to remedy the problem and, indeed, have recently shown they are unwilling to do so. now, even though the court equild the heart of this law that, of course, requiring police officers to conduct those background checks critics say the legal battle is far from over. at only in arizona but in the five other states that have lssed similar laws so, scott, legally and politically there s a long way to go before these laws are settled. pelley: jan, a lot of states are following this very closely. what does this decision say to state legislatures as they craft their own laws in the future? well, what they re looking at is the heart of this law, whether they can have those background checks, so this certainly is expected to encourage states to go forward with similar laws, similar nsidroversial provisions. right now, eight other states are considering specific laws of sois nature and other states g rtainly are looking at it. d today the court gave a road owp of sorts saying so
controversial ruling, the u.s. supreme court weighs in on arizona s tough immigration laws. what stay, what goes and what this decision could mean for maryland. hi everybody i m kai jackson. vic and denise are off. here is what people are talking about tonight a split verdict from the supreme court. arizona s hotly contested immigration law is upheld. but some of its key provisions are struck down. and that has both sides claiming victory. wjz is live, megan mccorkel explains this ruling had major implications. reporter: the president sued the state of arizona to prevent that law from taking effect. now it appears a key provision of it will be enforced. they pulled me over. reporter: mario chihuahua pull over by a sheriff deputy for making an illegal turn in phoenix. he asked me, what are you from? , you know, you don t have the right to ask me that question. reporter: but according to the supreme court, arizona police will have the right to ask. the law has bee
most controversial question was on illegal immigration. specifically can the states impose their own immigration laws if they believe that the federal government has failed to do its job in the case before the court came from arizona, which passed its own law in 2010. among other things, arizona made it against the law for an illegal immigrant to look for work and it required police officers to check the immigration status of people they stop we have two reports from the court and phoenix. first with the decision we ll go to our chief legal correspondent jan crawford at the supreme court. jan? reporter: scott, arizona said it passed this law out of desperation because the federal government had failed to solve the problem of hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants in their state and today the court had some sympathy for that although it put some limits on what states could do. the justices unanimously upheld the law s most controversial provision, giving arizona greater