Border security measure Proposition 314 getting lost on a long ballot

An initiative that would criminalize unauthorized migrant crossings at the Arizona border and would allow local and state police to arrest migrants will appear on the ballot as immigration and border enforcement issues rise to the top of voters' concerns in this election.

But with a lengthy ballot that includes high-profile presidential and Senate races, control of the state Legislature, and nearly a dozen other initiatives, Proposition 314 is struggling to get attention from voters in a crowded field of races, even though border issues dominate the airwaves and political ads.

Proposition 314 is not even the most-contested measure on the November ballot. That would be Proposition 139, which asks voters to enshrine abortion access to the state Constitution.

The measure appears on the ballot under the title, "Referred to the people by the Legislature relating to responses to harms at the border." In addition to criminalizing migrant crossings outside of ports of entry, it would also allow local judges to issue deportation orders, and it stiffens penalties against fentanyl smuggling.

Republican state lawmakers referred Proposition 314 to Arizona voters during the legislative session earlier this year, after Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed a similar bill during the session following an increase in migrant crossings at the Arizona border last year. Crossings have dropped considerably since border restrictions took effect in June.

However, Republicans said Proposition 314 would enable Arizonans to do their part to stem illegal border crossings in between ports of entry by going after migrants who they claim have no basis to be in the country and are looking to evade detection at the border.

"Public safety is our number one priority and that's why we have this bill, to protect Arizona from these very dangerous people," said Sen. John Kavanagh, who voted to refer the measure to voters.

But many Arizona voters remain unaware about the proposition or what it would do, even among people who are inclined to vote for it.

During a campaign stop in Tucson in September, former President Donald Trump continued to talk about migrant crime and open borders. Many of his supporters in attendance identified border security as one of their main concerns in this election, but they told The Arizona Republic they did not know Proposition 314 is on the ballot.

"It sounds like something I would support but I'm not super-familiar with the proposition," said Erica Velasquez, a Tucson voter who cast her ballot for Trump in 2016 and 2020. "We just got more information and I'm working my church to get more info about the propositions so that we can push that out to the congregation as well."

A poll of registered voters conducted in mid-August by Noble Predictive Insights showed that Proposition 314 has wide support from polled Arizona voters, with nearly two-thirds (63%) of respondents saying they would support the border measure.

Those findings do not surprise elected officials who oppose the measure, such as Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs.

"We also, as a border state, have borne the brunt of the federal government's inaction on the border," she told The Republic. "And, you know, Prop. 314 is not something that is going to solve those issues. But it's a way for Arizonans to feel like they're taking some action."

The lack of awareness about the measure is concerning to critics of Proposition 314, who said the title could mislead them about what it does and doesn't do.

"Even if I didn't read the fine print, the small letters, go inside the bill, if I would see border security, of course, I'm in favor of border security and, of course, I'm in favor of kids not dying because of fentanyl, so I would vote yes if I could vote, right? But it's none of that," said Enrique Davis Mazlum, the Arizona director for UnidosUS the largest Latino advocacy group in the country.

The opposition to the measure has gathered a wide coalition of Latino community organizations, businesses and religious leaders who have compared the proposition to Arizona's Senate Bill 1070, which passed in 2010. They fear Proposition 314 would once again lead to racial profiling and foster greater distrust between undocumented immigrants and local law enforcement.

Listen to 'Rediscovering: SB 1070': We retrace how it happened, who advocated for it and why it still matters

"By having state and local law enforcement responsible for enforcing what should be the role of federal immigration authorities, many crime victims and witnesses will be afraid to go to law enforcement and report crimes. As a result, dangerous criminals will not be apprehended, and public safety will be threatened," Arizona's Catholic bishops wrote in a statement opposing Proposition 314.

But unlike SB 1070, which generated calls for boycotts, led to protests and spurred activism about Latino communities, the opposition to Proposition 314 has been more muted as other races and issues have taken precedence during this campaign season.

One of the biggest questions about the potential impacts of implementing Proposition 314 is about costs incurred by state and local agencies that would be tasked with immigration enforcement.

Language in the proposition makes it clear that law enforcement must have probable cause to arrest migrants, such as witnessing the crossing firsthand or having electronic recordings of the crossing. But it also requires the Arizona Department of Corrections to take custody of migrants charged under these new state crimes if county jails run out of space.

A memo from the Arizona Department of Corrections published earlier this year raised concerns about its ability to meet those demands within Proposition 314 without additional funding allocated for those efforts. The memo said the department could see as many as 1,500 new inmates per year if the measure passes, which would strain their staffing and resources, and could see them reach total operating capacity by 2027.

Republican lawmakers dispute that it would place additional, unfunded costs on the department. Kavanagh said he was confident migrants apprehended under the new state crimes created by Proposition 314 would choose deportation than to remain in jail.

"These prison costs are nonexistent, except who will go to prison? The ones who have fentanyl, the ones that had drugs, the ones that have outstanding warrants because they committed felonies in this country before," Kavanagh said. "And every penny spent to put those people in prison is money well spent."

No middle ground in debate: Lawmakers Kavanagh, Ortiz sharply split on effects of immigration ballot measure

A final decision on whether Proposition 314 goes into effect could come down to the U.S. Supreme Court, and not Arizona voters.

Proposition 314 includes a provision that says the ballot measure would only go into effect if a Texas law known as Senate Bill 4 is ruled constitutional. Arizona's ballot question is modeled after the Texas law and contains almost identical language, with few notable differences.

But when the Texas governor signed the bill into law earlier this year, a federal judge blocked its enforcement over a legal challenge by the federal government over the immigration enforcement provisions. The case is currently before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. Their decision, which could come down at any time, will likely be appealed to the Supreme Court.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: What to know about Proposition 314, the border security ballot measure