[untrained skeptic]

The Courts have gone along with the idea that the federales control the borders, but that's just their opinion. Presumably Arizona has a border and can control it.

That gets you into the realm of interstate commerce over which the constitution grants the federal government authority. In an area where the federal government is granted authority, federal law superceeds state law. Therefore the federal government can pass a law forbidding state laws like the one Arizona passed.

To my knowledge, the federal government has passed no such law, and without such a federal law, the Arizona law should be perfectly enforcable.

I also think there is little chance in today's political climate of Congress passing such a law. So the Arizona law should be upheld.

As for Coyotes, we already have plenty of laws. The administration has little will to enforce them, and even if they did want to enforce them, Congress refuses to provide enough funding to do so.

Immigration is one of the many topics where Congress will pass a law to present an appearance of doing something, and then not provide funding to actually do it.

[muawiyah]

Protecting a border does not require you to cross that border. Such activity could take place as a perfectly intrastate event. Maybe a few rounds might cross the border, but the state's jurisdiction rights all the way up to the traditional Common Law measurement of 6 inches.

Commerce can, of course, be routed to appropriate roads ~ but it's pretty clear the Constitution still reserves the privilege of "importing people" to the states!

We need some special Coyote Labor Laws.