Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs is turning up the heat on her own Attorney General, Kris Mayes, demanding she retract comments that tied the state’s robust Stand Your Ground laws to federal ICE operations. In a fiery exchange, Hobbs slammed Mayes for suggesting that armed vigilantes invoking self-defense statutes could legally confront undocumented immigrants, framing it as a dangerous misinterpretation that blurs the lines between state self-defense rights and federal immigration enforcement. This intra-Democrat dust-up erupted after Mayes’ remarks during a border security discussion, where she warned that Stand Your Ground—enshrined in Arizona Revised Statutes §13-405—might embolden private citizens to play Border Patrol with lethal force, potentially leading to chaos at the southern frontier.
For the 2A community, this spat is a goldmine of irony and opportunity. Stand Your Ground laws, a cornerstone of self-defense rights in 38 states including Arizona, have been battle-tested in courts to affirm that law-abiding citizens don’t have to retreat from imminent threats, whether from criminals or, increasingly, in high-crime border zones plagued by cartel activity and human trafficking. Mayes’ comments inadvertently highlight how anti-2A voices are scrambling to demonize these protections amid record migrant encounters—over 2.4 million in FY2023 per CBP data—by conflating legitimate self-defense with vigilantism. Hobbs’ call for retraction isn’t just political theater; it’s a tacit admission that attacking Stand Your Ground plays into Republican narratives on border security, where polls like Rasmussen’s show 70% of Americans support armed self-defense in such scenarios. This could supercharge 2A advocacy, rallying support for expanded castle doctrine reforms and preemption of local anti-gun ordinances that hamstring border residents.
The implications ripple far beyond Phoenix: if Mayes digs in, it sets up a perfect storm for 2024 ballot fights and lawsuits testing Stand Your Ground against federal overreach. 2A warriors should seize this—amplify the governor’s own words in op-eds, push for legislative clarifications affirming self-defense applies universally, and remind voters that disarming citizens amid an invasion isn’t protection, it’s surrender. In a state where concealed carry is shall-issue and constitutional carry reigns, this feud underscores why we fight: our rights aren’t up for partisan retraction. Stay vigilant, Arizona—your ground is worth standing on.
