In early August, Democratic state Sen. Analise Ortiz reposted to her Instagram story an alert about Immigration and Customs Enforcement activity at a local school. That caught the eye of the notorious MAGA social media account Libs of TikTok, which accused Ortiz of interfering with law enforcement and called for her to be charged with a crime.
Soon after, Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen announced he’d asked the U.S. Attorney’s Office to investigate Ortiz. Now, one of the most far-right members of the Arizona Senate — state Sen. Jake Hoffman — is hoping to get Ortiz expelled from the legislature.
On Tuesday, Hoffman filed an ethics complaint against Ortiz with the Arizona Senate’s bipartisan, five-member ethics committee. Hoffman alleged that Ortiz's reposting of an ICE sighting alert was “unbecoming of an elected official and embarrassing to the entire Arizona Legislature on a state and national stage.” Hoffman’s complaint was signed by seven other GOP state senators, including Petersen.
Reached by Phoenix New Times on Wednesday, Ortiz called Hoffman’s complaint an “alarming escalation of authoritarian tactics” that is “straight out of an authoritarian playbook.” She decried Hoffman’s “political circus” and said he’s trying to deprive her Legislative District 24 constituents of their chosen lawmaker.
“They are calling for the people of LD24 to be completely disenfranchised and stripped of their voice in the Arizona State Senate,” she said. “That’s a shocking level of intimidation to stop me from doing my job.”
That Hoffman is throwing stones is particularly rich. He was indicted as a fake elector for his role in trying to overturn the 2020 election, for which he faced an ethics complaint, and his marketing firm was banned by Facebook for running a troll farm. Libs of TikTok itself is known for siccing its followers on people, businesses and institutions, which often face threats as a result.
Though Republicans have labeled Ortiz’s posts as doxing, her actions fall well short of the definition of that term. Arizona law defines doxing as intentionally posting or publishing someone’s personal information, such as their home address and phone number, for the purpose of harming that person. However, Arizona’s doxing law doesn’t apply to “constitutionally protected speech or activity.” Ortiz’s post did not identify any ICE agents, much less share any other personal information about them.
First Amendment experts have noted that commenting on the presence of law enforcement is protected speech, similar to alerting other drivers on the road to watch their speed when police are sighted nearby. Police have no reasonable expectation of secrecy when they’re operating in public.
“She’s criticizing the government for how it’s implementing policy that has a direct effect on a lot of people’s lives,” said Gregg Leslie, who runs the First Amendment Clinic at the Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. “You don’t give up your First Amendment rights by becoming a public official.”
Despite that, Hoffman and other Republicans are determined to kick Ortiz out of the legislature.
“It is our belief that Senator Ortiz’(s) acts are an egregious violation of both the Arizona Constitution and the Oath of Office she took,” Hoffman wrote, “and therefore expulsion is indisputably warranted.”
Republican state Sen. Jake Hoffman filed an ethics complaint against Democratic state Sen. Analise Ortiz for posting an alert about Immigration and Customs Enforcement activity, which is protected speech.
Gage Skidmore/Flickr/CC BY-SA 2.0
What happens next?
Will Ortiz be expelled? Almost certainly not.Hoffman’s letter was addressed to Republican Sen. Shawnna Bolick, who chairs the Senate Ethics Committee. In a press release on Wednesday, Bolick announced she’d referred Hoffman’s complaint to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, noting that “the Arizona Senate Ethics Committee does not have jurisdiction to enforce federal law.”
In her press release, Bolick wrote that “doxing federal ICE agents is not only reckless, it endangers lives and undermines the rule of law.” That Ortiz’s post doesn’t meet the definition of doxing should be particularly obvious to Bolick, who sponsored Arizona’s anti-doxing law in 2021. Bolick did not respond to a request for comment.
The status of the U.S. Attorney’s Office investigation of Ortiz is unclear. A spokesperson for the office did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday. On Aug. 19, agency spokesperson Esther Winne told New Times that the office had no additional updates on the potential prosecution of Ortiz.
It could be several months before anything happens. Unless a special session is called by the legislature — which is unlikely, as it requires support from two-thirds of members in each chamber — the Senate Ethics Committee won’t evaluate the complaint against Ortiz until the legislature begins its next session in January 2026. At that point, the committee must first “adopt its operating rules” and then “conduct a thorough review of the facts, strictly adhering to constitutional standards, as well as applicable state and local laws,” Bolick said in her press release.
After the committee completes its investigation, which generally takes around a month, it reports its full findings to the Senate and provides a recommendation, such as dismissal, expulsion or disciplinary action, such as censure. Hoffman wants Ortiz expelled from her position, but that requires a two-thirds vote. Republicans do not hold that big a majority in the chamber, and Democrats are unlikely to support Ortiz's expulsion.
However, other penalties do not require a supermajority to impose. If the votes aren’t there for expulsion, Hoffman suggested removing Ortiz from all committees, taking away her office, parking spot, staff and keycard access, which he called “the bare minimum of punishment she should receive.” These administrative actions, as they relate to the building of the Arizona Capitol, can be passed by a simple majority, which Republicans possess.
Law-breaking is not a prerequisite for imposing an ethics penalty. Anything that can be considered “unbecoming” of an elected official is fodder for a complaint, which can lead to some mudslinging.
Last year, the Arizona House of Representatives' ethics committee found that former Democratic Rep. Leezah Sun engaged in a pattern of “disorderly behavior,” including making a death threat against a lobbyist. She resigned before an expulsion vote was held. In 2023, Republican Rep. Liz Harris was expelled after she invited a speaker to a hearing who spouted unsubstantiated claims about judges, officials and legislators being bribed by a Mexican drug cartel. In 2021, a former legislative aide filed a complaint against Republican state Sen. Wendy Rogers — now, wouldn’t you know, the vice chair of the Senate Ethics Committee — alleging workplace abuse and verbal harassment. Another complaint was filed against Rogers the next year after she made comments about a mass shooting being a government conspiracy. Neither complaint led to an expulsion vote.
Ortiz was also the subject of a complaint last year, when she was a state representative, after she and Democratic Rep. Oscar De Los Santos yelled “Shame!” at Republican lawmakers on the Arizona House floor following a failed vote to repeal the state’s 1864 near-total abortion ban. The House Ethics Committee found that Ortiz committed “disorderly conduct,” but no penalty was levied.
Ortiz could very well face some sort of punishment for her post, despite it being protected speech. A Senate ethics investigation is an inherently political process and not a criminal one. Still, punishing a state lawmaker for their speech could be a “troubling” slippery slope, Leslie said.
“Anytime there’s government action to punish somebody for criticizing the government,” he said, “it definitely has a chilling effect on other people.”
Despite the mounting opposition, Ortiz doesn’t plan to slow down or stop posting ICE alerts.
“My community supports me,” she said. “I will continue to support them by being the best senator they need in this moment of authoritarianism.
