A U.S. Border Patrol agent asks immigrants to sit in a queue while they await transport from the U.S.-Mexico border on Dec. 6, 2023, in Lukeville, Arizona. A surge of migrants illegally passing through openings cut by smugglers in the border wall has overwhelmed U.S. immigration authorities, causing them to shut down the international port of entry in Lukeville, so that officers can help process the new arrivals. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)
Arizona may once again be at odds with the federal government over immigration enforcement, as voters appear to support a GOP bid to give the state the power to jail and deport migrants.
With about half of all ballots tallied, 61% of voters were backing Proposition 314.
Dubbed the “Secure the Border Act,” by Republican lawmakers, Prop. 314 combines multiple GOP wish list items that either stagnated in the legislature or were vetoed by Gov. Katie Hobbs.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
It would make it a state crime for migrants to cross Arizona’s southern border, with first time convictions punishable by up to six months in jail. Local police officers would be allowed to arrest migrants they believed to have violated that law and state judges would be authorized to issue deportation orders. The proposal would also punish Arizonans who submit false documentation to apply for jobs or public benefits with a class 6 felony.
And it creates an entirely new class of felony, with harsh prison sentences, to criminalize people convicted of selling fentanyl that later ends in someone else’s death.
In the hopes of capitalizing on an election year focus on immigration, Republican lawmakers sold the initiative as a way to address record numbers of migrants at the Arizona-Mexico border — despite the fact that immigration has since plummeted and ignoring the state’s fraught history with usurping federal authority.
In 2010, GOP lawmakers in Arizona passed SB1070, the state’s infamous “show me your papers law” which gave police officers the go-ahead to detain drivers on suspicion of their legal status. Two years later, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down three of the law’s four provisions, ruling that enforcing immigration laws is under the sole purview of the federal government.
And the state crime provision in the new initiative mirrors a Texas law that is currently tied up in litigation. A caveat in the Arizona version states that it won’t go into effect until the Texas law does, or unless the U.S. Supreme Court overturns its 2012 ruling against the Grand Canyon State.
The ballot measure drew criticism and inspired protests from Latino and immigrant advocacy organizations, business leaders and some law enforcement officials, including ones that oversee communities on the Arizona-Mexico border. Opponents said the proposal would only further burden law enforcement agencies and lead to an increase in racial profiling.
Even with voter approval, it’s likely that the “Secure the Border Act” will face lawsuits after the election. Progressive organizations were quick to launch legal challenges against the proposal before it was placed on the ballot over its compliance with Arizona’s single subject requirement, which mandates that initiatives encompass just one topic. A judge ultimately sided with attorneys for GOP legislative leadership, who said that all of its provisions address the “harms” caused by the southern border.
But attorneys for the Latino advocacy organization, Living United for Change, that helped spearhead the lawsuit, have said that the proposal may also violate the state’s constitutional requirement that initiatives that are likely to increase state spending must identify an independent funding source. Several law enforcement officers warned during committee hearings while the initiative was being considered that it would cut into public safety budgets, but while GOP lawmakers acknowledged money would need to be spent, they said that would be up to a future legislative body to figure out.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.