by Jonathan Eberle | May 18, 2025 | News
By Jonathan Eberle |
Governor Katie Hobbs has vetoed SB 1268, a Republican-sponsored measure that aimed to increase transparency around the costs of providing healthcare to illegal immigrants in Arizona’s hospital system. The move drew swift criticism from State Senator Wendy Rogers (R-LD7), who accused the governor of obstructing efforts to ensure fiscal responsibility and protect taxpayer dollars.
The bill, sponsored by Rogers and passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature, would have required Arizona hospitals to include a voluntary question on patient intake forms asking individuals to indicate whether they are lawfully present in the United States. According to the bill text, the response would have had no bearing on the care provided and would not have been shared with immigration enforcement agencies. The Arizona Department of Health Services (DHS) would then compile annual reports using the data, including the number of non-citizens receiving care through the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS), the state’s Medicaid program.
“Our hardworking, law-abiding citizens have a right to know how much of their money is going towards paying for the medical services of those who’ve willfully chosen to break our laws by entering our country illegally,” said Senator Rogers in a statement following the veto. “This legislation would have helped us obtain the data necessary to make informed decisions on how to tackle this problem.”
A 2023 Congressional Budget Office report cited by Rogers estimated that federal and state governments spent approximately $27 billion on Emergency Medicaid for illegal aliens between fiscal years 2017 and 2023.
Supporters of SB 1268 argue that Arizona taxpayers deserve to understand how much of the state’s healthcare budget is being used to treat non-citizens — especially as hospitals report growing strain and long wait times for patients. Rogers emphasized that the intent was not to deny care, but to gather data needed for long-term planning and resource allocation.
This marks the latest in a series of transparency and immigration-related proposals rejected by Hobbs. Her actions have drawn praise from progressive groups but sharp criticism from GOP lawmakers, who argue that the governor is ignoring the concerns of constituents struggling with a strained healthcare system.
“This veto is a slap in the face to Arizona taxpayers who are demanding accountability and transparency,” Rogers said. “Shame on Governor Hobbs.”
As the debate over immigration and healthcare access continues to shape Arizona politics, similar proposals may resurface in future legislative sessions — especially as state lawmakers prepare for the 2026 election cycle, where these issues are expected to be front and center.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by AZ Free Enterprise Club | Apr 2, 2025 | Opinion
By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |
In 2022, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club crafted the blueprint to stop illegals from voting in our elections, authoring landmark legislation that was signed into law, becoming the first state in the nation requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote with HB2492. Now, states around the country are taking notice and adopting our model, and just last week President Trump signed an Executive Order to do it nationally. Arizona was just the tip of the spear, and the dominoes are finally beginning to fall.
As of this week, two states require proof of citizenship to register to vote. Arizona was the first with HB2492. Earlier this year, Wyoming became the second. And now, the Texas Senate is considering a bill that is nearly identical to the Arizona Model, which would make them the third.
Arizona has long been at the forefront of this issue. In 2004, Arizona voters overwhelmingly approved Prop 200 to require proof of citizenship to vote. After nearly a decade of litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed us to only implement the requirement on our own voter registration form but prevented us from requiring it on the federal form. The result over the decade following the decision was the complete proliferation of the “Federal Only Voting” list, amounting to tens of thousands of potential noncitizens registering and voting in our elections…
>>> CONTINUE READING >>>
by Staff Reporter | Mar 4, 2025 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Activist groups are addressing illegal immigrants’ fears of mass deportations through trauma therapy.
The Coalición de Derechos Humanos (Human Rights Coalition, HRC) out of Tucson formed a committee dedicated to mental health services for illegal immigrants.
HRC’s first emotional support forum took place over the weekend. The forum focused on how illegal immigrants have begun generating adaptive behaviors due to their worry over possible deportation, as well as stress, anxiety, and depression over their low tolerance for uncertainty. HRC recommended identifying emotions, self care, and taking action to counter worry over deportation: taking care of one’s environment, not comparing oneself to others, taking one day at a time, making plans, remembering one’s skills and achievements, and making an “emotional first aid kit.”
The forum was led by a trauma therapist, Sandra Martinez.
In addition to HRC, those hosting the forum were the Our Lady of Fatima Catholic Parish, Immigration Law & Justice Network, Mamas Con Poder, Paisanos Unidos, and Cultural Resource Center for Women and Their Families.
HRC followed the example of other advocacy organizations such as the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), which began offering free, virtual mental health services to illegal immigrants, as well as legal guidance and trainings. HRC leadership partnered with the Consulate of Mexico last month in launching UNAM’s digital platform for illegal immigrants, Acción Migrante. UNAM has headquarters in Tucson as well as San Antonio, Texas; Chicago, Illinois; Boston, Massachusetts; and the Northwest Station of the Institute of Legal Research in Tijuana, Mexico.
HRC also intervenes in visits by immigration enforcement to illegal immigrants’ homes. HRC’s “Rapid Response” network acts as a middle man when ICE arrives at illegal immigrants’ homes. The activist group also provides lawyers to these families. HRC coordinates using a tip line that community members call.
In one case reported by Tucson Spotlight last week, an HRC affiliate — Luis Campo, director of Alliance of Idaho — stopped ICE agents from entering an illegal immigrant family’s home and refused to allow entry without a signed judicial warrant. The ICE agents reported they were there to check on the welfare of the four unaccompanied children residing in the home owned by a Venezuelan couple.
Like other pro-illegal immigrant activist organizations, HRC hosts “Know Your Rights” workshops educating illegal immigrants and businesses on ways to avoid ICE interactions. Certain businesses relying heavily on illegal immigrants, like restaurants, tell the media that they rely on HRC coaching to bar ICE from entering their establishments.
HRC’s nonprofit name, “Arizona Border Rights Foundation,” reported just over $160,000 in revenue in 2023.
Reported leadership for the organization in 2023 all had University of Arizona ties: Isabel Garcia, former legal defender of Pima County and advisory board member of the College of Social & Behavioral Studies Mexican American Studies; Violeta Dominguez, University of Arizona research scientist and involved advocate for transgenderism; Ildefonso “Poncho” Chavez, University of Arizona director of economic development with Eller College of Management; and Raquel Rubio Goldsmith, co-director of the University of Arizona’s Binational Migration Institute at the Department of Mexican American Studies.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Dr. Thomas Patterson | Jan 31, 2025 | Opinion
By Dr. Thomas Patterson |
The Left has done a great job of influencing the issue of birthright citizenship. Most Americans oppose granting automatic citizenship to children born to illegal immigrants, but they also believe that we’re stuck with this policy.
They’re told repeatedly that the practice is enshrined in the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, that it has been affirmed by the Supreme Court, that the jurisprudence around it is settled law, and that challenging the matter now is unconstitutional and disloyal.
None of that happens to be true, but in the meantime, we’re saddled with a logically incoherent immigration system. Yes, immigrants are central to America’s story. But immigration law must be dedicated to the common good, not the benefit of those willing to flout our laws.
Immigrants should be vetted to ensure that they are likely to assimilate and be of value to their adopted country. Instead, we incentivize illegal immigrant mothers to cross the border before birth so their offspring can be entitled to lifelong citizenship.
So, did the writers of the 14th amendment botch the job, subjecting their descendants to such a dysfunctional system? No. In language more commonly understood at the time, they plainly stated, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein in they reside.”
The 14th amendment was written in 1868 to clarify that the newly emancipated slaves were granted all the privileges and rights of citizenship. There is nothing in the historical record to suggest that the authors had the slightest intent to grant citizenship to all born on American soil, much less those with parents living here illegally. The jurisdiction language was added specifically to prevent such an interpretation.
Advocates of constitutional originalism should also note that the author, Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan, explained it was meant to describe “a full and complete jurisdiction, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now.”
He clearly is not describing an illegal alien. Senator Lyman Trumbull, an influential supporter of the amendment, also emphasized “jurisdiction meant not giving allegiance to anyone else.”
The legal scholar Lino Graglia points out that, as the authors would have understood it, those who are born to parents legally in the US “are subject to the jurisdiction there of and so would have constitutional claim to birthright citizenship.” Just as plain is the fact the 14th Amendment, as written, would not apply to those born to illegal aliens, soldiers posted in a foreign country, or foreign diplomats.
Birthright advocates claim that the 1897 Supreme Court case of Wong Kim Ark clinches their claim that children of illegal immigrants born here are entitled to the full citizenship. Wong had traveled back to China with his parents and was unjustifiably denied reentry until the decision was overturned by the Court. They ruled that to bar Wong would be “to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of [European] parentage who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States.”
That makes sense, since Wong had the necessary documentation and his parents had been on American soil legally at the time of his birth, there being no laws defining them otherwise at the time. This is exactly the reason why this much ballyhooed ruling does not apply to the practice of granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens. In fact, the Supreme Court has never opined on the question.
The clear intent of the amendment, the language, and the historical record are all in accord. Yet the 14th Amendment has been completely untethered from its original meaning and impact. The Left and the Democratic Party have taken something meant to right a wrong and manipulated it to the advantage of those entering the country illegally.
There are at least 5 million children in America who have received citizenship inappropriately, or about one in eight U.S. births. That works well for those who relentlessly seek ways to produce millions of future Democrats.
The rest of us should continue to respect our Constitution and our history. The incredible privilege of citizenship should go only to those who merit it.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
by Staff Reporter | Jan 17, 2025 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Freshman Democratic Rep. Yassamin Ansari was the sole “no” vote among Arizona’s congressional members on a bill to deport illegal alien rapists and predators.
Ansari joined 145 of her Democratic colleagues in voting against the legislation. 61 Democrats voted for the bill, including Congressman Greg Stanton.
The bill by South Carolina Congresswoman Nancy Mace (HR 30) would not only deport illegal aliens convicted of sex and domestic violence crimes, it would expand inadmissibility for immigrants who admitted or were convicted of stalking, child abuse, child neglect, child abandonment, a sex offense, conspiracy to commit a sex offense, a violation of certain protective orders, or domestic violence.
In response to Democrat congressional members’ criticisms that her bill made unfair and sweeping generalizations of illegal aliens, Mace said she would gladly “demonize” those illegal immigrants who rape, murder, and molest American females.
“Under the border policies of Joe Biden and border czar Kamala Harris, our country has been ravaged by a horde of illegal aliens molesting American children, battering and bruising and beating up American women, and violently raping American women and girls,” said Mace. “My colleagues on the other side of this aisle like to minimize this issue because they refuse to acknowledge the consequences that their open borders agenda is here.”
Mace cited the latest ICE non-detained docket numbers (from July), which reported around 660,000 illegal immigrants convicted of crimes. Those numbers include over 100,000 illegal aliens convicted of or charged with assault, over 20,000 illegal aliens convicted of or charged with sexual assault or rape, over 12,000 illegal aliens convicted of or charged with sex offeness, over 3,000 illegal aliens convicted of or charged with kidnapping, and nearly 15,000 illegal aliens convicted of or charged with murder.
The ICE non-detained docket refers to illegal immigrants that are physically present in the United States and not in ICE detention, though they may be detained elsewhere, such as a federal prison.
This past year, ICE’s non-detained docket reached 7.4 million per Fox News.
“That is who the left are defending this morning: rapists, murderers, and pedophiles,” said Mace.
Last week, Ansari also voted against HR 29, the “Laken Riley Act,” named for late Georgia student Laken Riley, murdered by an illegal immigrant last February while out for a morning jog on her university campus.
Ansari acknowledged that Riley’s death constituted “a horrific tragedy.” However, Ansari claimed HR 29 would encourage discrimination against illegal immigrants, especially “DREAMers”: those illegal immigrants brought into the U.S. as minors given an alternative legal status under the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act.
“[T]he anti-immigrant bill being pushed by the House Republicans will do nothing to prevent this kind of violence or reform our broken immigration system,” stated Ansari. “Under this legislation, someone charged — just charged, not found guilty — could be immediately deported. This is a gross miscarriage of justice, and I voted no.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
