Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller said he is open to publicly discussing his office’s immigration enforcement agreement with federal officials but has no plans to end his offices’ participation in the 287(g) program, despite an order from the Pinal County Board of Supervisors to terminate it.

In a letter dated Tuesday, and sent to the board’s outside legal counsel, and posted publicly this evening, Miller rejected the board’s conclusion that the agreement is unlawful and void. He argues that his office acted within its authority when it entered into the partnership with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

“I respectfully disagree with your legal analysis,” Miller wrote, disputing claims that the agreement required approval from the board before taking effect.

The dispute centers on a 287(g) task force agreement Miller signed with DHS in December that authorizes investigators in the county attorney’s office to assist U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement by questioning individuals about their immigration status and making arrests under federal immigration law.

Earlier this month, the Board of Supervisors released a legal opinion concluding the agreement is invalid because it was not approved by the board, which under Arizona law holds authority to enter into intergovernmental agreements on behalf of the county. The board ordered Miller to stop operating under the agreement by Jan. 28 and directed him to outline steps to terminate it.

In this most recent response, as the deadline came and went, Miller wrote that he sought an opportunity to brief supervisors on the agreement months before it was signed but was denied a place on the board’s agenda. He said he remains willing to discuss the agreement in an open public meeting.

“Please convey to the Board that I remain willing to discuss the Agreement with them in open session,” Miller wrote, adding that his office has complied with the terms of the agreement while working with DHS “to keep our community safe.”

Miller also made clear that he does not intend to terminate the agreement.

“To be clear, I have no intention of terminating the Section 287(g) Agreement with DHS,” he wrote.

Last week, ICE backed up Miller in this tussle, saying the agreement was legally binding. 

The board’s legal opinion, authored by attorney Brett Johnson, concluded that the agreement is void because it was not approved by the county’s governing body and warned that the task force model could expose the county to civil rights lawsuits and jeopardize prosecutorial immunity.

Miller’s agreement is unique in Arizona. While several sheriffs’ offices and police departments in the state participate in 287(g), the Pinal County Attorney’s Office is the only prosecutor’s office to join the task force model, which allows warrantless arrests based on suspected immigration violations. The model was discontinued by the federal government in 2012 amid racial profiling concerns and revived under the Trump administration.

Pinal County Board Supervisor Mike Goodman pushed back on claims that the board sought to block cooperation with federal immigration authorities, calling those assertions “simply not true.”

Goodman said the Pinal County Sheriff’s Office “has partnered with ICE since 2008, and that agreement remains in place today,” adding that the board’s action was not political but legal.

“We did not stop immigration enforcement,” Goodman said. “Public safety was not compromised.”

He said the dispute arose only after County Attorney Brad Miller signed a separate 287(g) task force agreement “without approval from the Board of Supervisors and outside the authority granted to his office,” emphasizing that “prosecutors enforce the law in court. Sheriffs enforce the law on the street.”

The Pinal County Board of Supervisors scheduled a special public meeting tomorrow at 2:00p.m. to consider possible legal action over County Attorney Brad Miller’s 287(g) agreement with federal immigration authorities.

According to the agenda, the board will receive legal advice from outside counsel Snell & Wilmer on whether to pursue litigation to void the agreement. Following the closed session, supervisors are expected to vote on whether to authorize outside counsel to initiate a civil action seeking to invalidate the 287(g) task force agreement between the county attorney’s office and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.