Contributed by Ian Bratlie, Staff Attorney, Greater Minnesota Racial Justice Project
The United States Supreme Court decision in Arizona v. United States firmly reestablishes the Federal government's near universal power over immigration. Four sections of Arizona's law were reviewed and in three sections the Court completely ruled against Arizona, finding that Federal Immigration law preempts those state law provisions. The Court held that Arizona does not have the authority to criminalize a violation of federal registration laws or make it illegal to work while in undocumented status. Further, state law enforcement officers are not permitted to make warrantless arrests of someone on the basis of removability.
As far as the well known "show me your papers" provision of SB 1070, the U.S. Supreme Court has not said that it is constitutional, it merely said it depends on how the Arizona courts interpret the language in the law, and how state law enforcement actually implements it. In all likelihood, either further proceedings in this case, or soon-to-be restarted proceedings in other cases (including the civil rights suit brought by the ACLU and others) could lead to another injunction to stop enforcement of Section 2B.
"Show me your papers" laws violate our national values and national interests, as well as our Constitution. These laws hurt state economies communities, and reputations. Unsurprisingly, no state passed any Arizona like bills in their 2012 terms and, while six states have passed anti-immigration laws, twenty one, including Minnesota, considered and then did not pass these laws, to their own benefit. Alabama's state economy has taken a multi-billion dollar hit as a result of its law. Arizona saw a drop in sales tax revenue and a jump in the unemployment rate when S.B. 1070 first became law in 2010. Farmers have seen their crops rot and are planting less because the workers they have relied on for decades have fled in fear. Anti-immigrant laws also drain the resources of county sheriffs and local police departments who do not want the burden of serving as immigration agents while also trying to protect their communities. Immigration checks poison efforts foster trust and cooperation within all communities
While this decision is rightfully considered a victory for the Federal government, it is not without serious civil rights concerns. The Court recognized some problems with Arizona's anti-immigrant law, but should have gone farther to prevent racial profiling. The truth is, SB 1070 and other "show me your papers" laws harm citizens and noncitizens alike. It's impossible to enforce these laws without racial profiling, as people will be targeted and detained based on how they look or sound. These create divisions in communities, distrust of the government and invites discriminatory policing. The Supreme Court punted on that issue today, requiring the state courts to review the actual implementation of the law before they would rule it unconstitutional. While courts will eventually decide that issue, there will be many Constitutional violations before that decision is issued.
While lawmakers in Minnesota began to weigh in on this issue, they have wisely not yet passed an Arizona style bill, and today's ruling reinforces the wisdom of that decision. Not only did the U.S. Supreme Court strike down three major provisions of that law, but it expressed concerns that even the "show me your papers" section might very well be impossible to enforce in a manner that is not in conflict with federal law.
Check out a youtube video about what the decision means