Arizona v. United States

E4583

Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.

All labels observed (5)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (50)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case
federal court case
areaOfLaw administrative law
constitutional law
arguedDate 2012-04-25
citation 567 U.S. 387
concurrenceInPartAndDissentInPartBy Antonin Scalia
Clarence Thomas
Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
linked to: Samuel A. Alito Jr.
constitutionalProvisionInvolved Article VI of the United States Constitution
linked to: Article VI

Supremacy Clause
country United States
court Supreme Court of the United States
decisionDate 2012-06-25
docketNumber 11-182
fullName Arizona v. United States
holding Federal law preempts several provisions of Arizona S.B. 1070 regulating immigration enforcement.
Section 2(B) of S.B. 1070, requiring officers to make a reasonable attempt to determine immigration status during lawful stops, is not facially preempted.
Section 3 of S.B. 1070, creating a state crime for failure to carry federal registration documents, is preempted.
Section 5(C) of S.B. 1070, criminalizing unauthorized aliens seeking or engaging in work, is preempted.
Section 6 of S.B. 1070, authorizing warrantless arrests based on possible removability, is preempted.
States may not enact or enforce immigration policies that conflict with federal immigration law.
impact Limited state authority to create independent immigration enforcement schemes.
Reinforced federal primacy in immigration enforcement policy.
joinedMajority John G. Roberts, Jr.
linked to: John G. Roberts Jr.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Sonia Sotomayor
Stephen G. Breyer
jurisdiction United States
justiceNotParticipating Elena Kagan
keyPrinciple State laws are preempted when they conflict with the federal regulatory scheme on immigration.
The federal government has broad, dominant authority over immigration and alien status.
legalSubject federal preemption
federalism
immigration law
lowerCourtDisposition Affirmed in part and reversed in part
majorityOpinionBy Anthony M. Kennedy
originatingCourt United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
petitioner State of Arizona
popularNameOfLawAtIssue Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act
relatedCase De Canas v. Bica
Hines v. Davidowitz
relatedConcept conflict preemption
field preemption
reporter United States Reports
respondent United States
stateLawAtIssue Arizona Senate Bill 1070
volume 567
vote 5-3
yearDecided 2012

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (14)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Supremacy Clause interpretedInCase Arizona v. United States
Arizona v. United States fullName Arizona v. United States
Arizona v. United States stateLawAtIssue Arizona Senate Bill 1070
linked to: Arizona v. United States
Hines v. Davidowitz appliedIn Arizona v. United States
Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act alsoKnownAs Arizona SB 1070
linked to: Arizona v. United States
Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act legalChallenge United States v. Arizona
linked to: Arizona v. United States
De Canas v. Bica relatedCase Arizona v. United States
October Term 2012 includesCase Arizona v. United States (post-remand proceedings)
linked to: Arizona v. United States
SB 1070 subjectOfCase Arizona v. United States
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting relatedCase Arizona v. United States
Donald B. Verrilli Jr. notableCase Arizona v. United States
subject linked to: Donald B. Verrilli, Jr.
October Term 2011 heardCase Arizona v. United States