A federal judge refused late Friday to block state and local police from enforcing a voter-approved law allowing them to arrest people who enter the country at other than a legal crossing. The decision clears the way for enforcement of Arizona’s Proposition 314 while constitutional challenges to the law proceed in federal court—a development that affects how practitioners advise clients on state-level arrest and deportation risk in Arizona.
What changed
A federal judge decided to not block state authorities from enforcing part of a voter-approved measure aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration, ruling that a migrant aid group is speculating in claiming it will be irreparably harmed by enforcement of Proposition 314.
Republican lawmakers put Proposition 314 on the 2024 ballot. The measure, which voters approved by a 2-1 margin, says state and local police can arrest those who enter the United States in Arizona at other than a port of entry. It requires that an officer witness the illegal crossing, have video evidence, or some other “constitutionally sufficient indicia of probable cause,” a phrase not defined in the law.
Part of the 2024 voter-approved measure which just took effect makes it a misdemeanor to illegally enter Arizona from another country, and it authorizes state judges to order deportations.
During a two-hour hearing, Judge Michael Liburdi said there appear to be questions of how the state can enforce its law — including a provision allowing state judges to order migrants deported — without running afoul of the fact that immigration issues are the purview of the federal government. However, the judge said it appears any such questions about the legality of Proposition 314 need to be raised by someone actually affected by it. He said there is no evidence anyone has, in fact, been detained or deported under the new Arizona law, which became enforceable on July 14.
Why it matters
This ruling does not decide whether Proposition 314 is constitutional—only whether to halt enforcement while the case proceeds. Friday’s order is not the last word. Liburdi will give the Florence Immigrant Rights and Refugee Project another chance, after further briefings and arguments, to convince him that not only is the law damaging its work representing migrants, but that it is an illegal intrusion into federal immigration laws.
Practitioners should understand that the law is now enforceable, creating concrete arrest, prosecution, and state-ordered deportation risk for noncitizens in Arizona. Activists fear that the new law will encourage racial profiling if police are told to patrol for people who don’t look like they’re citizens. Some border crossers may not have the opportunity to take advantage of defenses available to them under federal law, like seeking asylum, depending on how state enforcement proceeds.
The preemption question—whether Arizona may create its own deportation regime—remains contested and will be litigated on the merits.
Way forward
-
Assess client risk. If your client is a noncitizen in Arizona who crossed the border outside a port of entry, the state now has a mechanism to pursue state-level criminal charges and deportation orders. Review the specific facts of entry and any existing criminal or immigration history.
-
Monitor the ongoing litigation. The Florence Immigrant Rights and Refugee Project’s case is live and will produce further written rulings. Additional arguments will be briefed. Practitioners should track decisions on the merits and any appellate filings.
-
Distinguish federal and state removal proceedings. Noncitizens charged under Proposition 314 may face parallel state criminal prosecution, state deportation orders, and separate immigration proceedings before EOIR. The interplay between these forums is still developing.
-
Preserve appellate record. If representing someone subject to state charges or proceedings, make clear written and oral objections to the jurisdiction of the state court and the constitutionality of the state law. These objections are critical for any later federal appeal.
Disclaimer
This summary is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Fola is a software company, not a law firm, and cannot advise you on your specific situation. Please consult with a licensed immigration attorney in Arizona who is familiar with Proposition 314 and current federal preemption law before taking any action. Immigration policy and court rulings change without notice—always verify the information in this article against primary sources and current case law before relying on it to represent a client.