
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer speaks Wednesday outside the Supreme Court after the court heard arguments about the tough Arizona immigration law. Paul Clement, who argued Arizona's case, is at right.
But the fate of other provisions that make state crimes out of immigration violations was unclear in the court's final argument of the term.
The latest clash between states and the Obama administration turns on the extent of individual states' roles in dealing with the nation's 11 million illegal immigrants. Immigration policy is essentially under the federal government's control, but a half-dozen Republican-dominated states have passed their own restrictions out of frustration with what they call Washington's inaction to combat a flood of illegal immigrants.
Parts of laws adopted by Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah are on hold pending the court's decision.
Civil rights groups say the Arizona law and those in some other states encourage racial profiling and ethnic stereotyping, and debate over such laws could have an impact on this fall's elections. More than 200 protesters gathered outside the court, most of them opposed to the Arizona law.
However, Chief Justice John Roberts made it clear at the outset of the administration's argument Wednesday that the court was looking only at state-versus-federal power, not the civil rights concerns that already are the subject of other lawsuits. "This is not a case about ethnic profiling," Roberts said.













Comment: Bradley Manning's treatment was cruel and inhuman, UN torture chief rules
Bradley Manning Nobel Peace Prize Nomination 2012
Hasn't Manning already served a life sentence, hasn't some part of him already been killed? Perhaps a photo will give us a clue.
Need we say more?