Start with the Texas situation which is extremely procedurally complicated just to throw that out there in terms of what what the status of the law is.

Talk us through what the court did today.

Fine.

Look, it is and it isn't.

What the court did was say, we're going to let Texas

have its way even as we figure out whether their law is constitutional and as you say

Chris it is flatly against the Supreme Court ruling the Arizona case.

Nevertheless, the procedural nicety you're talking about

is two justices said, well, this is an administrative stay,

which means basically a stay to consider whether to grant a stay that

the Fifth Circuit entered without any kind of reasoning, and we don't ever normally review those.

That's questionable whether they don't normally review,

but the bigger answer is, so what?

This is the Supreme Court of the United States.

They've left the situation on the ground that Texas

can violate current constitutional law and that means possible chaos in the field between federal and state agents. It means possible

abrogation of immigrants rights. It means possible interference with

our foreign relations with Mexico and it means the

suspension of the supremacy of federal law. What are they there for if not that and

it doesn't matter if it's for a day or week this is what

Justice Kagan essentially was saying administrative stay who cares if they

have made it the state of affairs that federal law binding federal law is set to the side

...