Arizona officials usually are not backing down from the state’s controversial decision to construct a makeshift border wall using shipping containers, even after the Department of Justice filed a federal lawsuit demanding the structure be taken down.
The U.S. government filed the criticism against the state in U.S. District Court on Wednesday, saying the barrier’s construction constitutes trespassing on federal lands and requesting that the containers be removed and further placement be halted, based on The Associated Press. The lawsuit also seeks damages to compensate for any required fixes along the border.
The project originally began after outgoing Republican Gov. Doug Ducey issued an executive order in August directing officials to fill an roughly 1,000-foot gap within the border wall near Yuma. On the time, it was estimated to require 60 double-stacked shipping containers and price about $6 million, based on the governor’s office. But the dimensions – and price tag – of the hassle has risen since, with The AP reporting the general work placing now hundreds of containers is a few third finished, at a value of $95 million.
CJ Karamargin, a Ducey spokesman, in response to a request for comment in regards to the state’s plans within the wake of the lawsuit shared a letter sent by the Arizona governor’s office to the Department of Justice, which says the barrier was “at all times intended to be a short lived solution until the federal government erects a everlasting solution.”
“In August, following a historic investment by the Arizona State Legislature, Arizona began placing shipping containers to guard the state from the unprecedented crisis confronting our communities and law enforcement,” the letter, sent on Tuesday prematurely of the approaching lawsuit and signed by general counsel Anni Foster, reads. “The primary public safety risk and environmental harm has come from inaction by the federal government to secure our border.”
Critics loop the Arizona barrier project in with other recent “stunts” from Republican governors in the case of immigration, similar to busing migrants from red states to blue states. The development zone has emerged as the location of spontaneous protests which have pitted environmentalists, amongst others who oppose the project, against residents and anti-immigration activists.
Immigration Cartoons
However the controversy across the barrier and high immigration numbers on the Southern border also represents a thorny issue for Democratic politicians in Arizona, who likely wish to remain loyal to President Joe Biden while recognizing that illegal immigration is concerning for a lot of their constituents.
Arizona Gov.-elect Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, has long opposed Ducey’s move and insisted she would halt construction on the barrier when she is sworn in next month.
“It is a political stunt. It’s a visible barrier that will not be actually providing an efficient barrier to entry, and I believe a waste of taxpayer dollars,” she was quoted by KJZZ-FM this week as saying.
Yet she walks a advantageous line politically.
Despite agreeing that the barrier is trespassing on federal land and decrying it as ineffective, Hobbs even after the lawsuit was filed has not committed to removing what has already been put in place, saying she would “explore all the choices” but citing potential conflict with the Republican-majority legislature.
The wall isn’t the one area over which Arizona Democrats have walked a thorny path over federal immigration policy.
Sen. Mark Kelly and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, who represent Arizona, detailed some concerns in a joint Nov. 28 statement with two other Democratic senators over the administration’s plans for the approaching Dec. 21 expiration of Title 42. The controversial Trump-era rule allows agents to rapidly expel immigrants on the border under public health provisions adopted through the pandemic and blocks migrants from the prospect to hunt asylum within the U.S.
“Record annual encounters have led to untenable situations. In Arizona, shelters have been forced well beyond capability,” the statement read. “This will not be secure, and creates a dangerous situation for migrants and communities.”
Representatives for Kelly and Sinema didn’t immediately reply to requests for comment on Thursday in regards to the federal lawsuit against the state. A spokesman for Biggs didn’t respond either.
However it appears that federal assistance for migrants and border states won’t be on the best way anytime soon. Several outlets reported on Thursday that a bipartisan immigration deal led by Sinema and Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina is unlikely to maneuver forward in Congress. Initial framework for the negotiations would have provided a path to legalization for two million people dropped at the country illegally as children in exchange for no less than $25 billion in increased border security funding, as reported by The Washington Post.
