An Arizona lawmaker, Representative Quang Nguyen, is demanding that Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes investigate Phoenix Administrative Regulation 5.32, which blocks the use of city-owned and city-controlled property for federal immigration enforcement unless the City Manager approves it.
The Phoenix City Council adopted the policy as part of its “Community Transparency
Initiative” to appease left-wing activists opposed to ICE operations.
According to Nguyen, that policy conflicts with Arizona law. State law prohibits cities and other political subdivisions from limiting or restricting the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law. Phoenix put a city official in charge of whether federal officers can use public property for operational needs tied to immigration enforcement.
“Phoenix has no authority to put the enforcement of federal immigration law behind a political gatekeeper,” said House Judiciary Chairman Nguyen. “Arizona law is clear. Cities cannot adopt policies that limit or restrict immigration enforcement. This regulation does exactly that by putting the City Manager in control of whether federal officers can use public property for staging, coordination, or other operational needs.”
The policy goes beyond passive non-cooperation. It creates a local approval system that can delay, obstruct, or deny enforcement activity on city property. It makes access to public property subject to City Hall approval and inserts local political control into federal immigration enforcement operations.
“Phoenix crossed the line,” Chairman Nguyen said. “This policy does not simply decline to help. It puts city government in the position of controlling whether federal immigration enforcement can use public property to carry out operations. That is a restriction on enforcement, and Arizona law forbids it. No city gets to override state law, obstruct federal officers, or turn immigration enforcement into a permission slip signed by the City Manager.”
The regulation also raises federal preemption concerns. Local governments cannot adopt measures that stand as an obstacle to the execution of federal law. Phoenix is restricting access to property that may be strategically necessary for enforcement activity while giving the City Manager broad discretion with no clear, objective standards.
Nguyen’s requested a written report within 30 days under A.R.S. § 41-194.01. If the Attorney General determines Phoenix is violating state law, the matter should go to the Arizona Supreme Court.
Be the first to comment