Senator Warren Petersen, a Republican from Gilbert, strongly criticized Governor Katie Hobbs for vetoing a significant GOP priority bill. This bill aimed to grant Arizona the authority to detain and deport migrants. The senator expressed his disappointment with the governor’s decision, emphasizing that this legislation, along with other border-focused bills, is currently making its way to her desk. Senator Petersen urged Governor Hobbs to reconsider and sign these important measures into law.
Republican lawmakers, enraged by Gov. Katie Hobbs’ veto of a bill aimed at giving the state the federal government’s responsibility of detaining and deporting migrants, have decided that one veto isn’t enough, and they plan to send her the same bill again.
And, just to be sure, when that one is inevitably vetoed, they will pass the identical law a third time and invite Hobbs to veto it as well.
They argued that doing so on Monday would portray her as unwilling to confront Arizona’s border challenges.
After that, GOP leaders stated they might just put the issue to voters in November.
Last week, Hobbs rejected a bill that aimed to classify crossing the state’s southern border anywhere other than at a port of entry as a class 1 misdemeanor. This proposal held a prominent spot on the GOP’s legislative agenda, as they have been prioritizing stringent immigration policies to attract voters in preparation for the 2024 election.
Senate President Warren Petersen criticized the veto on Monday, accusing Hobbs of criticizing the federal government’s immigration approach while refusing to support the GOP proposal. Despite her disapproval of the Biden administration’s immigration policies, the Democrat has consistently advocated for humane solutions and the increased funding of law enforcement agencies and border communities.
Petersen stated that the Ninth Floor would receive two identical mirrors of the vetoed proposal, along with several other bills focused on the border.
Republican Governor Hobbs of Gilbert emphasized the importance of action over mere words, stating, “Talk is cheap. Sign our bills.”
According to Petersen, once the mirror bills are vetoed by Hobbs, the party is prepared to bypass the governor and take the matter directly to the voters.
He stated that if it becomes necessary to bypass her through a constitutional or statutory amendment, they would do so. He emphasized that if she fails to ensure the security of the border, they have the ability to take action.
Legislatively referred ballot measures do not need the governor’s approval. However, Petersen pointed out that Republicans would prefer to have Hobbs’ signature, as it is more desirable to establish detailed and complex proposals as laws through the traditional legislative process. This is because initiatives passed by voters are safeguarded by the 1998 Voter Protection Act, which prevents lawmakers from making amendments unless they seek permission from the voters again. As a result, lawmakers have limited options if unforeseen issues arise.
The federal government has consistently been granted sole jurisdiction over the enforcement of immigration law by the courts. Arizona previously faced expensive legal battles when it attempted to take over this enforcement. In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated three out of four provisions in SB1070, which was known as the state’s controversial “show me your papers law.” This law allowed police officers to detain and investigate the citizenship status of individuals during routine traffic stops. The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government holds supreme authority over immigration law.
Republican lawmakers pushed back on Monday, dismissing the governor’s concerns about potential lawsuits as exaggerated.
Senator John Kavanagh, a Republican from Fountain Hills, emphasized that the U.S. Supreme Court now has a more conservative bench. He suggested that as a result, there is a higher probability that the court will support the laws implemented by Arizona and Texas, which are designed to safeguard their residents.
“We have a brand new Supreme Court, and I firmly believe that taking a proactive approach and involving the states will ultimately be deemed constitutional,” he confidently stated. “It is our duty to our constituents and our nation to make an earnest effort in this regard.”
Supporters of the proposal aim to secure Arizona’s southern border in order to reduce crime and prevent the smuggling of fentanyl. Republican politicians often emphasize these points, even though studies have shown that migrants are less likely to commit crimes compared to citizens. Additionally, data reveals that the majority of fentanyl is actually smuggled by U.S. citizens through official ports of entry.
“We must put an end to the drug problem,” emphasized Senator Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, the sponsor of the bill that was ultimately vetoed. “The most effective approach is to equip law enforcement with the necessary tools.”
“The main objective of the legislature is to safeguard the welfare of the people,” emphasized Gina Swoboda, the chairwoman of the Arizona Republican Party. Swoboda, who also serves as a consultant for the state Senate, receiving a monthly fee of $15,000 for her expertise in election policy.
Several bills and initiatives centered around border-related issues are making their way to the governor’s desk and the November ballot. These include measures to hold individuals accountable for selling fentanyl by charging them with first-degree murder if their sale leads to someone’s death. Employers who hire undocumented workers may also face hefty fines. Additionally, drug cartels could be designated as terrorist organizations, and using a phone or computer application for human smuggling, such as social media apps, may be classified as a class 2 felony. Furthermore, Arizona ranchers may find it easier to protect their property by shooting migrants.
