A Senate committee approved a ballot referral on Wednesday that would allow local police to arrest people who enter the country illegally despite concerns from Democrats that the move would allow for racial profiling. The measure is a direct attempt from legislative Republicans to curtail a veto from Gov. Katie Hobbs.
HCR2060 is a reflection of legislative language that Hobbs already rejected this session, alongside an onslaught of further immigration-related changes that GOP lawmakers said are needed due to failure of the federal government.
“The bill I vetoed earlier this year lacked support from businesses, farmers, and law enforcement in border communities,” Hobbs said in a written statement. “This ballot initiative won’t secure our border. Instead, it will put Arizona entrepreneurs out of business, kill jobs and prevent law enforcement from keeping our communities safe. Arizona should not pay the price for the federal government’s inaction.”
Coined the “Secure the Border Act,” the ballot referendum would specifically make it illegal to enter the state from Mexico if not from a legal port of entry. However, it sets up a provision that would drop the misdemeanor charges for entering illegally if the person agrees to be deported from the country and not return.
Further, the 10-page proposal would require that agencies utilize E-verify to check the citizenship of their employees if they collect benefits, criminalize falsifying documents to an employer that say you are a citizen and make it a Class 2 felony to sell fentanyl to a person and cause their death.
Republican lawmakers supporting this voter-protected immigration legislation draw direct inspiration from SB4, a Texas law currently under litigation in the Supreme Court for its constitutionality. This is reflected in legislative language that would only allow the measure to become enforceable when the Texas law has taken effect for 60 days.
Democrat lawmakers have largely opposed the measure. On top of that, some have said it would turn the state back to the “show me your papers days” which were brought up by the passage of SB1070 over 14 years ago. Further, some business owners and activists have said the proposal would significantly impact the state’s economy.
“The strike-everything amendment to HCR2060, offered by Senator Gowan who 14 years ago was a prime sponsor to SB1070 will empower local and state police to stop and detain law abiding citizens from going to work, attending temple and church or Dreamers simply going to school,” Sen. Flavio Bravo, D-Phoenix, said. “If my Republican colleagues were honest, they would tell you that this is an unfunded mandate for our already understaffed law enforcement agencies and the cost to implement a measure like this would fall most or almost entirely on the cities and towns.”
Sen. Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, disagreed that the measure is similar to SB1070. He said the previously enacted immigration legislation is different from their proposed ballot measure because it does not permit law enforcement to ask suspected illegal immigrants to “show them their papers.”
“Doing nothing is not an option,” Petersen said.
Bravo said he is disappointed by GOP lawmakers for bending legislative procedures to “rush through a ballot referral.”
Sheriffs showed up in support of the measure when it was heard in committee Wednesday.
Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb, who is running for the U.S. Senate, testified in support of the ballot proposal, and he said police officers would only be permitted to make arrests if they found reasonable suspicion proving a person entered the country illegally. Rep. Analise Ortiz, D-Phoenix, asked him how they would put that law into practice.
Yavapai County Sheriff David Rhodes spoke in favor of the legislation, but made it clear he is not sure how the specifics of implementation of the law would play out when it comes to execution or funding.
“In the view of the sheriff's, probable cause looks like this: something like eyewitness testimony of people walking through the border not at a port of entry, something like technology that indicates that people are crossing the border not at a port of entry,” he said.
He said that from a sheriff’s perspective, the measure is a “border bill” that would not allow for racial profiling. The measure would permit law enforcement to drive all of that traffic to official ports of entry for lawful crossing of the border,” Rhodes said.
“If this goes to the ballot and they pass it, then there are a lot of details to be worked out,” Rhodes continued. “There's even language in the bill that is before you that likely needs to be worked out.”
The committee hearing brought forward over three hours of deliberation. At one point, ACLU representative Marilyn Rodriguez and Rep. Alexander Kolodin, R-Scottsdale, had a heated argument over whether the legislation was constitutional.
“By combining language from multiple failed immigration proposals, it (HCR2060) seeks to push through divisive measures rather than genuine solutions,” Sen. Rosanna Gabaldon, D-Green Valley, said. “Instead of fostering bipartisan collaboration, HCR2060 demonstrates bipartisan politics at its worst.”
Sen. David Gowan, R-Sierra Vista, closed out the hearing by reiterating that the measure would primarily “codify federal law.” It will give lawmakers the tools they need to secure the border, he said.
“I know we have a difference of opinion up here, and that's why we’re going to let the citizens decide,” Gowan said.
Notably, the referral contains a paragraph that would permit minority and majority leaders of both chambers to legally interfere if the law is challenged in the courts.
The measure passed out of the Senate Military Affairs, Public Safety and Border Security committee with a 4-3 vote on party lines. The ballot referral will get its final vote in the Senate on May 15. If it is passed, it will be transmitted to the House. The proposal does not need approval from the Governor because it would get referred to the voters in November.
Copyright © 2024 BridgeTower Media. All Rights Reserved.
Most Popular
Comments / 0