." have a great night. >>> the crazy governor of arizona was crazy enough to get in a fight with president obama and eric holder's justice department and today, the obama/holder team crushed her in the united states supreme court. >> the excruciating waiting game may almost be over. >> today's decision by the supreme court -- >> the supreme court -- >> the supreme court -- >> the supreme court -- >> -- on arizona's immigration law -- >> declaring part of it unconstitutional. >> three quarters of it was struck down. >> it is a huge victory for the obama administration. >> the heart and soul of the arizona statute has been struck down. >> the heart of senate bill 1070 has been proven to be constitutional. >> did i miss something? >> i want whatever she's having. >> vindicated by the highest court in the land. >> this is not a victory for arizona. >> they just repeat over and over and over again. doesn't matter if it's true. >> perhaps she only read scalia's dissent. >> justice scalia today singling out president obama. >> it just shows you political scalia can be. >> how does this

>> this is not a victory for arizona. >> they just repeat over and over and over again. doesn't matter if it's true. >> perhaps she only read scalia's dissent. >> justice scalia today singling out president obama. >> it just shows you political scalia can be. >> how does this decision play out with latino voters? >> what document? there is no national i.d.. >> how does arizona ensure that this does not fall into racial profiling? >> it's almost a warning to the state. >> there's going to be a lot more litigation, particularly on racial profiling. >> this is probably the worst of all outcomes if you're mitt romney. >> why is governor romney in arizona? >> mitt romney, by happenstance -- >> he's in arizona -- >> holding a fund-raiser today in phoenix, arizona. >> this is a reminder to latinos who has their back and who doesn't. >> i think you see a model here in arizona -- in arizona -- in arizona. i'm not familiar, precisely, with what i said, but i stand by what i said, whatever it was. >>> today, the crazy anti-constitutional thinking of arizona governor jan brewer got smacked

>> the high court upholds the most controversial part of the arizona immigration law. the white house suddenly axing a deal with arizona, allowing local police to enforce federal immigration rules. governor brewer is furious, fights back, calling this a new low, even for this administration. she is not throwing in the towel. the barack obama administrationt through. the department of justice announces a telephone hotline for civil rights complaints in arizona. now it's governor brewer's turn. she is here to go "on the record" to tell us why this war isn't over. and senator john mccain is here to talk about immigration in his state and the next big ruling, health care. that comes on thursday. for starters, the facts you need to know exactly what the supreme court decided. you will because shannon bream is here and no one knows it better than shannon. all right. you were at the supreme court today. tell me what the decision means? >> reporter: overall, they are striking down 3 of 4 provisions of sb1070 that inspector play. the majority agrees that the federal law preemps what the

stop the arizona to enforce the immigration code for them. so they stopped it. so what is interesting, suddenly the president said, snapped his finger at the full court. he said, we are not going to abide by this. >> reporter: it is interesting because on that one point, it was anan mus. justice kagan did not take part -- so 8-0. but a unanimous decision t. appears that the administration said we are unhappy with this. what we think is that you are going to get all kinds of calls for people who are stopped for speeding tickets and dhs will come in here and check if they are legal. so dhs officials have been told, do not respond. have you to telephoneically give assurance, but you don't have to show up and pick up these people, unless they are criminal offenders, people we are really interested in deporting. >> the odd part is that it does seem like the president has reacted very quickly, basically saying, i am president. you are the court -- trying to muscle the court a little bit. >> reporter: they were prepared, it seems. this policy happened very quickly. >> shannon, th

law means, the key changes ahead? >> i think this is a victory for arizona, but i think it's the narrowest possible victory for the state because the court struck down three parts of the law. there are four at issue, not the whole law but four that came up here in the supreme court. here are the three that were struck down. an arizona law that made it a crime to fail to have the right immigration papers. court said today that interferes with the federal immigration law, the federal schemes sets out who has to have what papers. the field is preempted by federal law. the court struck down a provision of the tough, new arizona law that would have made it a state crime for someone here illegally to look for work. the supreme court said that's the furthest at odds with the federal law so the state can't make something a crime that the federal law doesn't. it struck down another part of the law that said police in arizona can arrest someone without an arrest warrant if they have a reason to think that the person has violated immigration laws. in other words, is here illegally. the cour

bret baier. perhaps the second most awaited supreme court decision of 2012. arizona's crackdown on illegal immigration. the high court struck down key provisions of the law. the most debated portion, the show me your papers requirement was upheld. we have fox team coverage. brit hume offers analysis of the decision. carl cameron examine house the ruling is playing out on the campaign trail. first, correspondent shannon bream is live at the supreme court with a closer look at this ruling. good evening, shannon. >> reporter: hello, bret. following the decision, both sides are claiming victory. although they disagree on what it means for future of the arizona immigration law, they agree the legal fight over it isn't over. opponents and supporters of the law sb-1070 got the supreme court decision they have been waiting for. split decision with justice anthony kennedy writing the three key provisions were pre-empted by federal law. a critical provision was upheld. >> the day is a day the key component of the effort to protect citizens of arizona, to take up the fight against illegal imm

, arizona, as we all now know passed sb-1070 which established certain new requirements to attempt to keep illegal immigration out of arizona. and what the court did was they evaluated four provisions of the law, and they said three of them were unconstitutional, because they conflicted with federal law, but the one they upheld, the one they allow ed to go forward is the most controversial and perhaps the most important of the four. it is nicknamed the "show us your papers" law. it is the law that says that arizona law enforcement officials can go up to individuals whom they have stopped for a legitimate reason and say show us papers indicating your immigration status. that is now okay and on the books, and lit go into effect. the other provisions are declared unconstitutional and they will not go into effect. >> jeff, why did they do that? why did they decide that provision which is the one that many says opens up the door to racial profiling is acceptable? >> well sh, actually justice kennedy in his opinion very much said, look, we don't know if this will lead to discrimination. we will

that this puts the federal government in. arizona has got this population, and they've and they're by law committed to maximum enforcement. and so the federal government's got to decide, are we going ttake our resources, which we deploy for removal, and are we going to use them to deal with this population, even if it is to the detriment of our priorities chief justice roberts: exactly. the federal government has to decide where it's going to use its resources. and what the state is saying, here are people who are here in violation of federal law, you make the decision. and if your decision is you don't want to prosecute those people, fine, that's entirely up to you. that's why i don't see the problem with section 2(b). general verrilli: here's the other half here's the other half of the equation, mr. chief justice, which is that they say if you're not going to remove them, we are going to prosecute them. and that means that the and i think this does get at the heart of why this needs to be an exclusive national power chief justice roberts: only under section 3 and section 5. gener

no national i.d.. >> how does arizona ensure that this does not fall into racial profiling? >> it's almost a warning to the state. >> there's going to be a lot more litigation, particularly on racial profiling. >> this is probably the worst of all outcomes if you're mitt romney. >> why is governor romney in arizona? >> mitt romney, by happenstan happenstance -- >> he's in arizona -- >> holding a fund-raiser today in phoenix, arizona. >> this is a reminder to latinos who has their back and who doesn't. >> i think you see a model here in arizona -- in arizona -- in arizona. i'm not familiar, precisely, with what i said, but i stand by what i said, whatever it was. >>> today, the crazy anti-constitutional thinking of arizona governor jan brewer got smacked down by the united states supreme court. two republican-appointed justices, including the chief justice, joined clinton and obama appointees on the supreme court to throw out three out of four provisions of an arizona law, and left the fourth provision hanging by a legal thread that they will surely cut as soon as a case on the enfor

champion arizona wildcats, text the word awake followed by your response to 622639. >>> the next 30 minutes will be your cram session for this tuesday, june 26th. a lot going on today, including news that syria fired on a second turkish jet as it looked for survivors of the first one shot down by the syrians. details on an increasingly sticky diplomatic situation. >>> plus jon stewart reviews the performances last week of mitt romney and president obama in front of latino leaders. a little pandering going on. that clip, later in the show. >>> first, the news live at 5:30 a.m. democrats, republicans, progressives, conservatives, cats, dogs, all claiming victory on the supreme court's immigration ruling monday. that threw out much of the state of arizona's controversial law. but kept its most controversial element, the three sections that were struck down required immigrants to carry immigration papers at all times, ban illegal immigrants from trying to find work and require police to arrest people wount warrants. >>> but the section that everyone focuses on, which allows law enforcem

inmigrantes, no solo en arizona, la corte suprema decidiÓ sobre la ley sb 1070. buenas noches. y comenzamos sobre la decisiÓn de la corte suprema, la corte permitirÁ a la policÍa de arizonpreguntarle sobre el estatus migratorio a las personas que detenga, y muchas organizaciones creen que va a crear persecuciÓn, y que otros estados podrÍan seguir el ejemplo de arizona. pero vamos por parte. la corte rechazÓ la seccion 3 que convertÍa en delito menor estar sin dgpeo. y la secciÓn 5 c que convertÍa delito trabajar sin permiso. y la 6 que autorizaba arrestar sin orden judiacial sin causa probable. lo que causa revuelo es la secciÓn 2 b. y aautoriza a la preguntar sobre estatus migratorio de detenidos. vamos a continuar, una amplia cobertura. y tenemos varios equipos en phoenix donde comenzÓ esto hace un gaÑo iremos a washington donde los ojos de la naciÓn estÁn sobre la corte suprema, y a los Ángeles donde veremos las repercusiones. y vamos a phoenix con luis. ♪ >>> este es el clima que se vive en arizona, Ánimos acalorados tras temperaturas de 100 grados y lo que

arizona police arrest someone for any reason whatsoever, jaywalking, bank robbery, anything, they must check the immigration status of that person. they said that's the closest fit with federal law, because a federal center that does nhing but respond to local police around the country about whether someone is here illegally or not. it was before the court on a theoretical challenge. what if this goes into effect, and would it violate the constitution? the court says no. that leaves the door open for someone to come back with another lawsuit, as applied to these people it does. the supreme court is saying let's see how it works and come back if you have a problem with it. i said earlier thomas there are other lawsuits against this law, several civil liberties units suing in arizona claiming this law is racial profiling and those cases have to work through the courts. >> pete, thanks so much. we want to get reaction this morning from the white house. kristen welker joins us now. >> reporter: i have reached out to the white house and romney campaign, and we're still awaiting reactio

a day the key component of the effort to protect citizens of arizona, to take up the fight against illegal immigration, in a balanced and constitutional way has unanimously been vindicated by the highest court in the land. >> the law surviving provisions direct police to inquire in someone's status if the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the person is in the u.s. illegally or for anyone placed under arrest regardless if there are suspicions about the person's legal status. arizona shouldn't expect help from the feds, though, in many of the cases. custom enforcement is rescinding agreement with the state and local law enforcement in arizona with respect to federal immigration law. president obamap and homeland security secretary janet napolitano issued statements saying they were pleased with the decision. one to make at it state crime not to complete paperwork for or carry alien registration document. another would have criminalized solicitation or performance of any work in arizona by someone not authorized to work in the u.s.. the court blocked provision that would hav

>>> split decision -- the supreme court strikes down key provisions in arizona's controversial immigration law. >>> taking the plunge -- a wedding party finds out the hard way how much weight a dock will hold. >>> and royal elegance -- it's your chance to own couture headgear once owned by duchess kate, good morning, everyone, i'm lynn berry, those stories and more are straight ahead. >>> this is "first look" on msnbc. >>> we're going to begin this morning with an up and down decision. the u.s. supreme court delivered a mixed verdict, both the obama administration and the state of arizona yesterday, ruling it is constitutional for arizona police to check immigration status. however, other sections of the state's controversial immigration law were thrown out entirely. nbc's steve handelsman has more. >> reporter: both sides had something to celebrate as the high court handed down the arizona decision. by 5-3 the justices upheld the most controversial part of the law, requiring police to check the immigration status of anyone they stop and suspect is not in the u.s. legally. the

also think this is the narrowest possible victory for the state of arizona because while the court did uphold this part of the law that says when the police arrest someone or detain someone, then they should check the immigration status of that person. the court said, you know, arizona has to be very careful about how this is enforced, that if people are detained too long, or if the law is used as a pretext for rounding up suspected illegal aliens, then it would cross a constitutional line. so it is almost a warning to the state that as the state goes ahead to enforce it, if it ultimately does survive all the legal challenges, then it has to be very careful not to cross that line. so it is a caution light really, rather than a full up green light for arizona, that part of the decision. the other parts struck down today made it a crime for someone who is here illegal through apply for work in arizona. made it a crime not to have the right federal papers. and also said police could arrest someone without a warrant if they suspected they were here illegally. those parts were flat out

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 authority to identify illegal immigrants in its state. the provision-- often referred to as "show me your papers" requires police officers during stops or arrests to check a person's immigration status. but today's decision was only a partial victory for arizona because the court also of tdq teeth out of the tough anti-immigration

work in arizona and section six which would allow officers to make arrests in some cases without a warrant. you mentioned the part left in place, anyone stopped under state or local law if there is reasonable suspicion to believe the person is in the u.s. illegally. justice scalia who whereon -- wrote an opinion took a swipe at the administration repeatedly. here's another quote from his writings: >> reporter: by the way, before this decision ever came out today, we knew there were lawsuits already drawn up and ready to go challenging what was left of the bill. so s.b. 1070, section 2b, the fight over that is probably not over, megyn. megyn: shannon bream, thank you so much. and it looks like the white house is already weighing in on this matter with the president saying he is, quote, pleased that the high court struck down those three parts of s.b. 1070. president obama saying, quote, a patchwork of state laws is not a solution to our broken immigration system. it's part of the problem. he added, however, that he is still concerned about the impact of the remaining part of the ari

think it's very, very important, because if the court were to uphold the arizona law and while i know that it wasn't argued before the supreme court, i was there, racial profiling will basically be allowed by the supreme court and institutionalized. the only way you can from a practical point of view carry out the arizona law is to stop people as confer their i.d. and ask them for proof of citizenship because now you take local police enforcement officials and you're making them immigration agents. i have a funny feeling that people that look like me, especially in arizona where the law was crafted to pick up immigrants specifically, are the ones that are going to be asked. unfortunately, i think it is also going to harm our civil rights here for everybody in the united states, because we shouldn't all be looked at as suspects. >> do you believe that, congressman? do you believe you're on vacation in scottsdale and you're driving down the street, you might get stopped? >> i think that's exactly what's going to happen. so i think that because it's not going to be how is luis gutie

court earlier issued a long-awaited ruling on arizona's controversial immigration law, s.b. 1070. the majority blocked three parts of the law but let stand a critical fourth part, the power for police to ask about one's immigration status when they have reasonable suspicion to do so. but the real drama came with the dissenting opinion from justice antonin scalia which mentions the president's recent decision not to deport on his own, in other words, through the department of homeland security he implements this policy, not with the approval of congress, some 1.4 million young illegal immigrants. justice scalia writing, quote: there has come to pass and is with us today the specter that arizona predicted, a federal government that does not want to enforce immigration laws as rib and leaves the states' borders unprotected. so the issue is a stark one. are the sovereign states at the mercy of the federal executive's refusal to enforce the nation's immigration laws? shannon bream live in washington at the high court as she has been all morning. shannon, and so it pits one of the most cons

why arizona came one this. >> and the one provision upheld was unanimously upheld. all nine agreed to uphold it. then you fast forward and what happened a couple hours later when governor brewer claimed victory owe thingsly on that, and the president, or the dhs under the president issued an order say they will stop the arrangement they have with arizona where arizona was going out and enforcing immigration code for them. so they stopped it. what is interesting, suddenly the president snubs his finger a little bit at the full court because he says we aren't going to abide by thanks it is interesting because on that one point it was unanimous. and by the way one justice didn't take part because she had a part in earlier rulings. >> so 8-0. >> a nanus decision and it appears the administration was unhappy with this. i think what will happen is the get all kinds of calls people stopped for speeding tickets and those things, they want dhs to come in and verify their stat us and if they aren't here legally it will create more works. dh specials have been told do not spoken to the calls. yo

today arizona's immigration law as b ten seventy was decided upon and betting on what you read or where you watch it was either up held or gutted we'll break it all down plus the bradley manning case continues and his defense is making it clear the government is doing everything in its power to prevent the accused wiki leak or of receiving a fair trial i'll have all that and more for you tonight including a dose of happy hour but first let's take a look at what the mainstream media decided to miss. so it's monday funday here in washington and just like last week the outside of the supreme court looked more like a circus as the fourth estate waited with bated breath for the ruling on the affordable care act known to many as obamacare the excruciating waiting game may almost be over any minute we could get a major decision from the supreme court on health care or immigration to nine justices to landmark decision starting in an hour the supreme court could release its ruling on the sweeping health care law and we are awaiting a supreme court ruling on the constitutionality of the pre

so it is a caution light really, rather than a full up green light for arizona, that part of the decision. the other parts struck down today made it a crime for someone who is here illegal through apply for work in arizona. made it a crime not to have the right federal papers. and also said police could arrest someone without a warrant if they suspected they were here illegally. those parts were flat out struck down by the court today. >> all right, pete, thank you very much. i want to take our audience to arizona where governor jan brewer is speaking right now. let's listen in. >> -- thank you all for being here this morning. let me begin by saying from the moment that i signed into law senate bill 1070, the support our neighborhood act, arizona has been preparing for this day. the facts have too often been lost in the rhetoric. let's reflect on what has brought us here today. arizona did not ask for this fight. nor did it seek the task of having to confront illegal immigration. we cannot forget that we are here today because the federal government has failed the american people

in certain cities. >> as we speak, now that the court has ruled, as we speak now, our arizona state and local police officers now enforcing that provision as of today? >> well, i think they will, they will as of today or tomorrow, they will today, but certainly by tomorrow, we'll know that this law has been upheld and that they're able to do that. and they have been trained, as i said, to avoid racial profiling. even if it was a legal concern, it's a moral concern, we think it's important to treat people as individuals, and not limit anything they can do. so we want to do everything we can to make sure that nobody engagings in any racial profiling. >> tom horn is the republican attorney general, an attorney day for your time, i'm sure you know the country and perhaps the world will be watching as you implement this law going forward. we start the 11:00 hour here on the east coast. several important decisions from the united states supreme court today. this headline, the big health care decision will not come until thursday, that will be the final day of this year's supreme court ter

arizona's paper please law, and jan brewer is living in fantasy land. >> well, today the state of arizona and senate bill 1070 was vindicated. >> the arizona congressman is torn by the ruling and he's here tonight. the supreme court doubles down on citizens united in one of the most destructive rulings ever for the country. montana governor brian schweitzer and e.j. dionne are here with reaction. >> and it turns out republicans love obama care. as long as you don't call it that. former insurance executive wendell potter on what it means if the individual mandate dies and the rest of the affordable care act lives. >>> good to have you with us. thanks for watching. right wingers can no longer hide behind states rights when it comes to creating radical immigration laws. a ruling from the highest court in the land proves states can only go so far. the supreme court ruled 5-3 in favor of striking down most of the provisions in arizona's controversial immigration law. senate bill 1070, the ruling says states cannot override federal laws on immigration. here's what was struck down. arizona canno

. >>> divided decision. the supreme court rules on arizona's immigration law, keeping the most controversial part. new reaction from overnight. >>> and fresh outrage by facebook users. a huge change involving your contact information. >>> and playing with a lighter while gassing up. a lesson learned the hard way. >>> good tuesday morning, everybody. we begin with that florida rainmaker. tropical storm debby still parked in the gulf, turning much of the sunshine state into a soggy mess. >> the winds have been fairly tame. but floodwaters are swamping homes and cars. doing damage to properties. even opening up massive sinkholes. that rain is not going to stop coming down anytime soon. just an unbelievable picture right there. >> debby is right now creeping along at just four miles per hour. a slow-mover there. giving it time to soak the state even more. abc's tahman bradley has the latest. >> reporter: tropical storm debby's torrential rainfall is causing chaos for millions of floridians. this morning, a state of emergency remains in effect. debby is parked off florida's coast. a

first term initiative, also called obama care. but a most important verdict in the arizona immigration case, several provisions thrown out as unconstitutional. the justices saying the state of arizona was trying to essentially police immigration which is a federal purview, but one very controversial show me your papers provision left in place. that is if a police officer stops somebody for some other reasons and has suspicion that they're here illegally, they can ask for their papers. take us inside the room. >> again, everybody has been on pins and needless for two weeks in this court. and we know that they know that we know that everybody's waiting for a health care case. i thought today began with somewhat of a surprise because justice alana kagan is a very new justice, but she had a very important opinion this morning, she had a decision that struck down mandatory life terms for juvenile offenders. there's a law in several states that says on these circumstances, this person must be sentenced to life without parole. and what the court held by 5- 4, justice anthony kenne

de justicia decidiÓ que la policÍa de arizona tendrÁ que preguntarle por su estatus migratorio a las personas que detenga bajo sospecha de haber cometido u delito o una infracci infracciÓn patron que podrÍan seguir otros estados, rechazÓ tres secciones, la 3 que convertÍa en delito menor, rechazÓ la secciones 5c sin un permiso de trabajo y tambiÉn rechazÓ la seccion 6 que autorizaba a la policÍa sin causa probable de que una persona lo hacÍa deportable. pero la corte dejÓ la parte mÁs controversial contra ley que autoriza preguntar sobre el estatus migratorio sobre detenidos si tienen sospechas razonabless. >> cuando se habla de una medida como esta que ha tomÓ la corte suprema, relacionado. por un lado por supuesto iigrante y por otro lado personajes por ejemplo el alguacil arpaio nos cuentan que nos dijeron hoy dÍa. >> esta noche el sol comenzÓ a caer sobre el capitolio en donde naciÓ la y sb 1070 mientras tantear zona y la naciÓn intentaba de un dentroentender nÍtido de la decisiÓn de la corte suprema, podrÁ estudiar la situaciÓn, si sospecha que no estÁ legal

court gives an okay to the most inflammatory part of the arizona immigration law. tonight, team coverage, including jorge ramos of univision. >>> state of emergency in florida. a giant water spout and a whole family rescued from the tropical storm. >>> double jeopardy. alex trebek suffers a heart attack, something we've learned tonight that could help all of our hearts stay healthy. >>> and kate must curtsy? a new rule says the most glamorous member of the royal family. >>> good evening to you on this monday. a thunderbolt from the u.s. supreme court today on immigration. as of 10:30 eastern time this morning, the court said arizona police can officially demand proof from the people they pull over. proof that they are in this country legally. so what does this mean for the hispanic population across america and what about the other provisions of the law that the court sets down? our team is on this story tonight. abc's terry moran at the court. david wright on the streets of arizona. terry, lead us off right now. >> reporter: diane, this is it -- the 25-page opinion that that plunged rig

action from arizona gov. jan brewer and harry reid. we will also show you the oral arguments. . . of arizonas requires police minutes. reflect on what has immigration. immigration borders. regarding illegal that question bears the obama and his immigration system. vindicated highest court in the heart of senate bill 100 arizona and every other what the significant critically important issues critics will be legal assault are harmony with the civil rights will be profiling will not be senate bill 100 is equally law, while insuring constitutional all in arizona are prohibiting law rights are thank. >> i appreciate that. how do you defend saying and senate bill 100 heart of the bill was it says local to ask under someone being in the n that instructing law enforcement practicing what the states supreme court , is there going provisions you did prevail on section 2, they have i would think that it would a lawyer, but my it's upheld by the supreme immediately. local law unanimously by the >> thank you all for being not going to deport these >> members of congress have reacted thro

opinion here, justice kennedy wrote that arizona may have understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration but the state may not pursue policies that undermine federal law. >> president obama said he is pleased with the rules but concerned about the remaining provision. we have team fox coverage, and now reaction from arizona, and now to shannon on a windy day. a justice took aim at the president. explain to us what that is all about. >> justice scalia who wrote an opinion that concurred this part and disscented if part did something i have not seen happen often plugged a current event to the opinion he wrote, references specifically the president's policy directive change on immigration. saying that dhs will not deport certain individuals and young people, referenced in the opinion and he goes on to write, are the sovereign states at mercy of the federal executives' refusal to enforce the immigration law, and later said if we do not think arizona has the right to enforce these laws we should stop referring toÑi it as a sovereign state. >>shepard: there is so

court ruling is only the beginning. here comes the finger. watch out president obama, arizona gov. jan brewer could be pointing at you again. so here's what's going on. first, the high court strikes down parts of arizona's immigration law but upholds the most controversial part. governor brewer claims victory. but the obama administration sneaks up behind her and crashes her party. the white house suddenly actioning a deal with arizona allowing local police to enforce immigration rules. and governor brewer is furious and strikes bat calling it a new low, even for this administration. and she's not throwing in the towel. meanwhile the obama administration is not through with arizona for the day. late tonight they announce a telephone hot line for civil rights complaints in arizona. and now it's governor brewer' turn. she's here on the record to tell you why it son over yet. and john mccain is here to go on the record about immigration in his state. and the next big ruling, healthcare. that happens thursday. all that coming up. and for starters, the facts. you need to know exactly what t

claiming victory of the u.s. supreme court handed down a split decision on the arizona immigration law. now three aspects of sp 7-70 was struck down by the high court. but the cornerstone of the law was upheld. that's what requires police officers to verify the legal status of anybody that they suspect to be in the country illegally. and liberals from president obama to the attorney general eric holder have long claimed that this measure would somehow lead to widespread racial profiling. is that line. attack was revisited to the on the senate floor by harry reid just moments after the ruling wags in fact handed down. let's watch this. >> i don't think you will be carrying your immigration papers with you everplace you go. but if you are in arizona and you speak with a little bit of an accent and your skin color is brown, you better have your papers with you. that's unfortunate. >> it's unfortunate that harry reid would rather play follow ticks than protect the border. we will check on the developing story burke first let's bring in our legal panel to explain exactly what was thrown

upheld at constitutional. i believe that arizona has the right to defend their citizens. they have the right under section 2b and that's what the supreme court said is constitutional. >> let me go to two things. first of all the person had to have already been stopped on something else. it's not like they can pick somebody up -- >> right. >> it's not ammeter i see a yellow person or brown person, let's stop them. that's not the law. >> and also the language mirrored federal law. this is what scalia was pointing out in his dissent today. >> everybody has to read that. he said the founding fathers would have taken for the doors and not taken up with the united states if they believed the pre had the ability not to enforce the law as written. now we've seen it in reaction to the supreme court decision that the federal government is continuing in its ways today, sean. they suspended the partnership between states and local law enforcement and the federal government on many immigration enforcement activities. suspended it because of this decision in the united states supreme court. >> this

arizona immigration law, striking down three major parts but upholding what is called the "show me your papers" provision. welcome to "washington journal." we will talk this morning with reporters who cover the supreme court and arizona border and members of congress joined us to share their reaction very we would like to hear what you think this morning about the supreme court's decision. here are the numbers to call -- "the los angeles times" says -- "the orange county register" also with a top headline above the fold -- "the chicago tribune" also tells its viewers what is going on. one of the border states wrestling with its own issues, texas has "the houston chronicle." "the pittsburgh post-gazette" looks at the case. "the atlanta journal constitution" -- georgia is one of its states that has its own controversial immigration law on its books that may be affected by what happened in the supreme court yesterday. "the wall street journal" headline -- the report this per. joining us to talk about the piece is jess bravin, here in the studio, supreme court correspondent for "the wa

brakes on aggressive state efforts to crack down on immigration, at least for now. from the arizona border to the usz supreme court, the justices offered a split decision on the controversial, illegal immigration law. known as sb 1070. writing for the majority in the 4-3 ruling. justice anthony kennedy said arizona may have understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration. but the state may not pursue policies that undermine federal law. and so the high court struck down three of the four key provisions in the law. unanimously upholding, at least for now, the most controversial piece. the requirement the police check immigration status while enforcing other laws if the officer has reasonable suspicion they're in the country illegally, giving jan brewer reason to claim at least partial victor victory. >> today the state of arizona was vindicated. and the heart of the bill was upheld. >> but the court made clear the show me your paper section could face future challenges depending on how it's implemented. still, most of the provisions at issue were tossed ou

we get answers to two high profile cases that could affect millions and millions. arizona's controversial immigration law and the healthcare law. they are still yet to be rendered. martha maccallum is off today. jamie: she is. i'm jamie colby. the decision announced a little over an hour from now. but what will happen is anyone's guess. bill: what hint if any on the justices may decide that one for arizona? >> reporter: the administration decided to sue arizona over sb1070. during arguments many people thought as fared better than expected. at one point justice sotomayor said you need to try some other arguments. what you are trying to sell no one is buying. at one point chief justice said i'm starting to think the federal government doesn't want to know who is here illegally. bill: that's one issue yet to be decide on healthcare that will affect 300 million people. what do we know about the timing and any chance it happens today. >> reporter: it could come today. but we don't think the term will end today as scheduled. we think the justices will add a day or two days. but t

from the supreme court, as the bulk of a controversial arizona law is struck down. but police can still stop and check those they consider suspicious. good evening. i'm gwen ifill. >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. on the newshour tonight, marcia coyle of the "national law journal" walks us through today's decision. and we look at the effect in arizona and other states with similar laws on the books. >> ifill: plus, we sort through two other high court decisions today, on life sentences for juveniles and campaign spending. >> woodruff: in the first of two global election reports, jeffrey brown updates the egyptian results as newly elected islamist president mohammed morsi begins to form his government. >> ifill: and from mexico, margaret warner previews the upcoming contest there. that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: in here, the right minds from inside and outside the company come together to work on an idea. adding to it from the road, improving it in the cloud, all in realtime s. it's the at&t network. providing new ways t

rulings on the sweeping hearth law and arizona's tough immigration law. a lot at stake for everyone. we're following developments as only cnn can. tropical storm debby slamming the gulf coast with strong winds and predicted to dump at least 15 inches of rain on northern florida. debby is blamed for one death. >> scared half to death. pretty traumatic. >> we got the latest forecast track. more on cranberries. michelle obama want kids to lay off sugary drinks but she didn't expect cranberry farm towers be mad at her. plus this. >> are you sexually attracted to young boys to underage boys? >> am i sexually attracted to underage boys? >> yes. your sexually attracted to young boys, to underage boys? >> this exchange between jerry sandusky and bob costas was so damaging it was used as evidence in court but what you just heard might actually end up helping the convicted child rapist. it has to do with a bad video edit. i'll talk with a legal expert. too close to call, this photo finish was no help to judges. take a close look. what do you think? there can only be one winner so who decides.

healthcare law and also arizona versus the united states, the immigration law. the court is probably in session at 10:00 a.m. there is a decision in one case. this is the 5-4 holds in the eighth amendment forbids -- that is the first case out of the courts. we're awaiting word on others. we'll continue to watch the plaza of the supreme court. the crowd is gathered out there . will share more information with you -- we will share more information when we hear it. >> hold on, give me a second. >> hey, hey, ho, ho obamacare has got to go. hey, hey, ho, ho -- [singing] partyet's have a a constitution party received a flag is flying -- we lying highag is fflyin it makes me proud hey let's have a party a constitution party you see the statue of liberty she means a lot to me see the statue of liberty she means a lot to me hey -- let's have a party constitution party ♪ ♪ jesus stands for freedom ♪ >> the first thing that comes up. then if we have to dumb it down and just go with medication. i spend more and more of providingnot o actual therapy to my patients. i know that it doesn't have