Arizona voters have passed legislation granting local police the authority to arrest migrants suspected of illegally crossing the border from Mexico.
Proposition 314 would give the state authority over the federal government on immigration enforcement.
Its approval, however, doesn't ensure immediate enforcement; the measure will remain on hold if it faces federal legal challenges, as has happened with similar state-led immigration laws in Texas, Iowa and Oklahoma.
Known as the "Secure the Border Act", Prop. 314 reflects Arizona's ongoing frustration with federal immigration policy. The state shares a 372.5 mile-long wall with Mexico, second in length only to Texas.
Over 62 percent of the state have so far voted in favor of the measure with more counting left to go.
Arizona's Past Attempts at Stronger Border Control
Recent efforts by GOP lawmakers in several states have sought to address border control in the build up to Election Day, but courts have repeatedly blocked these initiatives over federal preemption issues.
For Arizona, the issue remains a divisive one. Since the early 2000s, the state has enacted several high-profile immigration laws, including a 2005 ban on immigrant smuggling and a 2007 mandate prohibiting employers from knowingly hiring undocumented workers.
"It's so polarizing, and there are folks in my family that are going to be voting one way and I'm voting another," Kelli Hykes, a health policy worker and volunteer for Democratic congressional candidate Greg Whitten, said to The Associated Press.
What Are Legal Challenges to the Measure?
Proposition 314 grants local authorities the power to detain individuals entering Arizona illegally outside official ports of entry, making it a state crime.
However, enforcement is conditional: Arizona's law would only go into effect if a similar law in Texas, or another state, remains unchallenged in federal court for 60 days.
Texas Senate Bill 4, which Arizona lawmakers cited as a model, was signed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, but the bill was challenged by the U.S. Department of Justice, which argues it infringes on federal jurisdiction.
Opponents of the Arizona measure caution that state-level enforcement could strain Arizona's economy and lead to costly litigation, especially if racial profiling issues arise.
Citing past controversies involving former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, they point to a 2013 ruling where Arpaio's immigration patrols were found to racially profile Latinos, resulting in an overhaul of the sheriff's office expected to cost taxpayers over $314 million in legal and compliance costs by 2025.
Proposition 314 will also address drug enforcement and fraud prevention. It will grant the power to impose a 10-year felony penalty for those who sell fentanyl resulting in death and criminalizes document fraud by non-citizens seeking employment or benefits.
Democratic Opposition of Proposition 314
The passing of the measure is set to be met with fierce pushback.
When speaking of an earlier version of the measure, then known as HCR 2060, Democrat Representative Katie Hobbs said the legislation was for "extremists" who have "chosen to prioritize their political agendas over finding real solutions."
This article includes reporting from The Associated Press.
English (US) ·