On June 25 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Arizona v. United States, voting 5-3 to block three provisions of Arizona's controversial 2010 policing law while upholding the section that required police to inquire about the immigration status of people they stop for other reasons who they suspect are in the country illegally. Many observers saw the ruling as a split decision, offering a little something to both sides in the case. Others believed it would deal a significant blow to immigration lawmaking in the states, leaving less room than many are anticipating for state enforcement and other measures.

Read the Court's decision.

IW summary of the Court's ruling 7-25-12
Bloomberg editorial The court got it right on Arizona law 6-25-12
Peter Spiro Supreme Court (mostly) guts SB 1070 6-25-12
Ben Winograd Why the Supreme Court ruling on immigration is a clear rebuke to Arizona 6-26-12



New York Times Arizona ruling only a narrow opening for other states 6-25-12
Politico After ruling, GOP grasps for ideas on immigration 6-27-12
Washington Post Arizona ruling complicates GOP strategy with Hispanics 6-25-12
Wall Street Journal Ruling sets off Latino vote drive in Arizona 6-26-12
Los Angeles Times op-ed Immigration after the SB 1070 ruling 6-25-12 (This article was reprinted in the Baltimore Sun 7-1-12, Las Vegas Sun 6-27-12, Lawrence-Journal World 6-27-12, The Times Herald 6-27-12 and the Appleton Post Crescent 6-26-12.)
CNN op-ed A changing national mood on immigration? 6-25-12
IW statement 6-25-12
On June 28, IW held a national call to discuss the Court's decision with legal scholars including Peter Spiro, professor of law at Temple University, Ben Winograd, staff attorney at the American Immigration Council, and members of IW's legal advisory committee. Click Here to listen to the call.

In May 2011, the Supreme Court decided 5-3 to uphold the Legal Arizona Workers Act, which requires all Arizona businesses to enroll in E-Verify and punishes employers found to have hired unauthorized workers by suspending and revoking their business licenses. What this means for employers in other states: the court has said it is legitimate and acceptable for a state government to require all employers to use E-Verify. And the decision opens the door to other states to punish employers who hire unauthorized workers by suspending their operating licenses.

For more about the case and the reactions to it –