>> arizona case the court decided today, after all. nbc's mike taibbi is there tonight and has reaction for us to the court ruling .
>> reporter: it only seemed like a normal day for letisha ramirez's family, her husband off to his construction job and her children watching early morning tv. but she and her husband have been in this country illegally for over a decade. when she later watched the supreme court ruling unfold, she said the verdict though it only upheld the so-called show your papers part of the law was still threatening.
>> the community won't be able to go out, have a normal life . they're going to be afraid that if they go out they might get stopped just for your color.
>> reporter: kelly townsend is a mother, too.
>> my daughter is half hispanic.
>> reporter: she and other supporters saw today's ruling, which requires law enforcement to check immigration status, as a clear win and a reason to keep pushing for the parts of the bill ruled unconstitutional.
>> i do believe that is a victory that was the heart of it. it's necessary.
>> this is where the rubber meets the road.
>> reporter: meanwhile on the front lines of the state's effort to curb illegal immigration , local units like pima county 's border crimes unit work with federal border patrol agents to try and stem the flow along 120 miles of border.
>> they get to this spot, they're almost home free?
>> yes.
>> reporter: the sheriff's department has detained and arrested hundreds while sb- 1070 was drifting in the political winds and pima county sheriff clarence duknik says this ruling will change nothing about how the job is done.
>> it doesn't take a genius to determine whether somebody is here illegally given the reality of our work.
>> it is also a reality that most in this state believe arizona must do what they say the federal government has not done.
>> this is the law. we need to enforce it.
>> reporter: the reality, too, that one group primarily believes today's ruling leaves them as vulnerable as ever. arizona 's already spent about $3 million defending its controversial law. most of it from private donations. there were some questions raised today about whether they'll still be the appetite, the political will to continue to defend the law vigorously if the taxpayers have to start footing the bill.
>> mike taibbi in phoenix for us tonight. thanks.
>>> now we'll talk about politics and the law. first of all, all of this of course taking place in a presidential election year. with us now our chief white house correspondent and political director chuck todd , who is at the white house . chuck, look at this for us vis-a-vis the political campaign under way.
>> today was the day where the obama campaign was pretty happy with what happened and the romney campaign was not very happy. let's start with president obama . you talk tosome democratic strategists and they say the part of the law that was upheld will only help them motivate hispanics even more and help them essentially alienate them from the republican party . as for mitt romney , brian, you saw today he doesn't like talking about this issue right now because they know the fine line they have to walk between not looking like they're contradicting what romney said during the primary campaign and not alienating hispanics. he said today he was against the decision, if you will. he wished that the supreme court had given states more leeway, but he's trying not to talk about it much. he wants to be talking about the economy.
>> chuck todd on the white house lawn. thanks. that's politics. now about the law. it's always good to ask a lawyer. with us now here in our studios in new york are chief legal correspondent savannah guthrie . savannah, what survives here and where to from here?
>> actually, the most controversial provision, the one that allows state officers to determine the immigration status of anyone they've lawfully stopped, and i think we'll see more lawsuits, frankly. this is a law that has never gone into effect because of this supreme court litigation. well, now it will, and that issue about whether that proef ifgs tproef -- proef ifgs the law leads to racial profiling will be at issue potentially. that was not something the court decided today. now you can expect plaintiffs to file lawsuits and say hey my constitutional rights were violated.
>> we'll be back at this thursday when the next big decision comes down on health care . thanks. always a pleasure.
chicago bulls dallas cowboys st louis blues rueben randle mike trout ryan broyles jerel worthy
কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন