In Plain English: Arizona V United States, Who Won?

Who won in Arizona v. united States? It's a tie. Sort of.

This gets complicated.

In the national debate that has engulfed the topic of immigration, Arizona v. United States was seen as a decision that could declare a winner in the "conservative v. liberal" debate over exactly how (and how far) States could respond to protect their own borders. Were the States strapped with whatever the federal government provided (even if it was a poorly funded, inefficient, mismanaged system of laws), or were the States able to defend themselves and take matters into their own hands by writing law that intruded upon an already-existing federal scheme?

The debate had essentially two teams. Team Brewer, lead by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer and those (conservatives?) who rallied to the cry that the federal system was not doing enough for Arizona. And there was Team Obama, lead by the President and those (liberals?) who rallied to the cry that the Arizona law was the product of discrimination against the Arizona Latino community.

After the Supreme Court published it's decision, President Obama said:

I am pleased that the Supreme Court has struck down key provisions of Arizona's immigration law. What this decision makes unmistakably clear is that Congress must act on comprehensive immigration reform. A patchwork of state laws is not a solution to our broken immigration system - it's part of the problem.

Then, the Obama Administration took swift action, hampering Arizona's ability to implement its "show me your papers" provision and further emphasizing who is really in control in matters of immigration. Two days ago, the Department of Homeland Security announced it had rescinded agreements, know as 287-g Agreements, that empowered local Arizona law enforcement officials to collaborate with the federal government to enforce federal immigration laws.The Department of Homeland Security, said that the agreements just do not work with States who have Arizona-like laws.

Without an agreement in place with the federal government, Arizona law enforcement agencies and jails are stopped from working "with" the Federal government in matters pertaining to immigration. And this is no small deal. As detailed by the DHS, currently "the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has 287(g) agreements with 68 law enforcement agencies in 24 states." DHS also notes, "since January 2006, the 287(g) program is credited with identifying more than 279,311 potentially removable aliens - mostly at local jails.

For her part, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer said her team won. She described the decision as:

[A] victory for the 10th Amendment and all Americans who believe in the inherent right and responsibility of states to defend their citizens. After more than two years of legal challenges, the heart of SB 1070 can now be implemented in accordance with the U.S. Constitution.

And she was really upset that the President's Administration pulled the agreement with Arizona:

They arbitrarily singled out Arizona and sent a bomb, if you will, across our bow and made Arizona once again a target.

At least in public, nowhere was anyone talking too much about the Supremacy Clause or field preemption - except of course in the chambers of the United States Supreme Court.

So from a political standpoint, it's a tie. Both teams won enough to appease their constituents and declare themselves the winner. But from a national point of view, we all won. The Supreme Court honored the rules that were designed hundreds of years ago to keep our Nation together at times like this, when one State or another is unhappy with the way the federal government is addressing a local problem.

By telling Arizona that it had gone too far in most of what it had passed, and by noting that the remaining provision had not yet shown itself to be in conflict with federal law, the Supreme Court preserved more than a political win for those who need that sort of thing. It defended the laws which bind us together, for good or for ill, as a Nation.

Immigration For Medical Professionals: Permanent Residence Status   Making an Application Under Skilled - Independent (Migrant) Visa (Subclass 175)   Bucking Congress, President Pushes Immigration Reform Through Exercises of Executive Discretion   Children of Green Card Holders to Be Given Priority for US Residency