In Arizona v.
在亚利桑那州诉……案中
Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.
亚利桑那州曾试图制定与现有联邦政策并行的州政策。
On the overturned provisions the majority held Congress had deliberately "occupied the field" and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal's privileged powers.
在被推翻的条款上，多数意见认为国会已经明确地"占据了领域"，因此亚利桑那州侵犯了联邦的特权权力。
However, the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement.
然而，法官们表示，亚利桑那州的警察将被允许核实与执法部门接触人员的法律地位。
Two of the three objecting Justices - Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas - agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute.
三位持反对意见的法官中，有两位 - 萨缪尔·阿利托和克拉伦斯·托马斯 - 赞同这一宪法逻辑，但对哪些亚利桑那州的法规与联邦法律相冲突存在分歧。
例句取自历年考研英语真题，翻译为机器生成，仅供学习参考。