Like Kly, I see a certain continuity with state law in the SCOTUS ruling: They said state, county and local law enforcement could ask about immigration status when making "legitimate" stops. But Arizona could not make new laws on immigration that interfere with the Federal Government's sovereignty over immigration--AZ can't deport illegals, can't prosecute them if they hold jobs, etc. The continuity: previously, state, county and local law enforcement people could be certified by the Feds to participate in arrests of illegals after meeting certain criteria. This SCOTUS interpretation expands it somewhat by allowing them to inquire about immigration status and, presumably, hold them for the Feds if they can't prove it.

As a AZ resident, I have mixed feelings about this. I share SC's view of our benighted governor and her motivations. The practice is a formula for racial profiling: my wife and I, if stopped for a traffic offense, are never going to be asked about our immigration status. But our granddaughter, whose birth father was Brazilian and who looks Hispanic, would.

On the other hand, illegal immigration is a major problem for Arizona and its municipalities, and costs hundreds of millions of dollars in direct and ancillary costs. I agree with Ivy that many if not most illegals do jobs that no Americans do. If all illegals were deported, the cost of construction, restaurant meals and service, food processing, child care, etc., would go up astronomically. On the other hand, you can't expect people to be good American citizens if they start out by violating our laws in coming here.