Proposal to allow local police to make arrests near Arizona border with Mexico will appear on ballot

The Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that a proposal that would let local police make arrests near the state’s border with Mexico will appear on the Nov. 5 ballot for voters to decide.

That sets up the biggest push to draw local authorities into immigration enforcement since the state’s landmark 2010 law that required police to question people's immigration status in certain situations.

The court late Tuesday afternoon rejected a challenge from Latino groups that argued the ballot measure had violated a rule in the state constitution that says legislative proposals must cover a single subject. In an order by Chief Justice Ann A. Scott Timmer, the state’s highest court concluded the measure satisfies the single-subject rule.

If approved by voters, the proposal, known as Proposition 314, would make it a state crime for people to cross the Arizona-Mexico border anywhere except a port of entry, give state and local law enforcement officers the power to arrest violators and let state judges order people to return to their home countries.

It also would make it a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison for selling fentanyl that leads to a person’s death and require some government agencies to use a federal database to verify a noncitizen’s eligibility for benefits. The proposal will go before voters in a state expected to play a crucial role in determining which party controls the White House and the U.S. Senate. Republicans hope it will focus attention on the border and dilute the political benefits Democrats seek from an abortion-rights ballot measure.

Opponents had argued the proposal dealt with the unrelated subjects of immigration enforcement, the fentanyl crisis and the regulation of public benefits. A lower court had previously rejected those arguments.

While federal law already prohibits the unauthorized entry of migrants into the U.S., proponents of the measure say it’s needed because the federal government hasn’t done enough to stop people from crossing illegally over Arizona’s porous border with Mexico. They also said some people who enter Arizona without authorization commit identity theft and take advantage of public benefits. Opponents say the proposal would lead to racial profiling, hurt Arizona’s reputation in the business world and carry huge unfunded costs for police departments that don’t typically enforce immigration law.

In early June, the Republican-controlled Legislature voted to put the measure on the ballot, bypassing Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, who had vetoed a similar measure in early March and had denounced the effort to bring the issue to voters.

This isn’t the first time Republican lawmakers in Arizona have tried to criminalize migration.

When passing its 2010 immigration bill, the Arizona Legislature considered expanding the state’s trespassing law to criminalize the presence of immigrants and impose criminal penalties. But the trespassing language was removed and replaced with a requirement that officers, while enforcing other laws, question people’s immigration status if they were believed to be in the country illegally.

The questioning requirement was ultimately upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court despite the racial profiling concerns of critics, but courts barred enforcement of other sections of the law. Earlier this week, the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office said supporters of a proposal that would enshrine abortion rights in the state’s constitution had gathered enough signatures to put the measure on the November ballot. If approved, it would allow abortions until a fetus could survive outside the womb, typically around 24 weeks, with exceptions to save the mother’s life or to protect her physical or mental health. Abortion is currently legal for the first 15 weeks of pregnancy in Arizona.