Question: will today's immigration ruling

[Nancy Waterman]

have any relevance for the draconian Alabama immigration law that has forced so many to leave the state?
I would think if that law got taken to court, this ruling would be invoked, in that states are not allowed to make immigration laws. It is now clear it is the federal government's domain. But I have heard nothing about Alabama in any of the coverage today, so perhaps I am wrong?

[elleng]

1. Yes, relevant. Many State 'immigration' laws probably gone, including Alabama.

'Mary Bauer, legal director of the Montgomery-based Southern Poverty Law Center, which is part of the lawsuit against Alabama, said the decision emphasized the role of the federal government over the states on immigration policy. She said the decision to leave the "papers please" provision intact is a disappointment but the overall decision is a blow to immigration laws like Alabama's.

"I think a lot of the provisions in the Alabama law are now doomed," Bauer said.'

http://blog.al.com/breaking/2012/06/us_supreme_court_upholds_polic.html

AND she's mistaken that 'papers please' provision intact; its not. Papers may ONLY be sought after a legitimate 'stop.' See Rachel and Lawrence shows for good discussions.

[Nancy Waterman]

2. Excellent! Thank you.

I saw Rachel and Lawrence. They both did a nice job clarifying things. Thanks for connecting the ruling to the other
immigration laws.