County Attorney Brad Miller to Investigate Senator ICE Posts Causes AG Mayes Backlash

County attorney Brad Miller offered to look into a state senator's social media warning about immigration agents in a Phoenix neighborhood being questioned by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes.

The dispute started when Sen. Analise Ortiz posted on Instagram to warn her community that on August 5, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers were in the area of Southwest Elementary School in South Phoenix.

The social media post, which accused Analise Ortiz of prohibiting federal authorities and demanded that she be charged, quickly gained attention and received backlash.

Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller then offered his services during a radio interview, saying he would be willing to serve as a "special prosecutor" if state legislators wanted him to investigate Ortiz.

"If our Arizona State legislators would like an investigation into it, into this particular matter, let them know that I'm free. I would be happy to be a special prosecutor and investigate this particular matter if they need a legal opinion," Brad Miller said during the Aug. 7 interview on iHeartRadio.

Kris Mayes responded quickly, posting on social media that Miller had no legal authority to make a statement such as that.

"Today, I sent a letter to Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller demanding answers about his offer to serve as a 'special prosecutor' at the request of the Legislature. There is zero statutory authority for such an arrangement," Mayes stated on X on Aug. 8. 

In her formal letter to Miller, Mayes challenged multiple aspects of his proposal and legal reasoning.

She noted that Miller's authority as the prosecutor of Pinal County stops at the county lines and does not include looking into offenses in Maricopa County, where Ortiz's position was first created. Additionally, she claimed that it would be against the separation of powers between the several institutions of government for the Legislature to choose a special prosecutor.

"The authority to prosecute belongs to the executive branch, and selection of a prosecutor by another branch of government is a violation of separation of powers," Mayes wrote, citing a 2005 Arizona Court of Appeals case.

Mayes raised several specific legal problems with Miller's approach:

The statement Miller cited for "unlawful transportation or harboring of unlawful aliens" has been permanently blocked by federal court since 2014. She demanded that Miller explain how he could pursue a case using an enjoined law.

Miller claimed Ortiz was "obstructing justice," but Mayes noted Arizona has no general obstruction of justice crime. The state's obstruction laws require specific elements like threats of violence or obtaining a financial benefit.

Additionally, she questioned whether Miller's warning about the investigation might be in violation of Arizona's anti-SLAPP legislation, which protects citizens from legal action meant to suppress free expression.

Miller ran for county attorney, and part of his campaign promise was to stand against "extreme leftist ideologies." His background, according to Mayes, made it difficult for him to carry out a fair investigation of a Democratic lawmaker.

Miller defended his position in response to Mayes' social media post, saying he would respond to her letter next week.

"I cannot and will not stay silent when anyone makes the dangerous job of being a law enforcement officer more dangerous. The First Amendment was never meant to protect criminal activity or aiding criminal activity," Miller wrote on X.

"It is my job as an elected official, Marine Corps officer, and citizen to question the bad behavior of those in power. I stand with law enforcement and always will."

Mayes has given Miller until Aug. 15 to provide a detailed response to her questions about his legal authority and intentions regarding the investigation.