Dreaming in Arizona: Can Prosecutorial Discretion Co-Exist With 'Show Me Your Papers?'

"It is indeed unfortunate that despite noting the role of the federal government in formulating immigration policy, the Court did not, at least for the moment, invalidate 2(B), which essentially legalizes racial profiling.  ... It does not require a crystal ball to imagine that 2(B), if enforced,  will cause mayhem for young DREAMers and their ability to remain in the US through further administrative remedies, despite the Court’s narrow upholding of the provision.  It will be difficult, if not impossible, for ICE to communicate with certainty to overzealous Arizona officials like Sheriff Joe that a young person who qualifies for the deferred action program is not unlawfully present.  In fact, such a person continues to be unlawfully present even though he or she may qualify for deferred action presently, prior to the filing of the application.  Moreover, even after an application is filed, it is not clear how long DHS will actually take to grant deferred action and such a person will still remain unlawfully present during the pendency of the application." - Gary Endelman and Cyrus D. Mehta, June 26, 2012.