Bill over sanctuary cities still planned

Legislators aim to deter those who back policy

Arizona lawmakers are planning to press ahead with new legislation punishing local governments that limit police in enforcing immigration laws, even after Tucson voters overwhelmingly rejected a sanctuary city ballot initiative on Tuesday.

State Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, said this summer that he would propose legislation allowing victims of felonies to sue local governments if harmed by policies that limit immigration enforcement.

The bill still could affect cities that have not embraced the sanctuary city label, Kavanagh said.

The retired police officer turned legislator confirmed Wednesday that he would still sponsor the bill, contending it would target not just self-declared sanctuary cities but local governments that have adopted similar policies.

“I’ve heard some of their policies which I do in fact believe restrict officers in violation of Arizona law,” Kavanagh said of Tucson’s government.

Kavanagh’s proposed law appears narrowly tailored.

It would apply in cases involving a convicted felon who is inside the country without authorization and is stopped or detained by local law enforcement but not handed over to immigration authorities due to local sanctuary policies.

If that felon went on to commit an

other felony, the victim could sue the local government for damages.

Kavanagh said he is not aware of any particular cases in Arizona where such a law would apply.

But it could still prompt local governments to rethink policies limiting how and when police assist immigration authorities.

State Rep. Jay Lawrence, R-Scottsdale, told the Arizona Mirror he would co-sponsor the legislation.

Proponents of Senate Bill 1070 argue that the Arizona immigration law effectively bans sanctuary cities in Arizona by prohibiting local governments from restricting the enforcement of immigration laws.

Enacted nearly 10 years ago amid protests and boycotts, SB 1070 required police make an effort to check the citizenship and immigration status of any person they had reason to believe might be in the country without authorization.

Lawsuits led to guidelines meant to curb racial profiling.

And courts have tossed out other pieces of the law, such as a provision that made it illegal to harbor or transport undocumented immigrants.

Tucson’s sanctuary-city vote

Proposition 205 in Tucson would have prohibited police from asking about immigration status at sensitive locations like courthouses and hospitals or using race or language as a pretext to ask people about their immigration status.

The city said it has already instituted many such policies.

But outgoing Mayor Jonathan Rothschild and incoming Mayor Regina Romero — both Democrats — asked voters to reject the measure.

Opponents argued Proposition 205 would have led to a legal battle over Senate Bill 1070 and the city’s ability to restrict immigration enforcement.

In turn, the city could have lost out on millions of dollars in state and federal funds, critics said.

Only about 29% of voters backed the proposition, while 71% voted no.

Whether or not Kavanagh’s bill passes, it is sure to stoke an ongoing debate at the Capitol about not just immigration but the Legislature’s control over local governments.

Over the past several years, the Legislature has passed laws, for example, to bar cities from banning plastic bags or enacting tighter restrictions on Airbnb rentals than is allowed under state law, and it has wielded state funds as a cudgel against cities that challenge its power.