Immigration consistently ranks among voters’ top three concerns in polls this election cycle. Supporters of a state-level crackdown in Arizona that is likely to pass next week argue that the measure reflects widespread frustration among residents over the chaos at the U.S. southern border.
If voters approve Proposition 314, a bill that would allow state and local law enforcement to arrest and deport immigrants who cross the border illegally between ports of entry, Arizona would be able to increase immigration enforcement at the state level. It will be the newest state to enter. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed similar legislation last November, and several states have since created their own provisions, sparking debate over whether states should have a role in immigration enforcement. It’s reignited.
The Arizona bill received less attention than the Texas law. Democratic Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs and Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego, who is running for the U.S. Senate against Republican Kari Lake, have criticized the bill. But Yavapai County Sheriff David Rose, one of the bill’s supporters, said many politicians on both sides of the aisle realize the measure is “very popular with voters.” .
Recent opinion polls seem to support him. Nearly two-thirds of Arizona voters support the measure, according to the latest Noble Predictive Insights Arizona Public Opinion Pulse poll. “Immigration and border security are the biggest issues,” Rose added. “If the federal government had done its job properly, this would never have been on the ballot, and voters are now ready to pass this.”
Rose is also president of the Arizona Sheriff’s Association, which represents sheriffs in the state, including border counties. “They have a lot of very unique public safety challenges related to illegal border crossings,” he said. In Yavapai County, located in the heart of the Grand Canyon State, Rhodes voters are concerned about fentanyl trafficking, another issue the ballot measure addresses. This law makes it a second-degree felony for an individual over the age of 18 to sell fentanyl that intentionally causes the death of another person.
The authors of Proposition 314, known as the “Border Security Act,” say in its text that nearly 7 million immigrants will attempt to cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally between 2021 and 2023. U.S. Customs and Border Protection noted the encounter. This does not include the estimated 2 million fugitives who have “completely avoided encounters with border officials.” Arizona became a hotspot for illegal crossings earlier this year, but numbers have declined in recent days.
Intended to deter illegal immigration, the law provides criminal penalties for immigrants who knowingly use false documents to apply for public benefits or employment. It also requires state authorities to use electronic verification programs to verify a person’s status and ensure eligibility for federal or state welfare benefits. Human smugglers often lure immigrants into the country illegally with glowing reports of job opportunities and taxpayer-funded benefits, the bill’s authors argue. .
“Many of our cities are flooded,” Sen. John Kavanaugh of Arizona, one of the Republican senators who unanimously approved Proposition 314 for a vote, told WORLD. And it’s not just border towns that are suffering, he says. New York City Mayor Eric Adams has repeatedly requested federal aid, and several small towns in the Midwest, including Springfield, Ohio, are struggling with the rapid influx of arrivals. Since 2021, authorities have released about 2.3 million immigrants into the United States to await immigration hearings.
The law’s most controversial provision makes it a national crime for immigrants to cross the U.S.-Mexico border into Arizona. State and local law enforcement would be allowed to arrest and detain immigrants who entered the country illegally, and state judges would be able to order deportation. If the individual chooses to leave the country voluntarily, the court will dismiss the charges, but if not, the court may charge the immigrant with a fourth-degree felony.
Law enforcement must have probable cause to arrest and detain an immigrant, such as the officer witnessing the individual passing through a port of entry, viewing a technical record of the act, or otherwise The bill makes clear that there must be access to constitutionally sufficient measures for Kavanagh said the measure targets “bad actors” who try to evade Border Patrol agents. “The focus is narrow,” he added. “It’s just a matter of putting more boots on the ground.”
But critics of the law say these guidelines are too broad and open to interpretation by individual officials. Alba Jaramillo is co-executive director of the Immigration Law and Justice Network and a community organizer in Tucson, Arizona. She argues that Proposition 314 “erodes trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement” and that it “does not make our communities safer.” In the long run. Jaramillo also believes the measure will encourage racial profiling of immigrants across the state.
He said the measure is reminiscent of another Arizona law enacted in 2010. Under Senate Bill 1070, infamously known as the “Show me your documents” law, police can request to see an individual’s immigration documents during a traffic stop or other routine encounter. They had a “reasonable suspicion” that they were in the country illegally. The law also penalized illegal immigrants who did not carry registration documents and was ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Kavanaugh described concerns that Proposition 314 would provoke racial targeting as a “scare tactic.” It argued that because of the law’s “probable cause” provision, the measure did not apply “to locations outside the border.” This measure will not be applied retrospectively. That means immigrants already in the state illegally are not eligible.
This provision of Arizona’s measure will not take effect unless the Texas law, or a similar law in another state, remains in effect for at least 60 days. Texas law allows state law enforcement to charge misdemeanors against immigrants who cross the U.S. border illegally. The law took effect for just a few hours earlier this year before several advocacy groups, El Paso County and the U.S. Department of Justice challenged it in federal court. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law should remain on hold until the court rules on the constitutional issue at hand.
“The main issue in this case is whether Texas exceeded its authority to regulate immigration at the state level,” said Dennis Gilman, co-director of the Immigration Clinic at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law.
The Lone Star State’s law has already been considered by the Supreme Court once, but the justices did not rule on its constitutionality in a short ruling. So it will probably come back, Gilman said. She believes Texas ultimately passed the bill aimed at forcing the high court to reconsider its decision to overturn Arizona’s 2010 immigration crackdown. In the decision, the court reaffirmed the federal government’s exclusive authority over immigrants, ruling that states can only engage in enforcement if ordered by the federal government.
There are also foreign policy concerns, Gilman said. The Mexican government issued an official statement on Texas’ immigration policy, warning of the potential impact on Mexicans living in the United States and emphasizing the importance of a consistent immigration policy.
“The Mexican government has been very clear that its immigration and immigration activities are coordinated with U.S. federal authorities,” said Tucson, Arizona, which shared similar concerns with WORLD about Arizona’s ballot measures. said Mexican Consul Rafael Barceló Durazo.
Critics of Arizona’s Proposition 314 also point out that most cities and counties lack the resources to enforce the measure. Donald Huesch is the mayor of Douglas, Arizona. Douglas is a small border community of approximately 15,300 people located directly across the border from Agua Prieta, Mexico. He understands the frustration driving Proposition 314’s popularity. “The uncertainty in the immigration situation is very severe,” he said. “The federal government had no plan for any of this.”
But Huesch argued that the voting system was not a sustainable solution and would place additional strain on the city’s already understaffed police department. The Grand Canyon Institute, a nonpartisan research organization, estimates the measure would cost the state $325 million a year. Hushi would rather see the money spent enforcing Prop. 314 go toward better surveillance cameras and more personnel, allowing local police departments to work more effectively with federal agencies.
The law does not require local law enforcement agencies to take action if they do not have the resources, nor does it specifically allocate funds. “It was written to be lenient. Law enforcement is saying ‘may’,” said Rose, the Yavapai County sheriff. “We’re not saying we’ll do that.” So if the state doesn’t provide additional funding or certain counties decide not to enforce this measure, “this bill won’t actually have any effect.” ” he said.
Still, Rose argued that the law is an essential tool for local law enforcement. Illegal immigration reached its lowest level since 2021 in September. President Joe Biden’s asylum restrictions have contributed to the decline, but immigration experts say Mexico’s increased enforcement has played a larger role. And local law enforcement knows Mexican policy can change quickly, and “no one believes this will last,” Rose said.
“Both parties that control this country have failed, and continue to fail, spectacularly and catastrophically when it comes to border security. So you can see the state being absolutely outraged.” he said. “I think there’s a better way to go about this. Unfortunately, [Proposition 314] It is the only tool provided. ”
