Arizona voters have approved allowing local police to arrest migrants suspected of unlawfully entering the state from Mexico, a move that would limit the federal government’s jurisdiction over immigration enforcement but would not take effect immediately, if at all.
With the passage of Proposition 314, Arizona becomes the latest state to test the limits of what local governments may do to combat illegal immigration. Within the last year, Republican lawmakers in Texas, Iowa, and Oklahoma have passed immigration legislation. In each case, federal courts blocked the states’ efforts to enforce them.
Noah Schramm, the ACLU of Arizona’s border policy strategist, said the organization may file a lawsuit challenging the proposition’s constitutionality. The ACLU filed a lawsuit earlier this year to keep the initiative off the ballot.
“We’re looking very seriously at all options with regard to litigation,” Schramm said to reporters.
Schramm noted various concerns raised by the ACLU about the proposal, including the prospect of additional family separations, racial profiling, and denying migrants qualified for asylum the opportunity to file claims.
“This is an example of a state deciding to enforce its borders more strictly. Another problem is having a hodgepodge of laws (from different states) that apply differently and conflict with federal immigration law,” Schramm added.
Arizona, the only presidential battleground state that borders Mexico, has a long history of divisive immigration politics. Since the early 2000s, discontent with federal enforcement of Arizona’s border with Mexico has sparked a campaign to include local police departments in immigration enforcement, which had previously been delegated to the federal government.
In 2005, the state Legislature enacted an immigrant smuggling ban, which empowered then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio to carry out immigration crackdowns. In 2007, the state prohibited employers from knowingly hiring individuals in the country illegally. In 2010, a landmark immigration law mandated police to investigate the legal status of individuals suspected of being in the country without authorization, all while enforcing other laws.
Voters in Arizona have previously made decisions on immigration-related issues. They supported a 2004 law that denied some government benefits to illegal immigrants, as well as a 2006 measure that declared English to be Arizona’s official language. They also rejected a 2008 proposal that would have made business-friendly changes to state law prohibiting firms from hiring undocumented workers.
Republican senators from Arizona emphasized the importance of this idea in securing the border, blaming the Biden administration for an unprecedented surge in illegal immigration. Following the White House’s decision to tighten asylum regulations, the number of unlawful crossings has dropped to a new low.
Opponents of Prop. 314 stated that it would undermine Arizona’s economy and reputation while also leading to the racial profiling of Latinos. They mention the profiling of Latinos that occurred while Arpaio was in charge of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. A federal judge found in 2013 that Arpaio’s traffic patrols targeting immigrants racially profiled Latinos, leading to a court-ordered agency makeover that taxpayers anticipate will cost $314 million in legal and compliance costs by mid-summer 2025.
Kelli Hykes, who works in health policy and volunteers for Greg Whitten, the Democratic nominee for Arizona’s 8th Congressional District, said she carefully considered how to vote on the immigration bill but declined to divulge her decision.
“It’s so polarizing, and there are folks in my family who are going to be voting one way and I’m voting another,” Hykes said.
Prop. 314 makes it a state criminal to illegally enter Arizona from Mexico outside of recognized ports of entry, allowing local and state law enforcement personnel to arrest them and state judges to order deportation. Legal claims would protect those who enforce the law.
These provisions, however, would not be effective immediately. A offender could not be prosecuted until comparable legislation in Texas or another state had been in place for 60 days.
The Arizona Republican lawmakers who voted to put the proposal on the ballot were referring to Texas Senate Bill 4. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed the bill into law in December, intending it to empower local and state law enforcement to arrest individuals suspected of illegally entering Texas from Mexico.
In March, a federal appeals court placed the case on hold. The following month, a panel of federal justices heard testimony from a Texas attorney defending the statute and Justice Department lawyers claiming that it infringed on the federal government’s power to enforce immigration law. The panel has yet to issue its ruling.
Other sections of Proposition 314 are not dependent on analogous laws outside Arizona. The measure’s approval immediately makes selling fentanyl that causes death a felony punishable by up to ten years in prison, as well as submitting false documentation when applying for employment or attempting to receive benefits from local, state, and federal programs.