Latest news with #SB1070
CBS News
02-05-2025
- Health
- CBS News
Florida bill would require student athletes to undergo heart screenings before participating sports
Florida bill would require children to undergo heart screenings before participating in sports Florida bill would require children to undergo heart screenings before participating in sports Florida bill would require children to undergo heart screenings before participating in sports A new bill in the Florida Legislature could make it mandatory for student athletes to undergo heart screenings before taking part in sports. The bill (SB 1070) was passed in the Florida Senate on Thursday and is now heading to Gov. Ron DeSantis' desk, awaiting his signature. The issue hits home for many people across the state, especially with one South Florida family, who finds the issue to be deeply personal and said the measure could save lives. On Dec. 9, 2014, the Vergaras' life changed forever when their 11-year-old daughter Breanna collapsed during dance class. "She was in dance class dancing, when all of a sudden, she collapsed," said Claudia Vergara, Breanna's mother. "They thought she had just fainted." Breanna Vergara would have turned 22 years old this month and her room is nearly identical to how she had it 10 years ago. "How could this be happening? Unfortunately, they kept working on her," said Jesus Vergara, Breanna's father. "We went to the hospital and maybe 30 minutes later, [the doctors] walked in and they told us that she did not make it." Breanna Vergara died of sudden cardiac arrest and her parents said an electrocardiogram (ECG/EKG) could have saved her. "An AED could've changed things, an EKG could've changed things," said Claudia Vergara. "She just got her physical, and they don't do EKGs," added Jesus Vergara. "If they had done it, it's possible that we would've found out and she would still be here." SB 1070 aims to combat that — it requires all student athletes in Florida to get an EKG before participating in school sports for the first time. Doctor Jose Martinez Elejalde, the chief medical officer for Broward Medical Health Center, told CBS News Miami that EKGs will show acute things that would help diagnose heart conditions better. "It's a very quick and easy test to do," he said. "It's non-invasive and gives a lot of info in [an] acute setting." Since their daughter's death, the Vergaras have been working to prevent their tragedy from happening to others by organizing events to bring awareness. "It's a start in the right direction and if they can only save one life like that, it was already worth it," said Jesus Vergara. "The five minutes that it takes to do it are worth it. We wish every day that we had the opportunity." "It would've changed her life and we wouldn't be talking to [CBS News Miami] about this," added Claudia Vergara. If DeSantis signs the bill, it will go into effect in the 2026-2027 school year and make Florida the first state to mandate EKGs for student athletes.
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
GOP lawmakers are building school-to-deportation pipelines with the ‘Arizona ICE Act'
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations officers execute criminal search warrants and arrest more than 100 employees on federal immigration violations at a trailer manufacturing business in Sumner in 2018. Photo by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement In the name of public safety, Arizona lawmakers, led by Republican Senate President Warren Petersen, want to force police departments to hold undocumented crime suspects with federal immigration detainers. 'Go back to Africa!' and 'Go back to Mexico!' are phrases that countless Black and Brown adults recall hearing during their childhoods, a reminder that many still see us as criminals and outsiders. These slurs, wielded as weapons, send the clear message that we do not belong in our own country. I've had 'Go Back to Africa' yelled at me repeatedly from childhood through adulthood. The Trump administration has already said it wants to send U.S. prisoners — which means Black Americans, given how Black people disproportionately make up prison populations — to a maximum security prison labor camp in El Salvador, from which they may never return. It's not a stretch to expect that the Trump administration will soon do whatever it can to deport Black Americans to countries they've never been to, merely the latest extension of the targeting by law enforcement of Black and Brown communities — targeting we see in action through School Resource Officers and ICE enforcement in places that should be safe, like schools. Now, Arizona lawmakers are reinforcing the same exclusion with Senate Bill 1164, also known as the Arizona Immigration, Cooperation, and Enforcement Act (Arizona ICE Act). The measure, which would mandate state and local law enforcement work with ICE, targeting individuals under ICE detainers and banning policies that limit immigration enforcement, cleared its final legislative hurdle and now awaits its fate with Gov. Katie Hobbs. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX This bill echoes SB1070, the infamous 'Show Me Your Papers' law of 2010, which encouraged racial profiling and gave law enforcement unchecked power to interrogate anyone suspected of being undocumented. Though most of SB1070 was struck down as unconstitutional, its racist legacy persists, justifying the criminalization of immigrants and laying the groundwork for policies like SB1164. The bill poses a serious threat to our children's future, particularly their education. By placing Black, Brown and immigrant students under constant surveillance, it turns schools into spaces of anxiety rather than learning. It will strengthen systems that funnels students into prisons, detention centers and even deportation. GOP bill targets Arizona schools that restrict immigration agents on campus Across the country, aggressive immigration enforcement, such as using school records or false information to track families, have led to an increase in chronic absenteeism among Brown students. The fear of deportation discourages attendance, disrupting education and widening the achievement gap. This increases the risk of students being forced out of school and into the school-to-prison or school-to-deportation pipeline. As students wrestle with physical threats, hate crimes and psychological stress, they find it harder to focus, engage with peers and trust their school environment. This struggle often leads to harsher disciplinary actions that disproportionately impact Black and Brown students. Students' tardiness and absences have gone from being met with a simple warning to in-school suspensions, to full multi-day out-of-school suspensions, reflecting a system that punishes rather than supports. An investigation by The Hechinger Report and the Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting found that: Black students make up 6% of total enrollment and 15% of suspensions. Latino students represent 43% of total enrollment and 68% of suspensions. White students account for 37% of total enrolment and 23% of suspensions. Arizona lawmakers are using SB1164 to double down on the same old playbook: more punishment, more fear. Schools are battlegrounds for Black and Brown students who are already policed by School Resource Officers and maybe soon ICE agents. Arizona continues to tear down students instead of lifting them up. SB1164 would deepen racial inequities, prioritizing punishment over protection and fear over opportunity. It would increase chronic absenteeism, discipline issues and erode trust between families and schools. Rather than nurturing growth, the bill aims to turn schools into environments of fear, especially in minoritized communities, where they resemble prisons and detention centers more than places of learning. Research shows that schools without resource officers have lower rates of exclusionary discipline (like the zero-tolerance policies) and better academic outcomes. By removing ICE enforcement, as Phoenix Union High School District has committed to doing, schools can create safer, more supportive environments where students feel safe and stay engaged. The Arizona ICE Act will instill widespread panic, much like SB1070 did. Fifteen years ago, immigrant families avoided hospitals, grocery stores, and even schools to escape harassment. Aggressive immigration enforcement in schools fuels fear, making both immigrant and non-immigrant students feel unsafe especially following immigration raids. ICE agents and police officers in schools don't serve as protectors. They serve as deterrents — not to violence, but rather to student success and fulfillment. Their presence tells Black and Brown students that they are suspects first and students second. It also reminds immigrant families that stepping into a school could mean losing everything. The Trump administration's executive order dismantling the U.S. Department of Education, including its civil rights enforcement, worsens these fears. By cutting investigations into discrimination against students of color and those with disabilities, it allows such practices to go unregulated. Title I funding, which supports low-income students, is at risk and may be funneled into private K-12 schools, further deepening educational disparities and creating additional obstacles for minoritized students. GOP lawmakers send bill mandating ICE cooperation to Hobbs' likely veto If Arizona lawmakers truly cared about education, they would be investing in resources for students, not pushing racist, punitive policies that rob children of their civil right to learn. Every parent hopes to give their child a better life. But access to a safe, enriching education increasingly seems reserved for those with privilege and resources. For the rest of us, school feels more like preparation for incarceration. Arizona has a history of enacting anti-immigrant laws that target our communities, from SB1070 to SB1164. These laws have repeatedly violated rights, separated families and pushed children out of school. Ultimately, the Arizona ICE ACT won't just impact those directly targeted by it; it will destabilize the foundation of Arizona's education system. By inciting fear and increasing punitive measures, the bill creates a more hostile learning environment for vulnerable students, hindering their academic success and long-term well-being. If enacted, it will deepen divides in education and community cohesion, making it even harder for marginalized students to succeed. Arizona's schools should be bastions of learning and success, not fear. It's now up to Hobbs to decide whether Arizona police will become the stooges of federal immigration agents. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
02-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Immigrant rights group seeks to nullify ‘Secure Border Act' over missing funding
LUCHA Executive Director Alejandra Gomez speaks on April 2, 2025, about the lawsuit her organization filed challenging the constitutionality of the Secure Border Act, which voters overwhelmingly passed in 2024. Photo by Gloria Rebecca Gomez | Arizona Mirror An immigrant rights group is asking the courts to overturn the Secure Border Act, the ballot measure voters overwhelmingly approved last year that made it a state crime for migrants to illegally cross the Arizona-Mexico border, because it violates a provision in the state constitution that voters approved more than 20 years ago. Living United for Change in Arizona, a progressive organization that was first formed in the aftermath of SB1070, the state's notorious 'show me your papers law,' filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court Wednesday afternoon arguing that the sweeping anti-immigrant law should be struck down because it violates funding source protections in the Arizona Constitution. In a statement, the group's spokesman, Cesar Fierros, characterized the legal challenge as an attempt to push back on increasing anti-immigrant hostility from Arizona's GOP-controlled legislature. 'This lawsuit challenges a key component of the far-right playbook being advanced in Arizona — an effort that seeks to criminalize immigrant families, stoke racial fear, and undermine civil rights across the state,' Fierros wrote. 'LUCHA's legal action aims to protect Arizona communities from policies that threaten our freedoms, our safety, and our democracy.' Voters last year sided with the GOP lawmakers who crafted the Secure Border Act and sent it to the ballot, with 63% of votes in favor of Proposition 314. The law makes it a misdemeanor to cross the state's southern border without authorization anywhere but at an official port of entry, which could carry with it up to 6 months in jail. Local police officers would be empowered to arrest migrants suspected of violating that law, and state judges would be able to issue deportation orders. While that provision is frozen until the U.S. Supreme Court rules a near-identical law in Texas can be enforced, other parts of it are active, including making it a class 6 felony to use false documentation to apply for benefits or jobs and creating an entirely new class of felony for people convicted of selling fentanyl that later results in someone else's death. The problem with the initiative, according to LUCHA attorney Jim Barton, is that the Arizona Constitution requires ballot measures that require any government spending to identify a funding source. And that money can't come from Arizona's general fund. That constitutional provision dates back to 2004, when Republican lawmakers sought to prevent advocacy groups from going to the ballot to force the state government to pay for programs that the GOP majority didn't want. But the constitutional restriction applies also to measures sent to the ballot by the legislature. When lawmakers last year were considering the Secure Border Act, multiple law enforcement officials travelled to the Capitol to warn that they would need more resources to enforce its directives. But lawmakers still failed to set aside a funding stream, something the Arizona Mirror exclusively reported on. That, Barton said, nullifies the initiative. 'Because Proposition 314 will cost millions of dollars and it has no funding source, it's unconstitutional and enforceable,' he said. In Texas, more than $11 billion of taxpayer money has been set aside to fund the Lone Star State's restrictive border policies. Although the provision in Prop. 314 making it a state crime to cross the border without permission is likely the one with the biggest price tag, the other parts that are being enforced will also cost money. Barton noted that the restriction on public benefits, which requires agencies to double check a person's eligibility through the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements federal database, could impact kids applying for library cards. 'This is a fiscally irresponsible act,' Barton said. This isn't the first time LUCHA and Barton have sought to void Prop. 314. Before the initiative was placed on the ballot last year, the group attempted to convince the courts that, because it spans so many different parts of Arizona law, it violated the state constitution's single-subject rule. But that challenge failed, with the Arizona Supreme Court agreeing with Republican lawmakers, who argued that all of the act's provisions fall under the overarching theme of border security. But this lawsuit is different, Barton said, because the Arizona Constitution is very clear about funding sources and it isn't open for interpretation. 'I don't see any wiggle room here,' he said. 'The law says you have to provide funding for mandatory expenditures. This mandates expenditures and it doesn't provide a source.' And that earlier loss in court will also aid LUCHA: Barton noted that the courts have already concluded that all the provisions in Prop. 314 deal with just one subject, meaning that Republicans won't be able to argue that just one part should be struck down. So, if any part of it is judged to be in violation of the Arizona Constitution, the whole act will have to be nullified. Along with arguing that Prop. 314 is unconstitutional because it fails to provide money to pay for it, LUCHA is also claiming that it violates two other legal principles, which govern how lawmakers make policy and to what degree government branches can encroach on each other's responsibilities. One of them, which is included in the Arizona Constitution, is the separation of powers. Barton said that a provision in Prop. 314 defining probable cause for officers who arrest migrants infringes on the judicial branch's authority. The other principle is known as the delegation of legislative authority, and it requires lawmakers to pass policy and laws for their own constituents. Barton says lawmakers violated that principle when it made Prop. 314 dependent on the legal future of Texas' law. 'The Arizona legislature gave our lawmaking over to the Texas legislature, and said, 'Well, once Texas gets their law through, then and only then will our law take effect,'' he said. 'You can't do that. The Arizona legislature has the responsibility to make laws for the state of Arizona.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Rep. Paul Gosar grills 'sanctuary city' mayors on Arizona's SB 1070 at immigration hearing
Rep. Paul Gosar clashed over immigration with big city Democratic mayors in a congressional hearing, going as far as to quiz them on Arizona's controversial Senate Bill 1070 law. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing, titled 'A Hearing with Sanctuary City Mayors,' included Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, New York City Mayor Eric Adams, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston. Gosar, R-Ariz., accused the mayors of 'disgracing a legal immigration system' and promoting a 'false narrative' on illegal immigration. He asked them if they supported Arizona's hardline SB 1070 immigration law that passed 15 years ago, most of which the Supreme Court struck down in 2012 because it violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. 'Did you support the Arizona law called SB 1070?' Gosar asked New York City Mayor Eric Adams. Adams and the other mayors said they were unfamiliar with the Arizona law and assured Gosar that they comply with all state and federal laws. SB 1070 was passed by state lawmakers in Arizona in 2010, not by Congress. The hearing came as Republican President Donald Trump continues his immigration crackdown and looks to ramp up mass deportations of illegal immigrants. Trump border czar Tom Homan has taken aim at Boston and Chicago as places to carry out immigration raids. He has a warmer relationship with Adams of New York City. Boston, New York City and Chicago are sanctuary cities, where municipal laws protect undocumented immigrants from deportation and prosecution. The mayor of Denver calls his city 'welcoming' but does not use the 'sanctuary city' label. 'The federal government has jurisdiction and supremacy over all immigration laws, right?' Gosar asked the mayors. 'How can you get a comprehensive immigration policy when you're defining it from the very get go. You're building on false premises.' Wu, the mayor of Boston, responded by pointing to the sweeping Department of Government Efficiency cuts enacted by Trump and his billionaire adviser Elon Musk. 'Respectfully, Congressman, you could pass bipartisan legislation, and that would be comprehensive immigration law. The false narrative is that immigrants in general are criminals, or immigrants in general cause all sorts of danger and harm. That is actually what is undermining safety in our communities,' Wu said. 'If you want to make us safe, pass gun reforms. Stop cutting Medicaid, stop cutting cancer research, stop cutting funds for veterans. That is what will make our city safe.' This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Rep. Paul Gosar grills 'sanctuary city' mayors on SB 1070
Yahoo
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Arizona Republicans want to pay police bounties for immigrant deportations
GOP Sen. Jake Hoffman speaks on the Senate floor on May 1, 2024. Photo by Jerod MacDonald-Evoy | Arizona Mirror Arizona police departments would be incentivized to target people they believe are undocumented under a Republican bid to award them a $2,500 bounty for every arrest that ends in a deportation. The move represents the GOP legislative majority's latest foray into immigration policy, which has taken on a decidedly hostile tone in the wake of President Donald Trump's election victory and his stated goal of deporting millions of immigrants. And it goes far beyond what Republican lawmakers in Arizona have ever attempted, including the controversial SB1070 in 2010, the 'show me your papers' law that spawned boycotts of Arizona and ultimately cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars of economic activity. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Sponsored by Sen. Jake Hoffman, the leader of the far-right Arizona Freedom Caucus who has built a reputation for hard-ball politics and controversial proposals, Senate Bill 1111 would set up an 'Arizona Deportations Fund.' That fund would be used to disburse bounties of $2,500 to law enforcement agencies every time the arrest of an undocumented person leads to their removal from the country by federal officials. Originally, the bill called for that money to be divided up among the arresting officers as compensation for their involvement in the deportation of unauthorized immigrants, but Hoffman modified it so that the money is sent instead to the police department or sheriff's office they work for. Immigrant rights advocates argue that the effect remains the same: Paying law enforcement agencies to arrest people suspected of being in the country illegally essentially transforms Arizona's police departments into bounty hunting agencies, incentivizing them to prioritize enforcing federal immigration laws over state laws. Noah Schramm, the border policy strategist for the Arizona chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, warned lawmakers on the Senate Government Committee — which Hoffman chairs — that it would spell disaster for the constitutional rights of Arizonans, no matter their citizenship status. 'It will supercharge racial profiling across the state,' he said. Lena Avalos, an organizer with Living United for Change in Arizona, a progressive pro-immigrant organization, denounced the bill as 'hateful, racist legislation' and criticized GOP lawmakers for seeking to facilitate deportations instead of resolving pressing issues the state faces. 'Instead of focusing on lowering the cost of rent, keeping our schools open and making sure that Arizonans can keep their health care, we are here discussing different ways to spend taxpayer dollars on criminalizing communities of color,' she said, shortly before being cut off by Hoffman for what he said were comments that strayed from the bill's intent. Democratic politicians want illegal aliens to vote, they want illegal aliens to be counted in our census so that the district lines can be drawn in favor of Democratic politicians. – Sen. Jake Hoffman, invoking the racist Great Replacement theory to support his SB1111 The Republican framed his proposal as restoring lost funding sent abroad by undocumented Arizonans. The money for the $2,500 bounties would be raised from increasing taxes on foreign wire transfers, which immigrants often use to send remittances back to family in their countries of origin. 'We are losing hundreds of millions of dollars every year in economic activity to foreign nations,' he said. 'Hundreds of millions of dollars are being sent out of our economy to the economy of foreign nations by those who are in this country illegally, who have broken our laws and are now exploiting the benefits of this great economy, the benefits of this great nation to prop up failing foreign governments.' Billions of dollars in remittances are sent every year from the U.S. to other countries, including those in Latin America. In 2023, Mexico alone received more than $63 billion in remittances. Anti-immigrant politicians have long aimed their ire at people who send money back to family members in their native countries. During his first presidency, Trump threatened to tax remittances to pay for the border wall, and long before that, in 2009, Oklahoma lawmakers approved a $5 tax on foreign wire transfers under $500 with collected revenues being sent to the state Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. Hoffman's proposal far outstrips Oklahoma's law, levying a $25 tax — on top of current foreign wire transfer fees — on every sum below $500 and an additional 5% of any amount exceeding that threshold. And while Arizonans with lawful status who file taxes would be able to recoup those fees during tax season, undocumented people — who don't file income taxes — would essentially be forced to fund deportations. Western Union, the most popular financial services firm for wire transfers, is opposed to the bill. Democrats on the committee questioned the fairness of punishing migrants for using the money they earned. Sen. Flavio Bravo, D-Phoenix, pointed out that sometimes people travelling through the state stop to send remittances, and students at Arizona's public universities who don't file their taxes in the state might also wire money to their relatives in other countries. Bravo added that there's nothing wrong with seeking to help family members who live outside the U.S., and said he himself has sent remittances to his wife, who at the time hadn't yet become a legal permanent resident and lived in Mexico. 'The American Dream isn't just about preparing yourself for success, it's also about bringing up your family with you, and if people have worked hard and earned this hard earned money, I don't see anything wrong with them supporting loved ones abroad,' he said. Hoffman also dismissed concerns that the bill would incentivize police officers to make racially biased arrests, saying that it doesn't change how law enforcement agencies should carry out their duties and leaves in place current protocols that protect Arizonans' due process rights. But even without the law on the books, police departments across the state have been found guilty of detaining people based on their ethnicity. A 2011 investigation from the U.S. Department of Justice found that officers with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department stopped Latino Arizonans nine times more often than non-Latino drivers in some parts of the county. And just last year, after a three-year investigation, the DOJ concluded in a 126-page report that Phoenix Police Department officers engaged in rampant discrimination against Black, Hispanic and Native American people, and routinely violated people's civil and constitutional rights. Some law enforcement groups have spoken out against the bill. The Arizona Police Association, which is the state's largest law enforcement advocacy organization and is made up of more than 12,000 law enforcement officers, is opposed tocreating a bounty system for cops. Joe Clure, the group's executive director, said it doesn't support the 'monetizing' of arrest decisions under any circumstances. Currently, there appear to be no similar laws or state-funded policies on the books that reward police departments for how many arrests are made of a particular group. Bart Graves, a spokesman for the Arizona Department of Public Safety, said no bounty program exists for the agency that is dependent on an officer or agency's everyday actions. Richie Taylor, a spokesman for the Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, said the office does award some bonuses for law enforcement agencies, but those are based on retention and performance outcomes. He added that Mayes is opposed to the bill, which she derided as a political 'stunt.' It will supercharge racial profiling across the state. – Noah Schramm, ACLU of Arizona The Senate Government Committee, which is controlled by Republicans, passed SB1111 along party lines. Democrats on the panel denounced the bill as an attack on immigrants and sharply criticized Republicans for advancing discriminatory legislation. Sen. Lauren Kuby, a freshman Democrat from Tempe, said it was an 'ugly' and 'hateful' bill. Her voice shook as she shared the story of meeting with a 17-year-old student in her district from a mixed status family. 'She and her family have their bags packed, ready to leave if they need to leave and escape the country, escape persecution, escape this terror that is being visited upon them,' Kuby recounted. 'She told me that, when she's in school, she worries when she gets a phone call from her mother that it's not her mom just seeing what her plans are for the day. She's worried it's going to be a message from her mother that her grandfather's been taken, or that her sister's been deported.' Republicans, meanwhile, dismissed concerns about the bill's impact on the state's immigrant communities. Sen. Wendy Rogers, who regularly traffics in hard-line anti-immigrant rhetoric and spoke at a white nationalist conference in 2022, called for taking the 'emotionalism' out of the conversation. She said the bill doesn't stop people from sending remittances home, it merely raises the fees to do so. Rogers, a Republican from Flagstaff, also used nativist terms to characterize undocumented immigrants as an 'invasion.' Hoffman, too, invoked invasion terminology and alluded to the racist Great Replacement theory — which has spawned violence in America and around the globe — accusing Democrats of supporting undocumented people with the intent of ousting Republicans from power. 'There is an effort afoot in this nation to take it over through invasion,' he said. 'Democratic politicians want illegal aliens to vote, they want illegal aliens to be counted in our census so that the district lines can be drawn in favor of Democratic politicians.' Anti-immigrant politicians have long framed unauthorized immigration as an invasion to push draconian policies. But the terminology isn't just wielded in statehouses: it has also been widely adopted by nativist movements and white supremacist terrorists, like the El Paso shooter who targeted Mexicans at a Walmart in 2019. The bill next goes before the full state Senate for consideration, where it is expected to be supported by the Republicans that hold a majority in the chamber. If that happens, and if the state House of Representatives — which Republicans also control — also passes it, SB1111 would almost certainly meet a swift veto from Gov. Katie Hobbs, who has already panned it. The Democrat has been a strong advocate for increasing funding for communities and law enforcement agencies along the border instead of taking a hostile approach. And while she has previously voiced support for anti-immigrant proposals at the federal level, she has been dismissive of state-led policy changes that immigrant rights groups oppose. Christian Slater, Hobbs' spokesman, said she's prepared to reject it if it lands on her desk. 'There's no way in hell the Governor signs a tax hike into law, especially one that puts a bounty on the heads of innocent people who have worked hard, paid taxes and lived in their communities for decades,' he said. 'Arizonans want border security, they don't want to turn hard working law enforcement officers into bounty hunters.' And while Republicans, including Hoffman, have criticized Hobbs as weak on border security and unwilling to work with them on the issue despite acknowledging it as critical, Slater said Hobbs is simply not going to cave to 'political messaging games.' 'She's going to work with anybody in order to deliver real border security, and that includes President Trump,' Slater said. 'She's also going to stand up and tell people when they're getting it wrong.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
