Senate Panel Greenlights Controversial Immigration Enforcement Bill

An amendment to a bill aimed at enhancing cooperation between county sheriffs and the Arizona Department of Corrections with federal immigration enforcement advanced in committee on Monday.

Senate Bill 1164, known as the Arizona Immigration, Cooperation, and Enforcement Act, narrowly passed the Senate Military Affairs and Border Security Committee with a 4-3 vote, relying on Republican backing.

Spearheaded by Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, the legislation instructs sheriff departments and the Department of Corrections to make “best efforts” to assist federal immigration officials. Notably, it eliminates the previous requirement for these agencies to enter into 287(g) agreements, which allowed local law enforcement to perform specific immigration enforcement duties.

The bill does mandate compliance with immigration detainer requests, preventing the release of certain detainees from custody. Furthermore, it explicitly forbids cities and towns from enacting or enforcing policies that obstruct collaboration with federal immigration authorities. Should the Attorney General determine a violation has occurred, those municipalities will face penalties through the loss of state-shared revenues until compliance is achieved.

“Ensuring the safety of our citizens is a fundamental duty of government,” Petersen emphasized during the committee hearing.

Petersen noted his ongoing collaboration with law enforcement agencies to shape the bill, highlighting the backing of the Arizona Sheriffs’ Association. David Rhodes, Yavapai County Sheriff and Association President, expressed gratitude, stating, “The Arizona Sheriffs’ Association fully supports the AZ ICE Act, which strengthens the rule of law and enhances community safety.”

Opponents of the bill raised concerns regarding potential racial profiling, particularly in light of heightened immigration enforcement under former President Trump’s administration. Tanisha Hartwell-Parris spoke out, recounting her husband Marlon Parris’s detainment by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, despite his legal residency status.

“I can only imagine the risks for someone without documentation,” she lamented, underscoring the distress such laws could inflict on vulnerable communities.

Tyler Montague, a senior advisor for the American Business Immigration Coalition, warned that parts of the bill could have detrimental economic effects, especially in sectors reliant on undocumented workers. “While we support removing dangerous criminals, we urge a no vote on this bill in its current form due to significant concerns,” he said.

Sen. Catherine Miranda, D-Laveen, echoed these sentiments, asserting that even refined iterations of the bill would adversely impact the community. “This legislation will have lasting repercussions, no matter how many adjustments are made,” she stated.

In response, Petersen reassured that the law is designed to focus on individuals already in custody for state crimes, aiming to alleviate fears about racial profiling. “We do not want individuals released into the community who have committed a crime and are here illegally,” he concluded.