Home/ Fights/ Pima County AZ — Sheriff Nanos Caught Lying About ICE/Border Patrol Cooperation
County Fight Active-Crisis

Pima County AZ — Sheriff Nanos Caught Lying About ICE/Border Patrol Cooperation

Pima, AZ FIPS 04019
Vote: Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to demand sworn report; 10-day deadline (April 21, 2026)
Current status: ACLU lawsuit for records ongoing. Board threatening removal if Nanos fails to provide sworn report by April 21, 2026. Recall petition launched.

The Fight

Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos publicly claimed his department did not cooperate with federal immigration authorities. The ACLU of Arizona obtained records proving the opposite: deputies actively coordinated with Border Patrol, including in one incident where deputies offered men a ride to Taco Bell, then called Border Patrol to pick them up there.

The Pima County Board of Supervisors has now unanimously voted to demand a sworn report from Nanos on four areas of concern, threatening to remove him from office under Arizona statute if he does not comply within 10 business days (deadline: April 21, 2026).

Why This Fight Matters

This is not just a sheriff-misconduct story. It exposes the gap between what local governments say about ICE cooperation and what their law enforcement agencies actually do. Pima County passed resolutions opposing ICE, adopted ordinances restricting ICE use of county property, and publicly positioned itself as protective of immigrant communities. Meanwhile, the sheriff’s department was handing people to Border Patrol.

The Nanos case also reveals how record-keeping failures enable covert cooperation. PCSD stopped tracking contacts with federal immigration officials in June 2024 — even though the tracking policy remained in effect. If the ACLU hadn’t sued for records, the cooperation might never have surfaced.

The Taco Bell Incident

The most striking allegation in the ACLU lawsuit: Five men were on a construction company’s property and told a security guard they were looking for work. The guard called both the Sheriff’s Department and Border Patrol. When deputies learned Border Patrol wouldn’t arrive for over an hour, they offered the men a ride to a Taco Bell — then told Border Patrol agents to meet them there and take the men into federal custody.

The men were suspected of no crime.

Other Documented Incidents

The ACLU filings detail incidents between 2021 and 2023 where deputies contacted Border Patrol about people suspected of no crime:

  • A deputy responded to a 911 call about a “suspicious person” outside Tucson, encountered three Spanish-speaking men in camouflage walking on the side of the road, searched their bags, determined they were not suspected of any crime, and then called Border Patrol anyway (2021)
  • Multiple additional instances of deputies contacting BP after encounters where no criminal activity was observed

Timeline

  • Pre-2024: Sheriff Nanos publicly claims PCSD does not cooperate with federal immigration authorities
  • June 2024: PCSD quietly stops tracking contacts with federal immigration officials, despite the tracking policy remaining in effect
  • Summer 2025: ACLU of Arizona files public records request for incident reports involving deputy interactions with ICE and Border Patrol
  • 2025-2026: PCSD repeatedly fails to fully comply with records requests
  • March 24, 2026: Supervisors move to compel sworn reports from Nanos amid “fraud” allegations (AZPM)
  • March 26, 2026: AZ Mirror publishes ACLU allegations: “Lawsuit: Pima County Sheriff’s Office handed people over to Border Patrol despite claims it doesn’t”
  • March 26, 2026: Tucson Sentinel covers the story independently
  • March 30, 2026: ACLU of Arizona files lawsuit in Pima County Superior Court seeking full records on PCSD interactions with ICE/BP (KJZZ)
  • April 2, 2026: Evidentiary hearing set for Friday on ACLU lawsuit (AZPM)
  • April 7, 2026: Board of Supervisors votes unanimously to demand sworn report from Nanos on four areas, threatening removal
  • April 8, 2026: Supervisors specify questions about employment history, disciplinary actions, ICE cooperation, and budget overruns (AZPM)
  • April 21, 2026: Deadline for Nanos’s sworn report — next board meeting
  • Ongoing: Recall petition against Nanos launched by community member Butierez

The Four Areas of Board Inquiry

The Board’s demand covers more than just ICE cooperation — it encompasses a pattern of governance failures:

  1. Employment history misrepresentation: Prior representation of his employment history with the El Paso Police Department
  2. Personnel retaliation: Disciplinary actions against Lt. Heather Lappin and Sgt. Aaron Cross
  3. ICE/Border Patrol cooperation: Department’s collaboration with federal immigration officials despite public denials
  4. Budget management: Repeated instances of the department exceeding its budget

The Records Problem

The ACLU lawsuit is fundamentally a public records case. PCSD:

  • Maintained a policy requiring tracking of federal immigration contacts
  • Stopped tracking in June 2024 (while the policy remained in effect)
  • Failed to comply with ACLU’s 2025 records requests
  • Forced the ACLU to sue in Superior Court to obtain documents

This pattern — claiming non-cooperation while simultaneously destroying the paper trail — is a tactic worth watching for in other jurisdictions.

Implications for the Detention Pipeline

The Nanos case matters for the detention pipeline in two ways:

  1. Undermines local resistance: Pima County’s official opposition to the Marana ICE facility rings hollow if the sheriff’s department is actively funneling people to Border Patrol. Enforcement cooperation feeds the pipeline regardless of what resolutions the Board passes.

  2. The records gap pattern: If sheriffs’ departments stop tracking immigration contacts, there is no way to verify compliance with local non-cooperation policies. Other counties with sanctuary-style policies should audit whether their sheriffs are actually complying.

Sources

This research is published at The RAMM — investigative reporting on the detention pipeline.
Edit Report issue County profile Add a tip about this fight
Last updated: Apr 13, 2026