Arizona voters will soon have the opportunity to determine whether local law enforcement should be granted the authority to detain individuals believed to have illegally crossed the border from Mexico. This proposition, if approved, would infringe on the federal government’s jurisdiction over immigration enforcement. However, it is important to note that this measure would not be implemented immediately, and its actual enforcement remains uncertain.
If Proposition 314 is approved by Arizona voters, the state would join the ranks of Texas, Iowa and Oklahoma in pushing the boundaries of local authorities’ power to address illegal immigration. Over the past year, Republican lawmakers in these states have passed immigration laws, only to have their enforcement efforts blocked by federal courts.
Arizona, the sole presidential battleground state that shares a border with Mexico, has a long history of grappling with the contentious issue of immigration politics. Over the past two decades, mounting dissatisfaction with the federal government’s handling of border security led to a push for local law enforcement agencies to take on immigration enforcement responsibilities, which were traditionally reserved for federal authorities.
In 2005, the state Legislature passed a law prohibiting immigrant smuggling ban , which granted then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio the authority to carry out immigration crackdowns. Subsequently, in 2007, employers were prohibited from knowingly hiring individuals who were in the country illegally. Furthermore, in 2010, a significant immigration law was enacted, which mandated that police officers, while enforcing other laws, inquire about the legal status of individuals suspected of being in the country without proper authorization.
Arizona voters have had previous opportunities to weigh in on immigration-related issues. In 2004, they gave their approval to a law that limited government benefits for individuals residing in the country illegally. Similarly, in 2006, they passed a law designating English as the official language of Arizona. However, in 2008, a proposal seeking to make business-friendly amendments to the state’s law prohibiting employers from hiring unauthorized individuals was rejected by voters.
Arizona GOP lawmakers argue that the proposal is crucial in order to enhance border security. They attribute the surge in illegal immigration to the policies implemented by the Biden administration. However, it is worth noting that there has been a significant decline in illegal border crossings after the White House implemented stricter asylum restrictions.
Opponents of Proposition 314 argue that it would have negative impacts on Arizona’s economy and reputation, and could potentially lead to racial profiling of Latinos. They point to the racial profiling that occurred under Arpaio’s leadership in the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. In 2013, a federal judge declared that Latinos had been subjected to racial profiling in Arpaio’s traffic patrols, which specifically targeted immigrants. As a result, the agency was required to undergo a court-ordered overhaul, which is projected to incur legal and compliance costs of $314 million by mid-summer 2025.
Kelli Hykes, a health policy worker and volunteer for Greg Whitten, the Democratic nominee in the Arizona’s 8th Congressional District race, took thoughtful consideration when deciding how to vote on the immigration measure. However, she has chosen not to disclose her decision.
“It’s quite divisive, and even within my own family, we have differing opinions on how we will be casting our votes,” Hykes expressed.
Proposition 314 seeks to establish a state offense for individuals who unlawfully cross the Arizona-Mexico border at locations other than designated ports of entry. This measure would grant local and state law enforcement officials the authority to apprehend individuals involved and allow state judges to issue deportation orders. Additionally, those responsible for enforcing this law would be protected from civil litigation.
A violator would not be subject to immediate enforcement of these provisions. To prosecute, a similar law in Texas or another state must have been in effect for 60 consecutive days.
The Arizona GOP lawmakers who supported the measure on the ballot were referring to Texas Senate Bill 4. In December, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed the bill into law with the intention of granting local and state law enforcement the authority to apprehend individuals allegedly entering Texas illegally from Mexico.
A federal appeals court halted the law’s implementation in March. The subsequent month, a group of federal judges listened to arguments from a Texas attorney who defended the law, while Justice Department attorneys contended that it infringed upon the federal government’s jurisdiction in enforcing immigration law. Currently, the panel is still deliberating and has not yet announced its decision.
Proposition 314 includes several provisions that do not rely on laws from outside Arizona. If the measure is passed by voters, it will immediately establish selling fentanyl, which leads to someone’s death, as a felony. The punishment for this crime could be up to 10 years in prison. Additionally, the proposition makes it a crime for noncitizens to provide false documentation when applying for employment or seeking benefits from local, state, and federal programs.