Show Navigation
Social Issues and Topics All Galleries
Add to Cart Download

The Court Decided the Fate of SB1070

25 images Created 25 Jun 2012

The US Supreme Court ruled Monday on SB1070, overturning a huge portion of Arizona's tough anti-immigration law. They narrowly let stand a small part of the law, allowing law enforcement to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with, but had reservations about how it would be implemented.

Latino leaders and civil rights advocates responded with cautious optimism to SCOTUS' ruling.

Loading ()...

  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  GEORGINA SANCHEZ, prays at an impromptu alter at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix, AZ, Monday. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. Among other things, the law requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest, allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant, makes it a crime for someone to be in the state without valid immigration papers, and makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers. The federal government sued Arizona because it believes the law is invalid because it is trumped by federal immigration laws. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.   PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction005.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Immigration activists pray at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix, AZ, Monday before the US Supreme Court ruled on Arizona's immigration law, SB1070. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. Among other things, the law requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest, allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant, makes it a crime for someone to be in the state without valid immigration papers, and makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers. The federal government sued Arizona because it believes the law is invalid because it is trumped by federal immigration laws. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.   PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ  PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction012.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ: JOSE LUIS LEAL, left, and PETRA FALCONE, both from Promise AZ, (PAZ) read the US Supreme Court's ruling on SB 1070 at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix, AZ, Monday after the court ruled on a lawsuit brought against Arizona by the Obama administration. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. Among other things, the law requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest, allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant, makes it a crime for someone to be in the state without valid immigration papers, and makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers. The federal government sued Arizona because it believes the law is invalid because it is trumped by federal immigration laws. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.    PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction016.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Immigration activists pray at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix, AZ, Monday before the US Supreme Court ruled on Arizona's immigration law, SB1070. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. Among other things, the law requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest, allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant, makes it a crime for someone to be in the state without valid immigration papers, and makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers. The federal government sued Arizona because it believes the law is invalid because it is trumped by federal immigration laws. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.   PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ  PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction010.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Immigration activists pray at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix, AZ, Monday before the US Supreme Court ruled on Arizona's immigration law, SB1070. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. Among other things, the law requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest, allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant, makes it a crime for someone to be in the state without valid immigration papers, and makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers. The federal government sued Arizona because it believes the law is invalid because it is trumped by federal immigration laws. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.   PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ  PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction015.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Immigration activists pray at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix, AZ, Monday before the US Supreme Court ruled on Arizona's immigration law, SB1070. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. Among other things, the law requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest, allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant, makes it a crime for someone to be in the state without valid immigration papers, and makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers. The federal government sued Arizona because it believes the law is invalid because it is trumped by federal immigration laws. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.   PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ  PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction018.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  GEORGINA SANCHEZ, prays at an impromptu alter at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix, AZ, Monday. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. Among other things, the law requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest, allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant, makes it a crime for someone to be in the state without valid immigration papers, and makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers. The federal government sued Arizona because it believes the law is invalid because it is trumped by federal immigration laws. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.    PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction020.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ: PATRICIA ROSAS, left, and GUSTAVO CRUZ, pray after the US Supreme Court ruled on US v. Arizona and Arizona's SB1070 at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix, AZ, Monday. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. Among other things, the law requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest, allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant, makes it a crime for someone to be in the state without valid immigration papers, and makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers. The federal government sued Arizona because it believes the law is invalid because it is trumped by federal immigration laws. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.   PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction019.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ: ROSA MARIA SOTO prays and celebrates at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix, AZ, Monday after the US Supreme Court struck down most of SB1070. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. Among other things, the law requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom they arrest, allows police to stop and arrest anyone whom they believe to be an illegal immigrant, makes it a crime for someone to be in the state without valid immigration papers, and makes it a crime to apply for or hold a job in Arizona without proper papers. The federal government sued Arizona because it believes the law is invalid because it is trumped by federal immigration laws. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.    PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction062.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:   MARTHA PAYAN (left) and ALLISON CULVER (red shirt) celebrate and picket the Arizona state capitol after the US Supreme Court overturned most of SB1070 Monday. Many conservatives in Arizona viewed the Court's decision as a victory because it let stand one small portion of the law. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction040.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:   MARTHA PAYAN (left) celebrates in front of the Arizona state capitol after the US Supreme Court overturned most of SB1070 Monday. Many conservatives in Arizona viewed the Court's decision as a victory because it let stand one small portion of the law. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.     PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction044.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  State Sen. STEVE GALLARDO, left, and Maricopa County Supervisor MARY ROSE WILCOX, discuss the US Supreme's Court's decision overturning most of SB1070, Arizona's tough anti-immigration bill. Both people, long time civil rights activists in Arizona, were opposed to the law. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction023.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:   Children stand in front of Arizona Democratic and civil rights leaders during a press conference in support of the Supreme Court's decision overturning most of SB1070, the state's tough anti-immigration bill, at a press conference Monday. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction037.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:   Maricopa County Supervisor MARY ROSE WILCOX, a long time civil rights advocate in Arizona, speaks out in response to the US Supreme Court's decision overturning most of SB1070 Monday. Wilcox was an opponent of the law. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction024.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:   Maricopa County Supervisor MARY ROSE WILCOX, a long time civil rights advocate in Arizona, speaks out in response to the US Supreme Court's decision overturning most of SB1070 Monday. Wilcox was an opponent of the law. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction026.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:   Arizona Democratic and civil rights leaders speak in support of the Supreme Court's decision overturning most of SB1070, the state's tough anti-immigration bill, at a press conference Monday. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction029.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:   DANIEL ORTEGA, an immigration attorney in Phoenix, AZ, speaks out in support of the US Supreme Court's decision to overturn most of SB1070 Monday. Ortega was an opponent of the law. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction034.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Immigration supporters picket the Arizona state capitol after the US Supreme Court overturned most of SB1070 Monday. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.       PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction032.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:   Former Arizona legislator ALFREDO GUTIERREZ (left) talks to other Latino political leaders at the state capitol Monday after the US Supreme Court's ruling that overturned SB1070. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.    PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction022.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:   ALLISON CULVER, a support of Arizona's SB1070, shouts at opponents at the Arizona State Capitol of the law after the US Supreme Court overturned most of the law Monday. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 was constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.    PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction046.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Arizona Governor JAN BREWER walks into a press conference in her office to respond to the US Supreme Court ruling that overturned most of SB 1070, the state's tough anti-immigration bill, duing a press conference Monday. Brewer said the state won a major victory in the court's ruling because a narrow portion of the law was allowed to stand. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction065.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Arizona Governor JAN BREWER responds to the US Supreme Court ruling that overturned most of SB 1070, the state's tough anti-immigration bill, duing a press conference Monday. Brewer said the state won a major victory in the court's ruling because a narrow portion of the law was allowed to stand. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction048.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Arizona Governor JAN BREWER responds to the US Supreme Court ruling that overturned most of SB 1070, the state's tough anti-immigration bill, duing a press conference Monday. Brewer said the state won a major victory in the court's ruling because a narrow portion of the law was allowed to stand. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction055.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Arizona Governor JAN BREWER responds to the US Supreme Court ruling that overturned most of SB 1070, the state's tough anti-immigration bill, duing a press conference Monday. Brewer said the state won a major victory in the court's ruling because a narrow portion of the law was allowed to stand. The lawsuit, US v. Arizona, determines whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction059.jpg
  • 25 JUNE 2012 - PHOENIX, AZ:  Arizona State Representative ANDY BIGGS, a supporter of SB1070, responds to the US Supreme Court's decision overturning most of the law Monday. Biggs said he viewed the Court's decision as a victory because it let stand one small portion of the law. The case, US v. Arizona, determined whether or not Arizona's tough anti-immigration law, popularly known as SB1070 is constitutional. The court struck down most of the law but left one section standing, the section authorizing local police agencies to check the immigration status of people they come into contact with.      PHOTO BY JACK KURTZ
    SB1070Reaction060.jpg
View: 100 | All
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
x

Jack Kurtz, Photojournalist & Travel Photographer

  • Published Work
  • Photographs
    • All Galleries
    • Search
    • Cart
    • Lightbox
    • Client Area
  • Jack on Instagram
  • About
  • Contact
  • My Occasional Blog
  • Portfolios on Behance
  • Portfolio