The Supreme Court today struck down as unconstitutional portions of Arizona's controversial law aimed at cracking down on illegal immigrants.

The Supreme Court will issue its last opinions on Thursday, with its decision on health care reform expected to come down that day, the Associated Press reports.

The court, however, left standing the "show me your papers" part of the law that requires state and local police to perform roadside immigration checks of people they've stopped or detained if a "reasonable suspicion" exists that they are in the country illegally.

But the court indicated that section could face further legal challenges.

The Associated Press writes that the court, in effect, took the teeth out of the "show me your papers" provision by prohibiting officers from arresting people on minor immigration charges.

Justice Kennedy wrote the opinion for the court that was unanimous on allowing the status check to go forward, the AP reports. The court was divided on striking down the other portions.

READ: Full opinion on Arizona law

VOTE: What do you think of the court ruling?

The court voted 5-3 to reject the parts of the law that:

Make it a state crime for illegal immigrants not to possess their federal registration cards;

Make it a crime for illegal imigrants to work, apply for work or solicit work;

Allow state and local police to arrest illegal immigrants without a warrant when probable cause exists that they committed "any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States."

The law, known as SB1070, has become a flashpoint for the debate over how to enforce immigration in the U.S. and served as a blueprint for similar laws in five other states - Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah.

President Obama called the Arizona law "misguided" and his Department of Justice sued the state. Former Massachusetts governor and GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney said he would drop the federal lawsuit against Arizona and adopt the Arizona-inspired idea of making life so difficult for illegal immigrants that they choose to "self-deport."

Four key provisions of the law were blocked by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton in Phoenix, a ruling that was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court in San Francisco. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, and both sides held oral arguments on April 25.

Sponsors said the law was necessary because the federal government has failed to control the influx of illegal immigrants into the country, forcing states like Arizona to grapple with the security concerns and high costs of educating and caring for illegal immigrants. They said the law simply empowers police and state officials to help enforce federal immigration laws.

Opponents said it unfairly criminalizes otherwise law-abiding people, opens the door for racial profiling of Hispanics legally in the country and forces state law enforcement to interfere with the intricacies of federal immigration policy.