona and other states pass-ing similar laws will need to be vigilant to ensure officers don’t exceed their authority.

The court’s decision is a setback more for its symbolism than for its practical implication.

As the economy improves and the nation moves to a more friendly view of immigrants, Arizona will be forced to temper its anti-immigrant

enforcement plans. Meanwhile, it is sad that Arizona, with the Supreme Court’s blessing, will continue to demonize immigrants with special laws that target them.