I believe you may be misinformed or uninformed. It was changed and is very clear:
one summary:
May 01, 2010
The Arizona Legislature has narrowed a controversial immigration law in response to allegations that the measure legalized racial profiling and forced police to determine the immigration status of everyone they encountered on the streets.

The initial law, signed by Gov. Jan Brewer last week, required police to determine a person's immigration status if officers formed a reasonable suspicion about their legality during any "lawful contact." That led to suggestions by some legal experts that police would be obligated to scrutinize even people who asked for directions. A Phoenix police officer who patrols an area near a school sued, contending that it would require him to ask children he encounters during the day if they are in the country legally.

Lawmakers on Thursday night changed the language to require scrutiny only of people who police stop, detain or arrest. They also changed a section of the bill that barred officers from "solely" using race as grounds for suspecting someone is in the country illegally; opponents had argued that that would allow race to be a factor. The legislators removed the word "solely" to bar race from being used by officers enforcing the law.


http://articles.latimes.com/2010/may/01/nation/la-na-arizona-immigration-20100501


>Ummm.. you need to read up on the Arizona law. ANYONE stopped by the police there can be asked to show proof of citizenship. I think it's inevitable that a US Citizen will, at some point, have to show that proof.
>
>>Your anology of segragation isn't applicable, as the blacks were American citizens being denied their rights. This is an issue of
>>people who are NOT citizens, and therefore do not have civil rights. These are two entirely different situations.