Delaware Governor Faces Backlash for Vetoing Bill Restricting Chinese Land Purchases Near Military Bases

Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs is facing mounting criticism after she vetoed a high-profile bill designed to restrict land purchases by Chinese government-linked entities near critical infrastructure, such as military bases and energy facilities. The decision has reignited debate over how best to protect local and national security interests while navigating complex international relations and property rights.

State Senate Majority Leader Janae Shamp quickly denounced the veto as a "politically motivated" move that puts Arizonans at risk. Lawmakers supporting the bill, known as S.B. 1109, argue it would have sent a strong message to foreign governments seeking to acquire land adjacent to strategic locations, including Luke Air Force Base and major industrial sites like the Palo Verde nuclear power plant. Shamp and other proponents cite incidents of Chinese entities attempting to secure leases or properties near sensitive assets in the state as justification for the legislation's urgency.

The bill specifically sought to prohibit the People’s Republic of China or any company with significant Chinese government ownership—defined as a 30% stake or more—from purchasing Arizona property near designated critical sites. Supporters believe such bans are crucial to limiting potential espionage and sabotage risks, referencing global conflicts and modern warfare tactics that capitalize on proximity to vulnerable targets. Michael Lucci, CEO of the security policy group State Armor Action, emphasized this point, stating that “allowing Communist China to buy up land near our critical assets is a national security risk, plain and simple.”

Governor Hobbs, however, defended her decision by labeling S.B. 1109 as “ineffective at counter-espionage” and lacking clear implementation standards. In her statement, she warned that the bill’s vague language could lead to arbitrary enforcement and unintended consequences. Hobbs underscored the importance of crafting legislation that directly addresses espionage concerns and withstands legal scrutiny, rather than what she described as a potentially discriminatory and unenforceable blanket ban.

The legislative journey of S.B. 1109 included a series of bipartisan amendments intended to limit its scope and mitigate fears of discrimination against individuals based on national origin. The revised version focused solely on government-linked buyers and subsidiaries, reflecting growing pressure on state lawmakers to balance security measures with civil liberties and economic interests.

The debate in Arizona mirrors a broader national trend, as several U.S. states grapple with the implications of foreign land ownership near military and technological assets. According to recent data, at least 27 states are considering over 80 bills aimed at restricting foreign property acquisition, especially by entities associated with countries like China, Russia, and Iran. So far, 22 states have enacted similar laws, with many taking effect in just the past year.

With Congress also examining seven separate bills on the issue, the outcome of Arizona’s ongoing legislative battle could set a precedent for future state and federal efforts to address what many see as an evolving security threat. For now, S.B. 1109’s fate may hinge on whether lawmakers can muster enough support to override Governor Hobbs’s veto—a test not only of political will, but also of how the nation navigates the intersection of property rights, economic alliances, and national defense.