Arizona case: what should Arizona do about it?

The Arizona opinion found three parts of SB 1070 invalid:

1. Making failure to carry a green card a State crime, and prosecuting that in State courts.
2. Criminal penalties for hiring any person found unlawfully present in the United States.
3. Allowing Arizona police to arrest someone upon “probable cause” to suspect that he is in the country illegally, but without a specific warrant.

The Court held that only the federal government, as a “single
sovereign,” has the power to regulate immigration. Arizona was trying to
take a federal matter into its own hands. This follows from Article I,
Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution.
Under that clause, the Congress sets “a uniform rule of
naturalization.” In addition, arresting someone on suspicion of being in
the country illegally, without a warrant, might break the Fourth
Amendment. It would be an “unreasonable seizure.”

But the Court sent back to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals the one
part of SB 1070 that Arizona Governor Jan Brewer most wanted to stand.
That part says that the police may check the immigration status of any
person whom they stop or arrest for any other reason, if they have reasonable suspicion that the person they stopped or arrested is an illegal alien. On that ground, Governor Brewer claimed “victory for the rule of law.”

The Obama administration reacted swiftly and shockingly. It suspended
all cooperation between the Immigration and Customs Enforcement service
and State and local police forces in Arizona. So now, local police may
check immigration status on anyone they stop or arrest, but the federal government won’t act on this information. In fact, they won’t even talk to local police when they call.

That made Justice Antonin Scalia terrifically angry.

He said flatly that the federal government doesn’t want to enforce
any laws against illegal immigration. Worse yet, the federals want to
“leave the States unprotected.” Scalia cited the recent Executive Order
that federal authorities would no longer deport most illegal aliens who
came to the United States as minors.

Are the sovereign States at the mercy of the Federal Executive’s refusal to enforce the Nation’s immigration laws?

Scalia went further: he suggested that no State would have ratified
the Constitution if the Constitution put that attitude in writing.

Imagine a provision—perhaps inserted right after Art. I, §8, cl. 4, the Naturalization Clause—which included among the enumerated powers of Congress “To establish Limitations upon Immigration that will be exclusive and that will be enforced only to the extent the President deems appropriate.” The delegates to the Grand Convention would have rushed to the exits.

No media organ, not even Fox News
Channel, has picked up on this yet. A Justice of the Supreme Court just
told the world that the States ought to consider seceding from the
Union, and no one could blame them. As Paul of Tarsus might have said
(Galatians 1:6): wow. Just—wow. But: can anyone blame him for saying so?

There are better ideas. They appear as answer choices in this poll.