Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes speaks to reporters in Phoenix on March 13, 2025. Photo by Caitlin Sievers | Arizona Mirror
Pinal’s County Attorney wants to prosecute a state Senator from Phoenix for posting the location of federal immigration agents online – but the state attorney general says he has no jurisdiction to do so and that there’s no crime to prosecute.
“I find it concerning that you express a willingness to use your office to prosecute an elected Arizona State Senator in what appears to be in excess of your constitutional and statutory authority,” Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes wrote in a letter to Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller.
Over the past week, partisan tensions among Arizona’s politicians erupted around the legality of sharing the movements of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents on social media. Democrats argued that doing so falls within their free speech rights while Republicans claimed it illegally endangers law enforcement officials. The question is of key interest to the Trump administration and supporters of its mass deportation campaign, who have fiercely criticized the social media alert strategy of immigrant advocacy groups as an attempt to foil raids and help undocumented people avoid arrest. Both Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi have threatened to prosecute the creator of ICEBlock, an app that allows users to report sightings of ICE agents.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
What happened?
On Tuesday, ICE agents pulled over and detained two men in front of Southwest School, an elementary school in Phoenix, according to a spokesperson for ICE. The brothers were in the middle of an early morning school drop-off.
Immigrant rights advocates have been closely monitoring ICE operations across the Valley, and posting about sightings on social media, particularly Instagram. Ortiz shared a post on her Instagram account from advocacy groups warning users that ICE agents had been spotted in front of the school.
The far-right social media account, LibsOfTiktok, which has built its brand on inflammatory conservative content, accused Ortiz on X, previously Twitter, of “impeding and doxxing” federal officials and called for her to be “charged.” Just hours after that accusation went viral online, the Republican leader of the state Senate announced that he had referred the matter for investigation to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona.
At the same time, Miller, also a Republican, weighed in on the controversy on his own X account. He wrote that Ortiz’s post wasn’t covered under the First Amendment right to free speech because it amounts to “speech that helps another person engaged in criminal activity evade detection by law enforcement.” Two days later, Miller went on a conservative radio podcast, where he volunteered to investigate Ortiz’s social media activity and take her to court.
“If our Arizona State legislators would like an investigation into it, into this particular matter, let them know that I’m free,” he said. “I would be happy to be a special prosecutor and investigate this particular matter if they need a legal opinion.”
Arizona’s top prosecutor: You don’t have the authority, or the grounds to sue
In a scathing letter, Mayes, a Democrat, reminded Miller that she is the state’s No. 1 lawyer, and that he lacks the authority to helm a lawsuit stemming in Maricopa County.
“As the elected County Attorney for Pinal County, your jurisdiction covers your county and ends at its borders,” she wrote.
During his interview with Garrett Lewis from iHeart Radio, Miller acknowledged that his office has no jurisdiction in Phoenix, but said that Petersen or Speaker of the House Steve Montenegro could add him to the case as a special prosecutor. But, Mayes pointed out in her letter, that’s inaccurate: only the executive branch has the ability to appoint special prosecutors.
Miller claimed that Ortiz’s social media post likely violated an Arizona law that makes it a misdemeanor to transport or “conceal, harbor or shield an alien from detection.” But that provision, which was part of Senate Bill 1070, Arizona’s notorious “show me your papers” law, was permanently blocked by a federal district court. It remains on the books but can’t be enforced. He also said Ortiz was obstructing justice by trying to prevent ICE agents from making arrests, but no Arizona law criminalizes obstruction of justice. There is a statute outlawing the “obstruction of public administration offenses,” but Mayes said that requires the threat of violent physical force or the obtaining a “pecuniary benefit” as a result.
Mayes demanded that Miller provide explanations by Aug. 15 on why he believes he has the power to investigate crimes in Maricopa County or serve as a special prosecutor; under what legal reasoning he would prosecute Ortiz; and why he isn’t violating Arizona’s law forbidding lawsuits used to silence free speech. She also ordered him to share any communications between his office and the state legislature discussing the possibility of appointing him as a special prosecutor.
The Democrat concluded by criticizing Miller for using his office to garner political points and warned him that his threats may actually amount to him breaking the law. Arizona’s anti-SLAPP laws, an acronym for Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, protect against lawsuits filed for intimidation purposes or to quell free speech. Mayes said that while Miller, who was elected last year, campaigned on a platform to fight “extreme leftist ideologies,” he should run his office in a nonpartisan manner, not target other elected officials based on political disagreements.
“Now that you are the elected official you have a duty to execute your authority fairly and impartially,” she wrote. “Why…would it not be an anti-SLAPP violation for you to initiate the investigation of a Democratic legislator given your campaign statements and current zealous interest to deter, prevent, or retaliate against Senator Ortiz from exercising her First Amendment Rights?”
Miller’s office did not respond to questions seeking clarification about the legal basis on which he believes a lawsuit could be filed against Ortiz. But on X, he lashed out at Mayes, reiterating his claim that the First Amendment doesn’t protect “aiding criminal activity” and saying that it’s his duty as an elected official to scrutinize the “bad behavior of those in power.”
“I cannot and will not stay silent when anyone makes the dangerous job of being a law enforcement officer more dangerous,” he wrote.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by PostX News and is published from a syndicated feed.)
