U.S. Supreme Court strikes down parts of Arizona immigration law

The court lets stand a section about checking immigration status of suspects in custody for other crimes.

The U.S. Supreme Court sided with the federal government this morning and struck down several sections of an Arizona immigration law.

But the court let stand a section that says if police are holding a suspect for committing another crime, they should check the person's immigration status if they have reason to believe the person is in the United States illegally, according to the Associated Press.

The initial status check could also make way for future legal challenges, the AP reported.

Critics of the decision argue that racial profiling by police officers will be on the rise, but the court will prohibit officers from arresting people on minor immigration charges.

“The opinion invites the challenges that we are bringing. It’s going to cause racial profiling. It will cause prolonged detentions,” Linton Joaquin of the National Immigration Law Center told the AP. The group, one of several immigration rights groups who have followed the case closely, is pushing a separate challenge to the Arizona law.

The court ruled 5-3 that a state, no matter the frustration, can't pursue policies that undermine federal law. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the opinion of the court, which included a unanimous decision to allow status checks, but the court was divided regarding other portions of the Arizona law, the AP reported.

Kansas attorney Kris Kobach, who helped draft the Arizona law, called the decision "a big victory for Arizona" while acknowledging that "it's not a complete victory," according to the AP.

Arizona passed the law in 2010, but the Obama administration sued, stating that enacting immigration laws is a federal responsibility. Arizona has spent $3 million dollars defending the law in the past two years, the AP reported.

Five other states — Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah — have adopted similar laws to Arizona's with sections of them on hold while the court decided the case.