Estimated read time: 4-5 minutes
PHOENIX — On a spring morning in 2010, thousands of pro-immigrant protesters flooded downtown Phoenix. They waved American flags and Mexican flags. Some, like a young girl in a stroller, held handwritten signs: MOMMY, WHY IS MY SKIN COLOR A CRIME? By some estimates, there were 20,000 people there; by others, over 100,000.
Some had traveled from as far as Louisiana and Rhode Island to participate. As they marched through downtown and reached the Arizona State Capitol, the mayor of Phoenix, Phil Gordon, greeted them. "Welcome to the site of the next civil-rights movement," he declared.
Weeks earlier, Arizona's governor signed SB1070, dubbed the "show me your papers" law. At the time, it was deemed the country's toughest bill on illegal immigration: It made it a misdemeanor for immigrants to be in Arizona without carrying proper documentation at all times, and it empowered local law enforcement to detain people they suspected to be in the country illegally.
The bill's critics, like those who protested in Phoenix that May day, said it would unfairly target Hispanics and encourage racial profiling. "I thought the government is more noble, more fair here," one naturalized migrant from Mexico, midway through the march, told the Los Angeles Times.
As the bill wound its way through the Arizona Legislature, it garnered national and international attention. Boycotts against Arizona companies were organized. Protests erupted in 70 cities across the country, from Los Angeles to Boston. Latino celebrities spoke up against the law, one after another: Shakira, Ricky Martin, Gloria Estefan.
A U.S. congressman was arrested while leading a protest outside of the White House. The Phoenix Suns, in an act of solidarity with the Hispanic community, wore jerseys that read LOS SUNS.
The bill's proponents deemed it a necessary measure to curb the flow of illegal immigration into the state: Phoenix had garnered the reputation of being the country's "kidnapping capital," linked to illegal narcotics and human smuggling across the border. Arizona's undocumented population had grown fivefold in the two decades since 1990. The high-profile murder of an Arizona border rancher added fuel to the fire.
Eventually, after the protests subsided, much of the law's teeth were knocked out. A district court blocked key provisions from going into effect; later, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that several parts of the bill were preempted by federal law. A year later, Russell Pearce, the state senator who was the bill's lead proponent, became the first legislator in Arizona history to be recalled.
Arizona's immigrant population, its growth stunted during the SB1070 era, began to increase again. A generation of Latino lawmakers took office across the state. Arizona shifted from being a deep-red state to purple. The age of anti-immigrant legislation, it seemed, was in the rearview.
This fall will determine whether that is true. In November, Arizonans will once again vote on a strict immigration ballot measure — one that opponents call "SB1070 2.0." The measure, if passed, would make illegally crossing the border a state crime and toughen punishments for selling fentanyl. Like SB1070, it empowers local law enforcement to arrest and jail unauthorized migrants, renewing fears among its critics about how it could lead to racial profiling.
"We definitely feel like it's a return to (SB1070), which is very problematic," said Jennie Murray, president of the National Immigration Forum.
SB1070 faced widespread opposition. This time, 14 years later, the ballot measure has widespread support. A recent poll from Noble Predictive Insights shows that nearly two-thirds of Arizona voters, including a majority of Democrats, plan to support the measure. A legal challenge to the measure's constitutionality was tossed out. Few protests and no nationwide boycotts have accompanied the bill.
The activist groups that would dedicate resources to opposing it are overextended between the presidential race, a U.S. Senate election and a high-profile abortion ballot measure. "I think it's going to pass," Yasser Sanchez, a Mesa immigration attorney, said. "Groups don't have money to oppose it right now."
A new age for immigration
What changed between 2010 and now? Why did a tough-on-immigration bill garner massive opposition then, but a bill with some similar elements enjoys majority support now? Perhaps the shift isn't exclusive to Arizona: Americans, at large, are undergoing a major transformation on how they view immigrants and immigration.
Public opinion on immigration policy fluctuates, but for much of the 21st century, Americans have regarded immigration — and its benefits to society — either positively or with indifference. But in recent years, as illegal border crossings reached record levels, public perception has undergone a notable shift. Half of Americans, including 42% of Democrats, favor mass deportations of unauthorized immigrants, according to an Axios/Harris survey. That was a fringe view in 2016 exit polls. A majority of Americans now think immigrants today have "worse character" than immigrants 50 years ago did, per the same survey.
Gallup's polling lays this out clearly: a larger share of Americans want to reduce immigration now than at any time since 2011, a month after the Sept. 11 attacks. When asked if immigration should be kept at its present level, increased or decreased, a majority of Americans — 55% — say it should be decreased, up from 28% in May 2020. Only 16% say it should be increased.
