(NewsNation) — Arizona voters will decide whether or not to approve a ballot measure that would increase local officials’ power to enforce federal immigration law as southern border security remains one of the pivotal issues at the forefront of voters’ minds.

Arizona’s Proposition 314, also known as the “Secure The Border Act,” would create new state crimes surrounding several border and immigration issues. If passed, the measure would make it a crime for noncitizens to enter the state anywhere other than through a port of entry and would allow state judges to order deportations. State and local police would also be allowed to arrest anyone who crosses the border without proper authorization.

If passed, the law would make it a felony for undocumented immigrants to use false immigration documentation to apply for employment or public benefits. The measure would also boost verification of a worker’s immigration status, according to the proposed initiative. The ballot measure would make it a felony for an adult to knowingly sell fentanyl that results in another person’s death.

Proponents maintain the measure would drastically reduce the amount of weapons and fentanyl entering the state.

Others fear Proposition 314 is a bulked-up version of the controversial Senate Bill 1070, which made it a crime to be in the state without immigration papers. The law was passed in 2010 but stripped down dramatically by the U.S. Supreme Court, which deemed many aspects of the law unconstitutional in 2012.

The Supreme Court struck down three of the four provisions of the bill, some of which are included in Prop 314.

Some opponents, including Alba Jaramillo, the co-executive director of the Immigration Law and Justice Center, call Prop 314 “SB1070 on steroids.”

The arguments for and against Arizona’s Prop 314

Opponents of Proposition 314 characterize the measure as racist, arguing allowing local law enforcement officers to make arrests would lead to racial profiling. However, opposition groups failed to keep it off the ballot when the Arizona Supreme Court ruled the measure does not violate a constitutional provision that limits ballot questions to a single subject.

The measure went to voters after Democratic Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed the measure passed by lawmakers.

In a statement, Hobbs’ office referred to the border bill as a “job-killing, anti-business” ballot initiative that “demonizes our communities.” The statement also said that the measure would raise costs, hurt the state’s farmers and put entrepreneurs out of business.

In response, the bill’s sponsor, Republican state Sen. Janae Shamp, called the governor’s actions an example of the chaos Hobbs was unleashing on Arizona residents while perpetuating the ongoing crisis at the border.

Since then, arguments over what proposal would accomplish — or wouldn’t accomplish — have continued. Samara Klar, a professor at the University of Arizona, told NewsNation she expects immigration and abortion to be among the reasons why voter turnout should be high in the state.

On the border question, Klar said most Arizonans remain more concerned about the volume of weapons and fentanyl crossing the border than they are by those crossing illegally into the state. In the meantime, though, Proposition 314 is being characterized differently along party lines.

“(The border) is a disaster, and the state has to step up and try to stop the flow of illegal immigrants, especially in the area between the ports, which is where the really dangerous people come in,” Republican state Sen. John Kavanagh said in a televised debate on Arizona PBS.

Kavanagh also said Proposition 314 effectively addresses the fentanyl issue and would help rural law enforcement agencies, which are already thinly staffed.

Opponents, however, say that the bill takes the wrong approach to the border. While they say that Arizona residents all want a more secure border, they claim Proposition 314 doesn’t address the root problems. Democratic Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos said Prop 314 does not provide adequate funding for the “astronomical” cost of detaining undocumented migrants.

“This has always been a federal government issue. … We’re looking for solutions, I understand that,” Nanos said to the Arizona Daily Star. “But that doesn’t mean we need to take our systems at the local level and make a bigger mess of them. I just don’t see this as practical.”

Unlawful crossings by migrants on the southern border have been dropping in recent months, dipping to levels not seen since winter 2021, according to government data. The figures do not include entries at official ports of entry.

Similar measure is in a holding pattern in Texas

Using Arizona’s controversial Senate Bill 1070 as a model, Texas passed Senate Bill 4 in 2023, which authorizes state and local police to arrest those who cross into the state in between designated ports of entry.

The bill was set to be enacted in March but has remained in limbo as legal challenges continue from the U.S. Justice Department and other groups. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the law could be enacted before a federal appeals court blocked the state of Texas from moving forward.

As the waiting game continues, so do local law enforcement agencies who are prepared to take on additional border responsibilities. In Texas, Terrell County Sheriff Thaddeus Cleveland, a Republican who spent more than 26 years working as a U.S. Border Patrol agent, told NewsNation that while federal and local officers already work together addressing border concerns, measures like Arizona’s Proposition 314 would make a difference.

Cleveland said that although crime levels in his county are low, his deputies are often called upon by local landowners encountering groups of illegal border-crossers after going undetected by federal agents. He said that many times, no federal response is available.

The sheriff said he expected the Texas bill to be faced with legal challenges and anticipates the same in Arizona should Proposition 314 pass. Cleveland says making things safer for residents living north of the U.S.-Mexico border is what matters most at a time when dangerous criminals can often blend with those seeking asylum as they cross into the U.S.

“The border has always been a political talking point,” Cleveland told NewsNation. “But we have two different issues going on. … We’re seeing a play between border security and immigration. We have to secure our border to make America safe, but we can also let people into the United States legally. And we want that. But that’s not what we’re seeing now.”

NewsNation’s Katie Smith contributed to this report.