The University of Arizona (UArizona) doesn’t believe that traditional law school entry tests are equitable enough, bolstering their push for an LSAT alternative.
UArizona James E. Rogers College of Law wants law school applicants to take JD-Next, an online prep course that concludes with an exam. UArizona issued a study in defense of their proposed LSAT replacement, claiming that it wouldn’t be “picking winners and losers through testing” but rather providing a way to “recognize and produce capability” — namely, for racial minorities.
“Especially for underrepresented students, the goal is to measure not just the accumulated knowledge and skills that they would bring to a new academic program, but also their ability to grow and learn through the program,” read the study. “[T]he JD-Next exam holds promise as a new law school admissions pathway, both to better predict success in law school and to help diversify the populations of students in law school.
The @NationalJurist article in support of increasing diversity in the legal profession suggests aspiring law students enroll in Arizona Law's online JD-Next Program to develop skills and experience.
The study tracked incoming students across dozens of law schools to determine whether the JD-Next exam was predictive of student performance. The study included data from two separate cohorts in 2019 and 2020.
The 2019 cohort tweaked its representation of students by oversampling minorities: 60 percent of nearly 11,600 invited participants were a minority. 24 percent were Black or African American, 21 percent were Hispanic, 14 percent were Asian, and one percent were Native American or Native Hawaiian. As a result of the oversampling, only 43.5 percent of participants were white.
The study also disclosed that students who identified as both White and Asian were coded as multi-race, but not classified as “underrepresented groups,” or “URG.”
However, the 2020 cohort more similarly reflected the makeup of law schools across the country: 61 percent white.
Regents Professor of Law Rebecca Tsosie discusses the legal profession’s diversity challenges with @Reuters.
The study noted that it focused on race as a factor in testing in order to determine diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in higher education. It claimed that the JD-Next exams resulted in smaller disparities in test results between different races than the LSAT.
“These questions about score disparities are important because admissions tests can impact efforts to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in law schools,” stated the study. “If admissions officers rely on these tests to decide which applicants to reject, and lower test scores are associated with some races or ethnicities, then students with those identities are more likely to be rejected, and overall representation in law school and the legal profession is thereby reduced.”
"Unfortunately, the legal profession is one that hasn't been as diverse as we would like it to become, so increasing diversity is an important initiative for the University of Arizona law school," said @jessfin79.
This wouldn’t be UArizona’s first foray into modifying admissions test standards. The university successfully pushed for the acceptance of the Graduate Record Examinations (GRE) General Test for law school admissions in 2021. Prior to that, the GRE General Test was used for admission to graduate schools.
The American Bar Association (ABA) mandates that law schools require an admission test in order to be accredited. However, the ABA Council voted last November to abolish this requirement beginning in the fall semester of 2025.
Authors of the UArizona study included Jessica Findley, a research scholar with UArizona Office of Diversity & Inclusion and an assistant clinical professor at the law school; Adriana Cimetta, associate educational psychology research professor in UArizona College of Education; Heidi Legg Burross, interim department head, educational psychology professor, and research assistant professor in the College of Education; Katherine C. Cheng, assistant educational psychology research professor in the College of Education; Matt Charles, designer of curriculum for the law school; Cayley Balser, Innovation for Justice post-graduate fellow; Ran Li, graduate student in educational psychology; Christopher Robertson, adjunct law professor.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
On Tuesday, lawmakers asked Secretary of State Adrian Fontes to reject the Election Procedure Manuals (EPM) drafted by Governor Katie Hobbs when she was the secretary of state, per recent court decisions.
The dubious EPMs were the 2019 and 2021 versions drafted by Governor Katie Hobbs during her service as secretary of state. Court decisions in Brnovich v. Hobbs, McKenna v. Soto, Leach v. Hobbs, and Leibsohn v. Hobbs declared that these EPMs weren’t in line with state law.
In a joint statement issued Tuesday, State Reps. Jacqueline Parker (R-LD15) and Alex Kolodin (R-LD03) insisted to Fontes that the court decisions merited review of the EPMs. Parker chairs the House Committee on Municipal Oversight & Elections, and Kolodin serves as the vice chair.
“Recent Arizona court decisions give us serious concerns about the lawfulness of former Secretary Hobbs’ 2019 EPM and 2021 draft EPM,” said Parker and Kolodin. “Arizona law purports to authorize the EPM to achieve and maintain the maximum degree of correctness, impartiality, uniformity and efficiency in voting procedures throughout the state. But we question whether these mandates have been followed. We hope Secretary Fontes more fully evaluates where the prior Secretary overstepped her bounds and look forward to hearing how those errors will be corrected.”
State Reps. @electjacqparker & @Alex4Arizona seek answers from new Arizona Secretary of State on Elections Procedures Manual & express serious concerns over errors and mishandling by former Secretary Hobbs.
Parker and Kolodin asked Fontes to include them in the stakeholder input process. They asked Fontes whether he would disregard Hobbs’ 2021 draft EPM; if he believed the 2019 EPM followed and carried the enforcement of state statute; and for his supplementation of any guidance, statements, emails, or directives that Hobbs or her agents gave to county election officials concerning the 2022 General Election not written in the 2019 EPM.
The duo also asked Fontes for copies of any and all drafts of the 2023 EPM, as well as communications regarding third-party input or proposals. They set next Tuesday, Jan. 24, as their deadline.
Brnovich v. Hobbs ruled that the 2021 draft EPM failed to meet statute deadline. McKenna v. Soto and Leach v. Hobbs determined that the 2019 EPM language added onto statute language and was therefore impermissible. Finally, Leibsohn v. Hobbs ruled that Hobbs’ electronic registration process for signature gathering was deficient and non-compliant with state statute.
When former attorney general Mark Brnovich rejected the 2021 draft EPM over concerns later confirmed by court decisions, Hobbs insisted that his grievances had no merit.
AG Brnovich now claims that his prior unethical behavior prohibits him from performing his current statutory duties.
The Elections Procedures Manual is an important part of election integrity in Arizona. It’s unfortunate for all voters that AG Brnovich refuses to do his job. pic.twitter.com/KJQnerd9Ve
The Elections Procedures Manual ensures that elections throughout AZ are run uniformly.
Unfortunately, it appears AG Brnovich prefers political posturing over performing his duty to review and approve the Manual. It’s time for him to work in good faith on behalf of all voters. pic.twitter.com/7ImW91mS6V
It appears that Fontes wouldn’t disregard Hobbs’ EPMs, regardless of court decisions. Fontes supported the Arizona Supreme Court decision upholding the 2019 EPM in McKenna v. Soto.
“This effectively shifts the burden from the petitioner (voter) to the government, maximizing all voters’ voices in the process,” stated Fontes. “This is a MASSIVE WIN for voters!”
Also, at Par20 of the opinion, the Court affirms that only the enumerated parts of ARS16-542 appearing in the AZ Election Procedures Manual have the force and effect of law. This is a MASSIVE WIN for voters!#ProtectDemocracy 3/
Fontes’ office didn’t issue an immediate public response to the request letter. However, he did advertise an upcoming panel with Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer.
I'm really looking forward to this friendly exchange of ideas with my colleague @stephen_richer. We don't agree on everything but having smart, civil, and informative conversations about improving our systems is what makes our democracy stronger. pic.twitter.com/6tLky19d8N
An activist group wants to overhaul elections processes with ranked-choice voting (RCV), open primaries, and a uniform signature-gathering limit.
Voter Choice Arizona (VCA) is behind the effort. During a monthly public meeting on Wednesday, VCA treasurer and founding member Richard Cook claimed RCV is nonpartisan, tried and true, and good for all parties.
“We’re not here to change an election system, we’re not here to generate support,” said Cook. “We’re here because we believe in a more effective government. We believe we can elect better leaders to lead the future of Arizona.”
In its presentation, VCA claimed that the current election system fails to eliminate the “spoiler effect” from independents and third parties, limits honest choice in the voting booth, thwarts majority rule by helping divisive candidates succeed in crowded fields, distracts from healthy-issue based campaigns, and chooses candidates in low participation primary elections. It cited low primary election participants as a reason for RCV.
RCV lets voters rank multiple candidates in order of preference, with the initial leading candidate receiving the most “first-preference votes.” However, even second, third, and so on rankings carry weight that can flip a final outcome. A candidate who originally led with the highest percentage of votes but no majority could fall behind another candidate when factoring lesser rankings.
In an example scenario: out of three candidates, none received a majority under RCV though one had the highest percentage of votes cast for them. The third-place candidate drops off, and the rankings assigned to the third-place candidate are shifted onto the first- and second-place candidates. If the second-place candidate far outranked the first-place candidate, theoretically, the second-place candidate could win.
Those elections that allow for multiple winning candidates, such as for the Arizona Corporation Commission, would need to meet a lower threshold for the majority.
VCA is partnering with several organizations: Rank the Vote, the Institute for Political Innovation, Represent Us, Unite Arizona, and Save Democracy Arizona. VCA said it planned to form a C4 organization with these organizations to fundraise and gather signatures.
In addition to its partners, VCA is endorsed by League of Women Voters Arizona, as well as a cohort of Democrat, Libertarian, independent, and moderate Republican elected officials. Members of the VCA advisory board include:
Alison Porter: Save Our Schools founder
Former Democratic State Rep. Sarah Liguori
Sam Coppersmith: former Democratic Congressman; founder of a top law firm for Democrats, Coppersmith Brockelman, from which newly appointed Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Roopali Desai hailed as a partner
Lauren Kuby: former Tempe City Councilwoman and Democratic candidate for the Arizona Corporation Commission
Heather Carter: executive vice president of Greater Phoenix Leadership and former Republican state representative
Art Babbott: former member of the Flagstaff City Council
VCA will attempt to file its constitutional ballot initiative for 2024 later this year. They likely need around 600,000 signatures to make the ballot, since the minimum is around 356,000. If approved, RCV would go into effect in the 2026 election.
23 other states allow RCV at varying levels: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington.
Two states banned RCV: Tennessee and Florida.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Arizona’s school choice program appears to have been undermined by neglect from former leadership, based on details of the program’s inherited state by the new administration.
AZ Free News spoke with Christine Accurso this week about the inherited state of the ESA Program, of which Accurso is the newly appointed executive director. Accurso hit the ground running when she began working for ADE several weeks ago. She walked in to find the ESA Program, left behind by former Superintendent Kathy Hoffman, severely understaffed and drowning in nearly 171,600 unfulfilled expense requests.
Although the Arizona legislature approved 52 positions to run the ESA Program, there were only 17 on the scene when Accurso arrived. That’s less than one-third of the staff that the ESA Program was intended to have. However, Accurso expressed confidence that merely doubling the team from 17 to 34 would be enough to run the program well for the meantime.
“We have less than half of the team we need to run this program,” said Accurso. “We will begin hiring soon and look forward to at least doubling our team to serve the families of Arizona well.”
ADE was severely understaffed despite receiving an additional $2.2 million last summer to hire 26 workers. Even with this funding, ADE undertook measures to minimize ESA Program operations. This included limiting call helpline hours to between 10 am to 2 pm.
Accurso said that her first hire was an individual who answers parents’ calls. The ESA Program failed to have a responsive helpline under Hoffman’s administration. Last year, parents who attempted to call the program helpline were met with an automated voice rejecting their call due to “excessive call volumes” and automatically hanging up with no promise of a call back.
These weren’t the only issues Accurso noticed. Ahead of her arrival, Accurso noted that odd expenses were given approval following Hoffman’s loss to current Superintendent Tom Horne.
I'm not sure what is happening at the ESA office, but their posted "Approval List" is growing and more things like this item are popping up. This wasn't on the approval list before December 12, 2022. We'll have to look into this when I arrive in January. An Espresso Machine?🤔🤦🏻♀️ pic.twitter.com/cLfnpEe29Z
That was far from the first time that odd expenses were given approval under Hoffman’s administration. Democratic state legislators argued that the program wasted taxpayer dollars through its allowable expenses. During a House committee hearing last year, Democrats questioned why items like bouncy castles and tonal home gyms, costing thousands, were approved. Republican committee members reminded their Democratic colleagues that Hoffman, a fellow Democrat, had approved these and other questionable items as allowable expenses.
In under three weeks, Accurso’s team approved nearly 24,700 of the unfulfilled requests after verifying the proper documentation was submitted, amounting to $22.2 million for things like private schooling, tutoring, and curriculum dating back to last November.
If the remaining 146,900 requests run a similar average in cost to the 24,700 approved requests (around $880 each), the ADE may owe over $129.2 million. The new administration paid 1,500 tutors who’d been awaiting paychecks for months under Hoffman, as well as reimbursement owed to a “small school” who’d been forced to consider a bank loan for their expenses due to Hoffman’s administration delaying their payment.
“We are reviewing all of the categories and our team, with ‘all hands on deck’ are getting through those as quickly as possible,” said Accurso. “These first orders were private school tuition payments and tutors of core subjects.”
Accurso noted that her team is not only working through old applications — they receive an average of about 130 new applications each day. Accurso stated that they have 949 pending applications.
“Yesterday we got around 200 applications. Right now my staff is working on a total of 990 applications from the weekend through yesterday. That’s why I’m hiring very quickly,” explained Accurso.
Accurso said that another one of her first actions was to replace the former administration’s allowable expenses list on the website with one that aligns with state statute. (The former list is archived here).
Prior to becoming ADE’s executive director, Accurso was an ESA parent burned by its poor administration. During Hoffman’s first year in office, Accurso and other parents were kept out of the program when the ADE failed to follow admission deadlines set by statute. Accurso gained national attention after her experience of spending hours each week on hold for over two months went viral.
Current Superintendent Tom Horne said in a statement earlier this month that the ADE’s previous administration of the ESA Program was unacceptable.
“When I took office, the commitment I made is that the Arizona Department of Education is a service organization committed to raising academic outcomes and empowering parents,” said Horne. “On my first day on the job, I demonstrated my resolve to fulfill that mission. Delays and inefficiencies of this kind are unacceptable and won’t be repeated.”
The decline of the ESA Program shouldn’t elicit much surprise. Since first campaigning for the position in 2018, former Superintendent Kathy Hoffman openly criticized the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) Program. During her re-election campaign, Hoffman claimed that the ESA Program had “zero accountability” while signing a petition to undo universal school choice.
What happened in Snowflake is one example of the lack of accountability with the ESA program. Stories like this will become more common with universal expansion. We only have 3 days left to stop this law from going into effect. Find out where to sign at: https://t.co/0j0mJo7IIhpic.twitter.com/mIxyaw1v2D
The ADE said that nearly 46,000 students have joined the ESA Program as of Tuesday. Despite Governor Katie Hobbs’ intention on rolling back the program, the GOP-controlled legislature has no plans to do so.
Sen. President Warren Petersen toldKTAR that there wasn’t a chance that school choice would be rolled back.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Drug traffickers who commit homicide may be charged with a Class 1 felony in Arizona under a newly proposed bill.
Class 1 felonies carry a minimum sentence of 10 years, with a maximum sentence of 25 years. Repeat offenders face a minimum sentence of 15 years, with a maximum sentence of 29 years. If the victim is under 15 years old, then the perpetrator would be subject to life imprisonment.
The bill, HB2167, was named after a Yavapai County victim of fentanyl-tainted narcotics, Ashley Dunn, and comes from State Rep. Quang Nguyen. The bill defines “drug trafficking homicide” as occurring when individuals transfer a dangerous or narcotic drug and cause another’s death through the consumption or sale of the drug.
In a press release, Nguyen said that this legislation would help solve the immediate issue of Arizonans’ safety.
“Fentanyl is killing tens of thousands of Americans each year and destroying families,” said Nguyen. “It’s a public crisis that should unite political parties to act urgently. We are in a war to save lives.”
State Representative @QuangNguyenAZ sponsors #HB2167 to combat fentanyl epidemic in Arizona.
26 House Republicans signed onto the bill, and two senators: Ken Bennett (R-LD01) and Eva Diaz (D-LD22). The bill was assigned to the House Judiciary Committee.
Fentanyl’s deadliness not only impacts those who consume it, but those who so much as touch it, whether intentionally or unintentionally. The drug’s toxicity has state officials urging speedy implementation of new protocol to protect law enforcement that may handle the drug. Last June, Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Brutinel established a task force to create guidelines for the safe handling of fentanyl. That task force must submit its report by March 31.
Quang’s bill includes stricter punishment for children’s deaths due to drug traffickers’ current operational patterns. With the rise of the border crisis, fentanyl traffickers expanded their targeted clientele to include minors. Over the last year especially, these traffickers have pushed “rainbow fentanyl” that look like candy to entice youth. Fentanyl pills are normally designed to look like oxycodone prescription pills: blue, and stamped with “M30.”
Like their traditional counterparts, these rainbow pills often carry fentanyl doses lethal enough to kill adults.
Almost one year ago to date, health experts and law enforcement warned that the state was facing a burgeoning pediatric fentanyl crisis. In 2022, there were 138 non-fatal opioid overdoses and 28 deaths in minors aged 0-17. That’s a decline of 70 non-fatal opioid overdoses and 19 deaths from 2021, and a decline of 198 non-fatal opioid overdoses and 31 deaths from 2020.
In fact, all non-fatal opioid overdoses and deaths have declined slightly since a peak in 2020.
Though these numbers have declined over the last few years, total drug seizures keep climbing. Law enforcement have seized millions in fentanyl pills amid the ongoing border crisis. According to Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) drug seizure statistics, there have been nearly 26,600 pounds of fentanyl seized along the southern border since President Joe Biden took office.
Seizures more than doubled from the 2020 to 2021 fiscal year. Last month was a historic high in fentanyl seizures for all time: nearly 3,000 pounds of fentanyl.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
