Supremes deliver a mixed message on Arizona immigration law

Guess this was your classic split decision, fight fans.

There is even more gray matter here than what you’ll find in my brain.

The Supreme Court today ruled that three of four provisions of Arizona’s immigration enforcement law are unconstitutional – and that a fourth could eventually be found to be.
Sounds like a big win for Obama and a big loss for Romney on the surface.
But the surface never tells the whole story. You have to dig deep into the hard dirt to find the rest of the story. Which is why this job comes with a shovel.
It’s far from clear whether the ruling will quash legislative efforts in other states to ferret out illegal immigrants in their populations.
Meanwhile, the decision does seem to validate President Obama’s stance and deepen his support with Latino voters.
And it complicates matters a bit for Mitt Romney, who took a hard-line immigration stance during the primaries and now is straddling a tightrope and pulling groin muscles while appealing to conservatives who want tougher enforcement while trying to cultivate Latino support.
But it was an incomplete win for Obama. The Supremes reversed the lower court on the most controversial part of the law, the “show me your papers” provision that requires law enforcement officers to check the immigration status of people while enforcing other laws.
By upholding this provision, the Supreme Court allowed Gov. Jan Brewer to claim victory for Arizona’s immigration enforcement effort.

So is everybody really happy? About as dumb a question as asking your wife if she’s putting on weight.