by Staff Reporter | Feb 2, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller again refused to drop his agreement to assist the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with deportations.
Miller joined the agreement to team up with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) through a 287(g) Task Force Model last August. The county attorney said this agreement would allow his office to “stop sitting on the sidelines” as illegal immigration and its consequences victimize more Pinal County residents.
The 287(g) Program authorizes state and local law enforcement to exercise certain federal immigration enforcement powers. The number of these agreements has grown exponentially under the Trump administration.
Miller said in a Friday press release that he would not yield to the Pinal County Board of Supervisors demand that he end the agreement to assist ICE.
“While the Pinal County Attorney will always discuss a compromise, he will never compromise on prosecuting dangerous criminals,” said Miller. “[T]his agreement will enable us to assist ICE to go after known criminals acting in our communities.”
The Phoenix ICE Field Office said the agreement with Pinal County Attorney’s Office could only be suspended or terminated by either the county attorney or DHS.
DHS reported in a year-end review published last week that it secured over 1,200 agreements through the 287(g) program in the first year of President Donald Trump’s second term.
This latest statement from the county attorney was a response to the most recent development in the ongoing conflict between himself and the Pinal County Board of Supervisors. In a special session on Friday, the board authorized outside counsel to take civil action to void or enjoin Miller’s agreement.
The county’s outside counsel argued in a letter issued earlier this month that the agreement between the county attorney and DHS was unlawful for multiple reasons.
That legal analysis argued that Miller lacked the constitutional or statutory authority to enter into agreements on behalf of the county. That analysis claimed the agreement between the county attorney’s office and federal immigration agents was not only impractical, but lacking any existing laws to justify county attorney authority to arrest individuals.
“This is inconsistent with the traditional separation of enforcement and prosecution, potentially eviscerates prosecutorial immunity, and impairs prosecutorial discretion,” stated the analysis.
The letter prompted the supervisors to vote to void the agreement, which Miller has since stated carried no weight.
Earlier this month DHS reported that nearly three million illegal aliens left the country in 2025, a majority of which were self-deportations (over two million) and the remainder deportations (nearly 700,000).
The greater incentive to self-deport was likely due in large part to the administration’s financial incentive. Illegal aliens were paid $1,000 last year and given a flight out of the country to self-deport. DHS disclosed the cost of a single enforced deportation was over $18,000.
The administration raised the self-deport financial incentive to $2,600. With the flight home, self-deportation costs just over $5,000. The self-deport option allows illegal immigrants forgiveness of any civil fines or penalties for violating immigration law. Even with this raise, the net taxpayer savings per deportation totals over $13,000 according to DHS.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Ethan Faverino | Sep 18, 2025 | News
By Ethan Faverino |
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club escalated its call for accountability, urging the County Attorneys of Mohave, Pinal, and Yuma Counties to launch investigations into Arizona State University (ASU) leadership for allegedly manipulating 2022 gubernatorial debate rules to favor Democratic Katie Hobbs over Republican Kari Lake.
The action follows a complaint filed by the Club in August 2025, with the Arizona Attorney General and Maricopa County Attorney, which was dismissed without a thorough review, prompting a broader push for enforcement under state law.
In a sharply worded letter addressed to the Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith, Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller, and Yuma County Attorney Karolyn Kaczorowski, Club President Scot Mussi detailed evidence of ASU’s deviation from established debate protocols, accusing university officials of using public resources to influence the election in violation of A.R.S. § 15-1633.
The statute states: “A person acting on behalf of a university or a person who aids another person acting on behalf of a university shall not spend or use university resources for the purpose of influencing the outcomes of elections or to advocate support for or opposition to pending or proposed legislation.”
This call-to-action stems from a September 2022 debate co-sponsored by ASU, Arizona PBS, and the Citizens Clean Elections Commission (CCEC).
Under longstanding CCEC regulations (Ariz. Admin. Code § R2-20-107(K)), a candidate declining an invitation to debate their political opponent forfeits airtime, granting the attending opponent a 30-minute solo interview.
When Hobbs announced she would skip the debate, ASU and PBS bypassed set regulations, granting her an exclusive 30-minute interview, a first in years to do so.
Internal communications, obtained and reported by the Arizona Republic, exposed the intent behind the decision. ASU President Michael Crow, Chief of Staff James O’Brien, and ASU Media Enterprise Managing Director Mi-Ai Parrish allegedly prioritized Hobbs’ comfort over neutrality.
Parrish’s emails to O’Brien highlighted concerns that “Katie is getting roasted hard” for dodging the debate and pressed CCEC staff to limit Lake’s discussion of election integrity, arguing that airing “a person with those views was wrong.” CCEC Executive Director Tom Collins confirmed to the Republic that Parrish sought to suppress Lake’s platform.
Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly listed the names of the County Attorneys. They have now been corrected.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Jun 5, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona State Senator Shawnna Bolick’s recently introduced bill to combat animal cruelty in Arizona was greeted with widespread support from prosecutors and the state’s law enforcement community on Monday.
Letters from Maricopa County Sheriff Jerry Sheridan, former Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller, the Arizona Police Association, and the Arizona Association of Counties, all urging the passage of SB 1658, were received by members of the Arizona House of Representatives. Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell also expressed her support in a recent press conference.
In a post to X, Bolick asked supporters to engage House Leadership in support of the bill which is expected to be voted on this week. She wrote, “The most recent disturbing case of animal abuse, where several dogs were left without food, resorting to feeding on the remains of deceased canines on a property in Gila Bend, highlights the significance of this bill. It’s disheartening to see misinformation clouding a straightforward measure that simply aims to do right by our animals.”
“Under current law, vague definitions can limit our ability to hold offenders accountable in animal cruelty cases. SB 1658 would address some of these shortcomings by providing law enforcement with the legal clarity needed to take action in cases where animals are in need of protection,” Sheridan wrote. “This bill represents a vital step forward in combating the growing issue of animal cruelty.”
The proposed bill, if enacted, would expand the legal definition of animal cruelty “to include failing to provide medical attention and broadens the definition of cruel neglect,” establishing this form of animal cruelty as a class 1 misdemeanor. The new law also expands the definition of cruel neglect to include “failure to provide a domestic animal with:
a) food fit for consumption, as appropriate for the species;
b) water suitable for drinking, as appropriate for the species;
c) access to shelter, except for a dog that primarily resides outdoors; and
d) access to shelter that meets specified requirements, for a dog that primarily resides outdoors.”
Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio offered a similar sentiment saying, “As Sheriff of Maricopa County, I saw many egregious animal cruelty cases while fighting crime and working to make our communities safer. We seized a lot of animals during my 24-year tenure as sheriff. I always told my deputies, if they find people breaking laws against animals, there is always room for them in my jails. Let’s not allow people to treat animals in a way that causes them to suffer. Please vote yes on SB 1658 when it comes to the House floor for a vote.”
“Animal abusers are more likely to commit crimes like assault, property offenses, drug offenses, and they do so at higher rates than other defendants,” Mitchell said in a press conference livestreamed to Facebook in February.
Miller added in a statement, “Tougher animal cruelty laws give prosecutors the tools we need to hold offenders accountable and send a clear message: cruelty of any kind has no place in Arizona or in a just society.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
Page 1 of 11
