Delaware Governor Faces Backlash as Veto of Bill Limiting Chinese Land Purchases Near Military Bases Sparks Outrage

Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs is facing mounting criticism following her decision to veto SB 1109, a bill intended to prevent entities linked to China from acquiring land near Arizona’s strategic assets, such as military bases and critical infrastructure. The veto, announced on Tuesday, has ignited a heated debate over security, property rights, and the effectiveness of state-level measures to counter foreign influence.

State Senate Majority Leader Janae Shamp condemned the governor’s move, calling it a “politically motivated veto” and accusing Hobbs of undermining public safety. According to Shamp, the legislation was crafted in direct response to rising concerns over attempts by Chinese interests to lease or purchase property adjacent to sensitive sites like Luke Air Force Base, which is integral to U.S. fighter pilot training. The bill would have prohibited the People’s Republic of China and its affiliates from holding a 30% or greater stake in Arizona real estate, a measure supporters say is vital for national defense.

Governor Hobbs defended her decision, labeling SB 1109 as “ineffective at counter-espionage” and asserting that the bill lacked clear guidelines for implementation. She argued that the legislation would not have provided direct protection for American military assets within the state, and cited the risk of arbitrary enforcement due to ambiguous criteria. Hobbs also emphasized the importance of crafting solutions that do not unintentionally open the door to discrimination or legal challenges.

Despite these assurances, critics maintain that the veto signals a lack of resolve against what they perceive as a growing threat from foreign actors. Michael Lucci, CEO of a state security-focused group, denounced the veto as effectively placing an “Open for the CCP” sign on Arizona, warning that proximity to key sites like the Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant and advanced semiconductor fabrication facilities presents unacceptable risks. “Allowing Communist China to buy up land near our critical assets is a national security risk, plain and simple,” Lucci declared, suggesting that, especially in modern asymmetric warfare, even seemingly small plots of land can prove strategically significant.

The controversy comes amid heightened scrutiny of foreign investments in real estate across the United States. In recent years, numerous states have taken action to limit or ban property acquisitions by entities associated with China and other nations deemed hostile. Data as of March indicates that 27 states are currently considering 84 bills restricting foreign land ownership, with 22 states already enacting such measures—17 of those laws passed just this year. At the federal level, Congress is actively reviewing multiple proposals aimed at strengthening national policy against foreign land purchases near sensitive assets.

Supporters of SB 1109 point to bipartisan efforts to refine the bill, narrowing its scope to specifically target government-linked buyers from China following initial concerns about potential overreach or discrimination. While the Arizona legislature retains the option to override the gubernatorial veto, it remains unclear whether the necessary support exists to accomplish this. Meanwhile, Arizona’s approach remains part of a broader national conversation about how best to safeguard critical infrastructure and military installations in an era of intensifying geopolitical rivalry.