A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona’s immigration law from taking effect, delivering a last-minute victory to opponents of the crackdown. . . .
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. "By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a ‘distinct, unusual and extraordinary’ burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose."
A housing project creates a "substantial likelihood" of increased crime, yet housing projects are legal. I always thought that someone had to actually break a law, not create a "substantial likelihood" of breaking a law before said someone could be convicted.
Incidentally, when we write regulations we use phrases like "substantial likelihood" when we want to give ourselves, as regulators, lots of flexibility during the actual implementation process. In other words, we use it when we’re not sure what to do and we’re making stuff up.