Arizona voters overwhelmingly passed Prop 314 on Election Day last week. The initiative was referred to the ballot by the legislature last session after Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed a similar bill.
It was dubbed The Secure the Border Act, but it goes beyond the border itself. The proposition will make it a state crime for anyone to cross into the state between ports of entry, as well as make it harder for noncitizens to get public benefits, and impose stiff sentences for selling fentanyl that causes someone’s death.
What’s often been called the new SB1070 didn’t face much public opposition — even from immigrant rights advocates who rallied loudly against 1070 more than a decade ago. And, when voters decided on it at the polls last week, they passed it with more than 60% support.
But, the law won’t go into effect anytime soon, if at all. Jeremy Duda, a reporter for Axios Phoenix, joined The Show to explain why.
Full conversation
LAUREN GILGER: Good morning, Jeremy.
JEREMY DUDA: Good morning.
GILGER: OK. So Prop. 314 was modeled after a Texas law that got a lot of attention last year SB 4. And a key piece of this law is actually even tied to it, right?
DUDA: Yes, it was modeled off it and the, and the legislation, the language of the law very specifically ties them together and does not allow the Arizona provision to go into effect unless, you know, the Texas provision goes into effect or a similar law in another state, and has to be in effect for 60 continuous days.
And that is this provision that makes it a state crime to cross the border illegally, a state crime to cross it to Arizona from Mexico anywhere except for an official port of entry. And that is, there's a couple of other provisions regarding fentanyl sales that lead to, you know, overdose death to public benefits. But this unauthorized entry is a legal entry provision is really the heart of the law.
GILGER: Right. And what most people would associate with it, right? So if SB 4 in Texas doesn't make it through the courts, this kind of major portion of this law goes out the window?
DUDA: Or at least goes on hold, you know, it's possible another state could pass something similar and that could go through kind of a lot, kind of depends on the courts. Right now, the Texas law has been stated it's on hold. they heard arguments in the 5th circuit Court of Appeals back in April.
And a ruling on that could come any time, suppose, you know, theoretically that the 5th Circuit strikes it down but none other state it, and that's covered by a different Circuit Court of Appeals passes it and that allows it to come into effect. Then it could, there's just so many different moving parts from the legal system right now, we could get a, a ruling from the 5th Circuit pretty much any day from my understanding from folks involved in the Texas case, if you know, that could mean the law could go into effect in 60 days from now.
You know, the Arizona provision goes into effect as well, or it could be stayed while they appeal to the Supreme Court and could eventually go into effect in a couple of years from now or could never, kind of depends on what the 5th Circuit does and then what the Supreme Court does because presumably whoever loses the Texas case will still appeal that.
GILGER: Right. Right. So we should expect whoever wins the 5th Circuit Court to Appeal to the Supreme Court. This will likely end up at the Supreme Court. It seems, and this, as you said, there quickly could, could take a long time.
DUDA: That it could. Now there are a couple of other laws that some folks feel like could be similar enough to trigger that illegal entry provision in Prop. 314, there's one in Oklahoma and one in Iowa. But they still kind of inspired by similar concepts but very different. Of course, Arizona and Texas are unique in that. We are two of the only four states that have a border with, share a border with Mexico.
I suppose someone on the Canadian state on the Canadian border could pass a similar law and, you know, that might be that it may be enough, you know, that the, the, the Iowa law makes it a crime to come into the state if you've been deported or denied entry to the U.S. Oklahoma law does that plus also makes it a state crime to come into the States if you are not authorized to be in the United States at all.
And I think that one, you could go into court and potentially make an argument that they're similar enough, but it's, but it still lacks that border provision. So if you know that happened, I presume, you know, one side or the other would sue out here in Arizona to say yes, that's a good close enough. We should enforce the law or, hey, that's not close enough. We've got to put it on hold.
GILGER: Interesting. OK. So it's, it's tied to the Texas law, but there are some other laws that may be similar enough, the courts will decide all of that. So I wonder, Jeremy, like was all of this symbolic? Like the, the other aspects of this proposition will go into effect, I assume.
DUDA: Yeah, the other, the other ones were the public benefits, which is, which was kind of where this all started in the first place with the House Speaker Toma trying to pass the public benefits provision which Governor Hobbs vetoed and then the fentanyl provision. And so those will. But, as I mentioned, you know, the heart of the law really is the illegal entry one. And that's really, I think what most folks were probably looking at when they voted for this.
GILGER: Yeah. OK. So I want to take it one step further here before we let you go at the same time as this is all playing out in the courts and could be for some time, we have heard law enforcement officials around the state kind of question this measure and if they have the resources to carry it out, even those who, who may be in support of it, say they might not have the resources to carry it out. Could there be, it sounds like other hurdles, Jeremy to enforcing this measure even if it does go into effect.
DUDA: Oh, certainly. Because, you know, we were talking, you know, in some cases, you know, small, you know, border town police forces or, you know, border area, you know, county sheriff's departments who, you know, again, you know, I mean, if limited resources, they've, there's only so many things they could do. And if you have to turn that much attention, that much of your manpower to enforcing this border provision that, you know, does not potentially leave you a lot of resources to do other stuff depending.
And, you know, the Legislature did not provide any funding to law enforcement agencies for this, which I know a lot of them are not super pleased about. I guess we'll see, we'll see if that changes, you know, this session or this upcoming legislative session or if, and when this actually goes into effect, I guess there's no, unless the 5th Circuit gives it the OK and the stay is lifted in Texas and I guess, you know, people can wait and take a wait and see approach, and, you know, see if any money is actually needed to enforce this.
