A Victory? Really?

Today in what many are calling a victory for the Arizona immigration law, the Supreme Court ruled most the law unconstitutional:

The justices let stand for now the part of the law that requires police to check the immigration status of anyone they detain or arrest if they have “reasonable suspicion” that the person is in the country illegally. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) declared that decision, on the part of the law that had generated the most controversy, a victory. 

The court ruled that Arizona cannot make it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to carry identification that says whether they are in the United States legally; cannot make it a crime for undocumented immigrants to apply for a job; and cannot arrest someone based solely on the suspicion that the person is in this country illegally. 

The court also said the part of the law it upheld — requiring officers to check the immigration status of those they detain and reasonably believe to be illegal immigrants — could be subject to additional legal challenges once it is implemented.

This means that the state of Arizona can force the police to you for your papers if they've stopped you on the street for some other reason, but the cops can't arrest you if you fail to do so, they can't arrest you for applying for a job without producing papers, and they can't arrest you just because they suspect you're here illegally.

What's the point of being able to ask for your papers if you can just say no, and there's nothing they can do if you refuse?

Basically, the Supreme Court says it's okay for Arizona to make laws that require the police to hassle people on the street. It's okay to pass laws that produce an oppressive cloud of suspicion on anyone who looks "Mexican."

The Court also left open the door for challenges the law once it goes into effect. This seems quite likely because different jurisdictions will enforce it differently, and different officers will exercise varying degrees of "reasonable suspicion," meaning that there will be selective enforcement and individuals will not all receive equal treatment under the law.

This doesn't sound like a big victory for Jan Brewer and the "centerpiece" of law. It sounds like this law was just gutted of its enforcement provisions, and will promptly be challenged when Joe Arpaio's men start harassing people for DWL (driving while Latino). And since the entire basis of it is blatantly subjective, it will probably face a skeptical Supreme Court if the state bothers to appeal it that far.