The Long Arm of Arizona's SB 1070: Antecedents and Far-Reaching Spillover Effects
Authors: Menjívar Cecilia , Tinoco Nicholas 
Published: August 2023

The Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act, or Arizona Senate Bill 1070, was signed into law on 23 April 2010 by Governor Janice K. Brewer. Barely one week later, Governor Brewer signed into law House Bill 2162 to correct provisions in SB 1070 that were manifestly racist. This pair of laws, better known simply as SB 1070, was set to go into effect on 29 July 2010. A barrage of legal challenges followed, culminating in a US Supreme Court ruling on 25 June 2012, declaring most provisions in SB 1070 preempted by federal law. Although SB 1070 had precedence in a series of laws passed in Arizona in the previous years, the magnitude and scope of SB 1070 generated significant media and public attention; fear among immigrants, especially Latinos; legal challenges; and criticism and protests from immigrant rights organizations. Touted as a crime-fighting legal mechanism, SB 1070 was not intended to combat serious crimes; instead, it was meant to discourage undocumented migration to the state. Indeed, Section 1 of the bill states its legislative intent this way: “The legislature finds that there is a compelling interest in the cooperative enforcement of federal immigration laws throughout all of Arizona. The legislature declares that the intent of this act is to make attrition through enforcement the public policy of all state and local government agencies in Arizona. The provisions of this act are intended to work together to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States” (State of Arizona 2010, cited under Understanding SB 1070). Among its several provisions, SB 1070 (as amended by HB 2162) included (a) prohibiting state and local law enforcement from restricting the enforcement of federal immigration laws; (b) requiring law enforcement, when making a lawful stop, detention, or arrest, to make a reasonable attempt to determine a person’s immigration status when reasonable suspicion existed that the person was unlawfully present in the country; (c) making the failure to complete or carry an immigration registration document a misdemeanor offense; (d) authorizing an officer involved in human smuggling enforcement to lawfully stop anyone in a motor vehicle on reasonable suspicion that the person is violating a civil traffic law, and making it a misdemeanor offense to unlawfully transport or conceal an “illegal” immigrant or encourage one to enter or remain in the country illegally (Orlando 2010, cited under Understanding SB 1070). In its June 2012 decision, the US Supreme Court left intact Section 2B, the requirement that law enforcement determine the immigration status of a person who has been lawfully stopped, detained, or arrested. However, the Supreme Court warned that this provision could still be ruled unconstitutional later. This essay provides an overview of SB 1070: it traces its historical background; discusses how it was understood and implemented; highlights the key role of media in framing the law and disseminating information locally, nationally, and globally with effects on public opinion; focuses attention on the effects of SB 1070 on key spheres of life for immigrants; points to broad effects of the law in the form of copycat laws around the country; and ends by pointing to the challenges to the bill through the courts and organizing efforts.