Does Supreme Court Ruling Now Clarify Immigration Policy?

That the immigration policy in the United States is broken is hardly in dispute. What appears to be the issue, however, is how to fix it. States have introduced legislation that is said to be firming up federal legislation not enforced. Much of that, however, was struck down in the Supreme Court decision Monday concerning Arizona’s law. Except for one provision, that being the ability of state law enforcement to question someone’s legal status when stopped for another reason, most of the Arizona law was rejected by the Supreme Court.

According to a report from CNN, the ruling makes it uneconomical for states to keep drafting legislation that the Supreme Court will likely strike down. There are several other states that introduced legislation they claim attempts to do the job the federal government doesn’t, but none have been enacted. In light of Monday’s decision, none are likely to be enacted now either.

The president also reportedly announced Monday that the government was revoking the 287(g) provision in Arizona. It is still in force in 68 other counties in 24 states though, including Gwinnett County. This is the federal progam that allows law enforcement to identify illegal immigrants if picked up for any offense and then turn them over to federal immigration officials for deportation. Funding was cut to these programs in February. However, except for Arizona now, the program remains in force in the other jurisdictions for the moment.

President Barack Obama also recently issued instructions preventing the deportation of people brought to the country by their parents illegally under a certain age. 

So what do you think of the Supreme Court ruling? Does it clarify the issue and make for a more streamline enforcement of U.S. immigration policy? Or has it just cast more confusion as to exactly what the current U.S. immigration policy is?