Protesters opposing legislation that will require local police departments to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement carry signs in front of the Arizona Senate building on Feb. 17, 2025. Photo by Jerod MacDonald-Evoy | Arizona Mirror
Republicans in Arizona are barreling ahead with a proposal that could force local police officers to comply with the federal government’s immigration policies, despite warnings from Latino Arizonans and the wife of a U.S. veteran who was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials last month that doing so will only lead to more unfair arrests.
On Jan. 22, Marlon Parris, an Iraq war veteran and legal permanent resident who has lived in the country for more than 30 years, was arrested outside of his home in Laveen. His wife, Tanisha Hartwell-Parris, continues to work towards his release while juggling a family business, the needs and emotional well-being of their seven children, and a newfound role in immigration advocacy.
On Monday, she testified against Senate Bill 1164, urging lawmakers on the Senate Military Affairs and Border Security Committee to reject the proposal and pointing to her husband’s case as proof that state law enforcement agencies shouldn’t entangle themselves in federal immigration policies that could get it wrong.
“(Marlon) actually has papers from ICE and the Department of Homeland Security stating that he can actually stay in this country,” she said. “He is now currently detained even with all of the proper documentation, so I can only imagine what could happen with somebody that doesn’t have that.”
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
In 2011, Marlon was convicted of conspiracy to distribute drugs. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security later gave him a signed “Letter of no interest” in recognition of the nonviolent nature of his crime and his military service. But two days after Trump’s inauguration, ICE officials surrounded Marlon outside his home. Tanisha said she believes the Republican’s campaign promises to oversee a mass deportation campaign changed the federal government’s immigration enforcement priorities to place Marlon, who would otherwise be a low priority for removal, in the crosshairs.
And a GOP-led bid to strengthen the relationship between ICE and Arizona law enforcement agencies — on the grounds that doing so will increase public safety — is causing alarm among immigrant communities and civil liberties groups, who say it will only serve to realize Trump’s mass deportation plan.
Dubbed the Arizona ICE Act, the proposal directs every law enforcement agency in the state to “use its best efforts to support the enforcement of federal immigration laws”. While that statement has no clear guidelines for when, or even if, law enforcement agencies can refuse to comply with federal immigration enforcement policies, the rest of the bill’s provisions increase the degree to which police departments must cooperate with ICE officials.
State, city, town and county employees would be barred from taking any action to limit the involvement of local police officers with immigration officials. That would likely void a 2018 citywide resolution passed by Phoenix’s city council prohibiting the conscription of city police officers for any federal deportation force that remains on the books.
ICE officials would also be able to request that any person in the custody of any police department in the state they suspect of being in the country illegally be held for an extra 48 hours — even if that person hasn’t yet been convicted of a crime, and even if ICE agents have no probable cause. Currently, police departments have the option to cooperate with those written requests, called “ICE detainers,” or obey only those issued with a judicial approval.
The bill also threatens legal consequences for police departments or correctional facilities found to be falling short of its directives. The state attorney general would be authorized to take negligent agencies to court. And any Arizonan could trigger an investigation from the state’s top prosecutor into their local law enforcement agency.
The proposal, which originally mandated all police departments join 287(g) agreements or similar federal immigration enforcement programs, has prompted several public protests in the past month. Monday was no different, as opponents packed the hearing room to voice their opposition and rallied outside in the Capitol plaza to demonstrate against it. But Chairman David Gowan, a Republican who represents Sierra Vista, limited public testimony to just a handful of speakers.
Noah Schramm, the border policy strategist for the Arizona branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, warned that the bill could lead to frivolous investigations prompted by citizens who believe their local police departments should be doing more to enforce federal immigration laws.
And the state would be the one footing the bill for those investigations and lawsuits, but GOP lawmakers didn’t include any money for local police agencies to cover those costs.
Douglas Kouffie, Marlon’s lawyer, told lawmakers on the panel that ICE detainers could represent constitutional rights violations. While Republicans have defended the bill as ensuring that undocumented people who commit crimes aren’t released without repercussions, Kouffie pointed out that extended detentions undermine a person’s right to due process.
“In this country, we have a presumption of innocence until proven guilty,” he said. “The mere evidence that somebody’s arrested doesn’t mean they’ve necessarily committed a crime.”
Kouffie added that many immigrants have legal authorization even if they aren’t citizens. Asylum seekers, for example, must live in the country as permanent residents for six years or more before they can be eligible for citizenship. But they are among the groups who are legally allowed to stay in the country. And while some asylum seekers apply for work permits and driver’s licenses, not all of them are able to work or drive due to age or infirmity, which means they simply don’t have such legal documentation on hand to deter a potential ICE detainer.
Democrats on the committee were unanimously opposed to the bill, voicing concern about its impact on immigrants and mixed status families in Arizona and the burden on law enforcement agencies across the state. Sen. Catherine Miranda, D-Phoenix, said the measure would worsen public safety.
“There will be reduced reporting of violent crimes by vulnerable communities because they won’t act as witnesses out of fear of deportation,” she said. “There will be increased response times for our law enforcement. Most major agencies are short staffed and over extended.”
But Republicans, who control the chamber and outnumber Democrats on the panel, backed the measure, saying it’s necessary to preserve public safety.
Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, pointed to Laken Riley’s murder in Georgia as proof of the Arizona ICE Act’s necessity to ensure Arizonans are protected from undocumented people who commit crimes. Jose Ibarra, a Venezuelan immigrant who was convicted in the 26-year-old nursing student’s murder in 2024, was previously detained in 2023 on a shoplifting charge and then later released. The case has been used by Republican politicians to justify hostile immigration policies, and inspired a federal law named after Riley that allows the indefinite detainment of undocumented people accused of low-level crimes, including shoplifting.
Shamp, who sponsored the Secure the Border Act that 63% of Arizona voters approved last year which made it a state crime for migrants to cross the Arizona-Mexico border anywhere but at an official port of entry, touted those results as an impetus to act.
“This is about making Arizona safer, and the fact of the matter is the citizens of Arizona overwhelmingly voted to secure our border,” she said. “Our federal government is not going to do it, then we have to do it.”
Outside the committee chambers, Latino Arizonans and immigrant rights advocates gathered to denounce the bill and a host of other anti-immigrant measures, which critics have begun to refer to as the “Arizona Families Deportation Agenda.” Holding up signs reading “These racist bills have got to go” and “Immigrants Make America Great,” protestors circled around prominent activists who spoke out against the proposal.
Tyler Montague, with the American Business Immigration Coalition, said the state shouldn’t get involved in a federal problem. ABIC advocates for immigration reform at the federal level and has pushed for pro-immigrant policies in Arizona, including a voter-backed measure that granted undocumented students in-state tuition at Arizona’s public colleges and universities
“We don’t oppose removing dangerous people from the community. We acknowledge that there are dysfunctional parts of federal immigration law that need to be fixed and improved but the answer is not a state-level, enforcement-only provision that requires our local police departments to make their ‘best efforts’ at enforcing federal immigration law,” Montague said. “That’s what will break up families. That’s what could devastate our workforce.”
Raquel Terán, a former Democratic lawmaker, who started her political career opposing the state’s notorious “show me your papers” law, encouraged attendees to continue mobilizing, and called on them to return to the state Capitol next week. Lawmakers, she said, need to be confronted with the public’s disapproval.
“We keep going, we are here and we’re not leaving,” she yelled in Spanish, to raucous cheers.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.