| Arizona v. United States | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued April 25, 2012 Decided June 25, 2012 | |
| Full case name | Arizona, et al., Petitioners v. United States |
| Docket no. | 11-182 |
| Citations | 567 U.S. 387 (more) 132 S. Ct. 2492; 183 L. Ed. 2d 351 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Injunction against Arizona, 703 F. Supp. 2d 980 (D. Ariz. 2010); affirmed and remanded, 641 F.3d 339 (9th Cir. 2011); cert. granted, 565 U.S. 1092 (2011). |
| Holding | |
| An Arizona law providing authority for local law enforcement to enforce immigration law violated the enumerated powers of Congress and is preempted by federal statute. Arizona law enforcement may inquire about a resident's legal status during lawful encounters, but may not implement its own immigration rules. Ninth Circuit affirmed and reversed in part. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy, joined by Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor |
| Concur/dissent | Scalia |
| Concur/dissent | Thomas |
| Concur/dissent | Alito |
| Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 4, U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2; Arizona SB 1070 | |
Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Arizona's SB 1070, a state law intended to increase the powers of local law enforcement that wished to enforce federal immigration laws. The issue is whether the law usurps the federal government's authority to regulate immigration laws and enforcement. The Court ruled that sections 3, 5(C), and 6 of S. B. 1070 were preempted by federal law but left other parts of the law intact, including a provision that allowed law enforcement to investigate a person's immigration status.