- Slug: News–Arizona ICE Act. 820 words.
- 4 photos available.
By Alysa Horton
Cronkite News
PHOENIX – The Arizona Immigration, Cooperation and Enforcement Act, SB1164 has furthered divisions between advocates for stricter border security and community groups rallying for immigrant protections.
The Arizona ICE Act seeks to use each law enforcement agency in the state to aid in enforcing federal immigration law. The bill, sponsored by Sen. Warren Petersen, R-Queen Creek, and co-sponsored by Sen. T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, was first presented in January and has seen consistent opposition from community groups that believe the bill will threaten immigrant communities and strain local law enforcement.
Petersen read the bill’s most recent changes Monday in a Senate Military Affairs and Border Security meeting.
“Here are the other key provisions to the bill,” Petersen said in the committee hearing. “The first is that it, the bill, states that no county, city, state agency or other political subdivision will adopt or pass anything that would prohibit or restrict cooperation with federal immigration authorities.”
The bill was introduced days after President Donald Trump took office and quickly signed numerous executive orders related to immigration policy.
The Arizona ICE Act has two primary provisions, which would require law enforcement agencies to comply with federal immigration detainers and prohibit state agencies and local governments from enacting policies that could obstruct federal immigration laws.
Some Arizona cities, like Phoenix, have policies that prohibit holding “a person longer than the purpose of the original stop to verify immigration status.”
According to Phoenix New Times, hundreds of protesters demonstrated at the Arizona Capitol against the bill Monday, and some were turned away from speaking at the state Senate committee hearing. A video posted on X by Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff, claims protesters continued trying to enter the state Senate.
Protests against the Arizona ICE Act have gone on for weeks. Hundreds gathered outside the state Capitol for the “Keep Families Together” rally a week prior to Monday’s reading.
Raquel Terán, a former Arizona legislator and the former chair of the Arizona Democratic Party, has consistently attended the protests. On Feb. 10, she said the group at the Capitol was protesting the potential separation of families due to SB1164.
“The more that immigrants and people of color are exposed to law enforcement who have authority to act as immigration agents, the more likely that there is family separation,” Terán said. “We don’t want to waste taxpayer dollars, and we want to make sure that Arizona is a safe place for everybody.”
Terán is the current director of Proyecto Progreso, which has been one of the numerous community organizations at the recurring rallies.
“We know that the extreme Republicans from our state Legislature have an agenda that is tied with (the) federal government, and so we need to make sure that our community is energized, educated on the legislative process and how it impacts our community,” Terán said.
The state Senate Military Affairs and Border Security committee began reading the amendments to SB1164 around 3 p.m. Monday before Petersen, the Senate president, was faced with questions from members of the committee.
“I know you’ve worked hard on the amendment,” said Catherine Miranda, D-Phoenix, at the hearing. “But it’s still bad. It’s still bad as far as what I’m concerned with here.”
Miranda repeatedly questioned Petersen about the “consequences of the bill.” She said she is concerned the bill would be a setback to relationships between law enforcement and the Latino community.
“It still has tons of consequences towards our community, and not only our community, our law enforcement, the police department, they’ve made significant strides related to Latino representation,” Miranda said at the committee hearing. “Do you think this will impact that progress?”
Tanisha Hartwell-Parris, a constituent of Miranda, spoke on behalf of her husband, who is currently detained by ICE.
“He actually has papers from ICE and (the) Department of Homeland Security stating that he can actually stay in this country. … He is now currently detained, even with all of the proper documentation,” she said to the committee. “I can only imagine what could happen with somebody that doesn’t have that documentation.”
Others who spoke against the bill included Tyler Montague, a senior policy adviser for the American Business Immigration Coalition. He said he worried about the economic consequences of the bill.
“We don’t oppose removing dangerous criminals from the community, or efforts to improve border enforcement and security and public safety,” Montague said. “But this bill has some big landmines, as far as we’re concerned, and so we urge ‘no’ vote in its current form.”
After hearing from speakers, the committee moved the bill forward as an amended recommendation in a 4-3 vote.
“Now that the federal government is acting and is securing our border, we as Arizonans, who are right here on the border, we need to be working in partnership to protect the citizens,” said state Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, who voted in favor of the bill.
For more stories from Cronkite News, visit cronkitenews.azpbs.org.
