[9YearLurker]

Doesn’t the article say the USSC rejected it? Is that not correct?

[Lakewood]

https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-court-arizona/u-s-top-court-rejects-arizona-challenge-to-dreamers-program-idUSKBN1GV1QR

From the above article:

“The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year struck down the Arizona policy, ruling that the state cannot develop its own definition of immigrants who are authorized to be in the United States and that only the federal government had that power.”

There is a bigger play here. The Ninth Circus says that “only the federal government had that power.” Think California. Think Sanctuary cities. The Ninth Circus just hung California and the Trump Administration (Sessions) will take that every time. This is precedent from the “local” circuit. California doesn’t have a chance now.

[Yosemitest]

From the article:

" ... Arizona’s “dreamers” will keep their licenses to drive — at least as long as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program exists.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday REJECTED the last-ditch plea by Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich
to uphold a 2012 executive order by then-Gov. Jan Brewer
to deny driver’s licenses to DACA recipients,
an order current Gov. Doug Ducey has left in place.

The justices gave no reason for their ruling. ...

With Monday’s high court action, that ruling is now final.

At last count, there were about 30,000 DACA recipients in Arizona.
ADOT does not have current figures on how many were issued licenses while the case was pending.
The last update, in April 2016, showed more than 21,000 DACA recipients with driver’s licenses.
... "