This morning the Court heard oral argument in Arizona v. United States, which ran for an additional twenty minutes beyond the scheduled hour. According to Tom’s first report, most of the argument was focused on Section 2(b) of S.B. 1070, which requires law enforcement officials to verify the immigration status of anyone stopped or arrested when they have “reasonable suspicion” that that person is in the U.S. illegally. In the news coverage of the argument, there was a general agreement that the Court seemed likely to uphold Section 2(B), although it was less clear how the Court might rule on the other provisions at issue. Reporting and analysis on the argument are available from Lyle Denniston at this blog, Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Associated Press (via the Seattle Times),Reuters, McClatchy, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, Huffington Post, Politico, DC Dicta, and the Wall Street Journal (subscription required). PolicyMic is hosting a debate on the constitutionality of S.B. 1070 featuring several guest contributors.
The Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire blog and PolicyMic both hosted live blogs of the day’s events (with a “tape delay” for coverage of the argument itself).
The ACLU has posted an infographic on what’s at stake in the case for states with “copycat” laws similar to Arizona’s (h/t @Dailywrit). Education Week’s School Law blog considers the potential implications of the decision for education in Arizona and Alabama.