The Biden administration and the dark left money network are demanding access to nonparty conservative organizations’ private documents in two lawsuits against election integrity laws requiring proof of citizenship and voter roll cleanups.
In the case Mi Familia Vota v. Fontes (2:22-cv-00509) the Department of Justice (DOJ), Democratic National Committee (DNC), Arizona Democratic Party, and leftist dark money groups including: Mi Familia Vota, Living United For Change Arizona (LUCHA), and Voto Latino are challenging the election integrity bills HB2243 and HB2492. In the case Mi Familia Vota v. Fontes (2:21-cv-01423), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, League of Conservation Voters, LUCHA, Mi Familia Vota, and Arizona Coalition for Change are challenging SB1485.
Any individuals or organizations that aren’t party in a lawsuit are considered “nonparty.” Federal law allows for nonparty individuals and organizations to be brought into a case and be compelled to disclose evidence requested. In these cases challenging Arizona’s three election integrity laws, that means conservative organizations are being asked to hand over private documents, communications, legislative correspondence, lobbying strategy, and information on contributions and expenditures.
Those issued nonparty subpoenas include the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) and the Republican Party of Arizona. No court has issued an injunction on the contested laws to date.
The Goldwater Institute is representing AFEC in their defense against the subpoenas. In a motion to quash the subpoenas, the organization argued that private opinions have no bearing on the validity of a challenged law, citing precedent set by Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (2021), and that the subpoenas threaten the rights to free speech and privacy.
“The Supreme Court has stated time and again that individual legislators’ opinions about a statute reveal little or nothing about the law’s meaning and validity,” read the motion. “It is thus all the more true that the statements and opinions of private parties, several degrees removed from any official government action, have no bearing on the question of whether a state law is consistent with federal law.”
The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, declared in a report that the budding leftist practice of filing nonparty subpoenas against conservative individuals and organizations constitutes a weaponization of federal law to intimidate and silence conservatives.
AFEC’s subpoena came from the Arizona Asian American Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander for Equity Coalition (AZ AANHPI for Equity). While that organization argues for total transparency of its ideological opponent, it is shrouded in mystery itself.
AANHPI for Equity and AZ AANHPI Advocates have independent websites, social media pages, and staff, yet the pair are presented as one entity in multiple locations (for example, on the AZ AANHPI for Equity “about us” page). Both were founded in July 2020 by Jennifer Chau, who has served as the director for AZ AANHPI for Equity, an unspecified nonprofit, and executive director for AZ AANHPI Advocates, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, since their inception according to her LinkedIn page.
According to the IRS, AZ AANHPI Advocates had its federal tax exempt status automatically revoked in mid-May for not filing any tax forms in the entire three years of its existence (EIN:85-2344934). The IRS issued its revocation posting earlier this month. No IRS records exist for AZ AANHPI for Equity.
Yet, both organizations’ websites continue to solicit donations and market themselves as nonprofits. The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) awarded AZ AANHPI Advocates good standing for its status as a nonprofit in mid-July as well. No ACC records exist for AZ AANHPI for Equity.
On its website, AZ AANHPI Advocates discloses that it receives funding from top leftist dark money organizations The Future We Need and Arizona Wins!. The listed address for The Future We Need is the same address for the Arizona Education Association and Progress Now Arizona (now Progress Arizona); yet, no such organization as “The Future We Need” exists per ACC, the IRS, the Federal Election Commission (FEC), or the secretary of state’s campaign finance databases. There does exist a similarly-named dark left political action committee (PAC) entity, “The Future We Want.”
In their entire three years of advocacy and fundraising, only AZ AANHPI Advocates had any campaign finance records filed within the state: just one receipt of $10,000 from Invest in Arizona in August 2021, for “signature gathering.” According to the secretary of state’s campaign finance database, AZ AANHPI has never filed any reports on their contributions or expenditures.
Invest in Arizona and Arizona Wins both had one top Democratic dark money handler in common: Dacey Montoya. (Gov. Katie Hobbs’ controversial former press secretary, Josselyn Berry, worked as the program manager for Arizona Wins from 2015 to 2016 and executive director for ProgressNow from 2016 to 2019; Hobbs’ gubernatorial campaign used the same mailing address as both organizations; and Montoya’s consulting firm was involved in both Hobbs’ secretary of state and gubernatorial campaigns). Montoya is now the treasurer for the organization behind the ballot initiative to legalize any and all abortion up to birth, Arizona for Abortion Access.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The assistant dean of University of Arizona (UArizona) law school admits that they have an ongoing system in place that effectively curtails the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruling prohibiting affirmative action.
The SCOTUS ruling ended race-based admissions in June, requiring colorblind criteria. Cary Lee Cluck, UArizona James E. Rogers College of Law assistant dean for admissions and financial aid, admitted that they still factor race in admissions during last month’s Association of American Law Schools (AALS) conference on affirmative action. Cluck was a key panelist tasked with discussing how law schools can achieve diversity without affirmative action.
Cluck shared that UArizona’s law school relies on a “holistic review” of applicants. In defining what a holistic review entails, Cluck explained that their admissions team reviews college transcripts and resumes to better understand what an applicant is all about, within the context of meeting the law school’s diversity goals. Cluck added that applicants who volunteer more information about themselves in their application are more likely to benefit, specifically citing race.
“When I say ‘holistic file review,’ we’re looking at all of those little pieces of things that we’ve asked you to give us and, some that are optional, that you can give us to get a fuller picture of who you are as a person,” said Cluck. “[I]ncluding other types of diversity beyond or alongside, you know, talking about your racial background is a good thing because it gives us, like we’ve been talking about, another piece or many more pieces of the puzzle to consider who you are in a holistic manner and trying to make a decision about you.”
Cluck said that they don’t proactively ask for a diversity statement, but do consider them when they’re submitted by applicants.
“It’s another piece of the puzzle […] that we take into consideration, when we are reading the application,” said Cluck. “They’re not always about racial discrimination or gender discrimination, but they can be a diversity statement about a lot of different things. They are very useful in the application process.”
It’s likely that applicants include a diversity statement into either materials containing their personal statement or “other considerations.” The law school requires applicants to submit a personal statement concerning personal characteristics and qualities, education and work experiences, talents and special interests, socioeconomic background, involvement in community affairs and public services, and “any other circumstances that have helped shape your life or given it direction.” The law school admissions team also reviews an unspecified slew of “other considerations.”
Both UArizona College of Law students and faculty sit on the admissions committee, but Cluck is the final arbiter.
In response to the SCOTUS ruling, UArizona issued a press release noting that Arizona law has already prohibited the consideration of race or ethnicity in university admissions since 2010. It appears that the university and its law school have had 13 years to find a workaround to the prohibition.
Watch the AALS conference below:
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Maricopa County Democratic Party’s (MCDP) executive director resigned following a media report on a nepotistic arrangement with her Black Lives Matter (BLM) longtime activist fiancé resulting in hundreds of thousands of unsent mailers. The soon-to-be-wed couple behind the arrangement share a history of shadowy political financial dealings.
The executive director, Ne’Lexia Galloway, resigned earlier this month, hours after an initial Axios report on 100,000 unsent campaign mailers preceding last year’s election.
MCDP paid nearly $24,500 to political consulting firm Agave Strategy for the mailers. A consultant informed Axios that Galloway instructed their firm to contract her fiancé’s company, Blaque Printing Enterprise owned by Bruce Franks, Jr., as a sub-vendor for the mailers. The firm reimbursed MCDP for the mailers in late January — but only after lawyers reportedly reached out on MCDP’s behalf.
According to emails obtained by Arizona Progress Gazette, precinct committeeman Steven Jackson challenged that what MCDP Chair Nancy Schriber characterized as incompetence in vendor dealing was actually malfeasance. Jackson pointed out that knowledge of the nepotistic mailers wasn’t disseminated until after Schriber’s re-election, and that several of their candidates lost in close elections last year.
In a statement, former MCDP Treasurer Heather Mrowiec alleged that she attempted to investigate the mailers last September despite Schriber’s resistance. Mrowiec reportedly found numerous red flags concerning the contracted mailers: the mailing and printing costs exceeded the agreed payment terms, as well as standardized United States Postal Service (USPS) mailing costs; no records existed of other vendor bids or any written contract, with Galloway allegedly telling Mrowiec that no other vendors could take on the project; forged USPS postage receipts, with Galloway allegedly telling Mrowiec initially that postage receipts proving delivery weren’t necessary; and retaliation against Mrowiec for investigating in the form of Galloway whipping votes to oppose her as treasurer.
“The vendor never disclosed who their print vendor was, and they were unable to provide any of the normal artifacts that would be generated during a routine direct mail translation — such as emails approving the proofs from the printer, address barcode lists provided by the printer, canceled checks for the postage, invoices from the print vendor, or legitimate Bulk Mail postage forms,” stated Mrowiec. “The money was only returned to MCDP after the vendor was contacted by lawyers reaching out on our behalf, as well as being contacted by the media with questions about the transaction.”
Galloway has prided herself as the first black woman to lead the county party; race aside, her leadership has been rife with controversy. Weeks after MCDP received the mailer reimbursement, Galloway fired nearly all of MCDP staff. Political circles widely perceived the move as self-preservation amid flagging operations and the mailer debacle.
What he “said” y’all must don’t know what these people do to black people especially black woken in this space. As the first Black woman to lead MCDP I got a list! https://t.co/rMgqtTQK7n
Last year, Galloway’s repeated purchasing from her fiancé’s company prompted the MCDP board to implement a Conflict of Interest policy preventing any board member or employee from directing business to a vendor owned by themselves, family, or partners without review and approval by the board.
MCDP paid Galloway’s fiancé’s company over $4,600 from last January through October: over $4,200 for t-shirts and $400 for postcards. Other Democratic candidates also paid the company, including over $5,400 for flyers from former superintendent Kathy Hoffman’s re-election campaign.
According to her MCDP bio, Galloway also served as the outreach representative for Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ-03). Although Galloway featured her former boss, she issued a public statement denouncing Gallego shortly after assuming the executive director role.
Prior to that, Galloway served as state manager for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Organizing Corps 2020 program, and chair of the Arizona Democratic Party Young Black Caucus.
Galloway and her fiancé, Franks, appear to share a common pension for political drama. Unsent mailers are far from the first or worst of shadowy political dealings involving Franks.
Franks served as the controversial campaign manager for failed Democratic Maricopa County attorney candidate Julie Gunnigle. Under Franks, Gunnigle’s campaign faced allegations of vague and misleading campaign finance reporting.
The Public Integrity Alliance (PIA) sent a letter last Halloween to the Maricopa County Elections Department alleging that hundreds of thousands in campaign transactions may have been disguised to hide how the Gunnigle campaign truly spent its funding.
Challenged campaign transactions included about $354,800 (79 percent) of campaign receipts going to a political consulting firm owned by Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s husband: about $7,800 categorized as “printing,” and nearly $347,000 categorized as “consulting.”
PIA also noted that the Gunnigle campaign used an Arizona address for the Omar-linked firm, despite no such registration existing with the Arizona Corporation Commission.
Another set of challenged campaign transactions included up to $26,500 allegedly spent on Google advertisements. However, Google records show that it received payment from Gunnigle’s 2018 state legislative campaign committee — not the county attorney campaign.
“[T]he Public Integrity Alliance is requesting that the department take steps to ensure that Ms. Gunnigle[s] committee is not misrepresenting its political activities to the public through third parties,” said the organization.
NEW – complaint filed against George Soros funded #MCAO candidate @juliegunnigle, who is alleged to have committed several campaign finance violations, paying firms tied with anti-police @IllhanOmar. More proof of her corrupt #DefundThePolice failing campaign 😬 #AZPOL
AZ Free News inquired about any response to the complaint letter. We didn’t receive a response by press time.
Franks was also formerly a Missouri state legislator who’d risen to prominence in the political scene in 2014 for his Black Lives Matter (BLM) activism spurred by the death of Michael Brown. When Franks began his activism, he’d joined the Peacekeepers.
In 2017, his first year as a lawmaker, Franks was arrested for intervening in another arrest while participating in a Black Friday protest. Franks and other activists were protesting the acquittal of former St. Louis officer Jason Stockley.
In 2018, Black Entertainment Television (BET) celebrated Franks as one of their “Great 28” individuals, known as “The Disruptors.” In 2019, Franks was the subject of a documentary film, “St. Louis Superman,” later purchased by MTV.
Just months later, Franks resigned from the legislature following allegations that he used campaign donations for his own personal use including vet bills, photography for his children, iTunes, and a casino trip. Franks also faced fines for thousands in cash expenditures and contribution acceptances over state limits.
The Missouri Ethics Commission found the allegations against Franks to be true, and fined him over $14,100 for campaign finance violations that year. In 2021, the commission raised their fine to $89,299 upon further investigation.
Despite these revelations of ethics violations, MTV aired Franks’ documentary across their networks in May 2020.
Franks left Missouri for Arizona not long after the ethics scandal. About a year later, he was making headlines again. In September 2020 Franks filed a $2.4 million claim against the city over his arrest the previous month at a Black Lives Matter (BLM) riot that he helped organize. Franks was charged with 13 counts, including aggravated assault on an officer, participating in a riot, resisting arrest, trespassing, and soliciting others to commit criminal offenses.
In February 2021, Franks took to the media to claim that Phoenix officers targeted him and fabricated the charges against him. His outcry was quickly amplified by prominent Democrats across the nation, including Hollywood actor Mark Ruffalo (“The Hulk”) — whose ear Franks’ fiancé, Galloway, appears to have had based on Ruffalo’s participation in her 2020 Get Out the Vote Rally.
Folks, my brother @brucefranksjr is being targeted, smeared, & persecuted by the Phoenix PD. This should be a federal crime & the @FBI should be brought in to investigate. The Phoenix PD is the most violent in the USA. (Cc: @CoriBush) #DropTheChargesMCAOhttps://t.co/OQyYnjGhCc
Franks appeared confident that the rallying cry from the most powerful corners of the Democratic establishment would result in the charges being dropped.
A month later, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO) dropped the charges against Franks and 11 other defendants arrested at the BLM riot he helped lead.
In July 2021, Franks and fellow activists sued the city in the Arizona District Court, alleging political persecution. The lawsuit is ongoing (Acton v. Adel).
Franks’ lawsuit against Phoenix wasn’t his first lawsuit against a local government following his arrest at a riot. In May 2019, St. Louis County settled with Franks for $50,000. As part of the settlement, the county and Franks admitted no wrongdoing on behalf of the St. Louis officers, and Franks was required to delete all social media posts containing an edited video of his arrest at a 2014 Christmas Eve riot.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Tucson’s stores are looking the other way with theft, according to local accounts of law and order in the city.
Lacey Nagao, a Turning Point Action influencer, shared her experience of a store visit over the weekend in a viral account. Nagao reported that she witnessed theft at a local Walgreens while she was checking out, but that employees said it didn’t matter. A homeless man, one of the 10 or so outside the store, walked out with items including Cheetos, beer, and soda without paying. Nagao recounted that the man even issued a farewell to the checkout clerk.
According to Nagao, the employees were beyond the point of feeling disaffected by the lack of police response to reports of theft. Per Nagao, the employees said the police “don’t show up” and “have been told not to do anything” concerning theft. Additionally, the store’s security guards were fired by their regional manager last month, and employees were instructed to allow thieves to “take whatever they want.”
America is not the America it was 10 years ago.
On Saturday I stopped at a Walgreens on Craycroft and Speedway as I drove home from the airport. There were about 10 homeless people outside but I didn’t think much of it. Sadly, it’s the “new normal” for anywhere south of River…
Nagao said that when she asked the employee if she could have left without paying for her groceries, the employee acknowledged that she could have if she so desired.
Nagao lamented the lack of law and order, blaming the city’s Democrat-majority leadership.
“Our city is becoming a place I never thought I would see, and quite frankly, somewhere I refuse to live,” said Nagao. “Thanks to [Mayor Regina Romero], Tucson is quickly on its way to becoming the next San Francisco.”
In response to Nagao’s account, several users reported that they noticed a lack of police amid drugs and crime.
A daughter moved to Tucson so I'm back in town after two decades away. There was always drugs and crime but what I noticed are no police anywhere, as if they want us to forget what being safe feels like. It happened in my new town but was extra shocking to see drastic…
Same here. I stopped at a Circle K around Miracle Mile and Oracle and about 25 hanging around the front door. A couple of them were trying to break into an outside vending machine.
Several users attested to similar issues happening in Scottsdale, Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa.
Several users pointed out that corporate policies factor into the permissive view of theft as well.
I was talking with a Lowe's employee yesterday, and he basically told me that their company policy is the same thing. I'm in a red state. So, it's also a corporate policy.
Within a week, Phoenix’s public libraries used up a month’s worth of the overdose-reversing drug Narcan made available at no cost to the public. The 1,600 kits cleared out almost immediately.
All 17 of Phoenix’s public libraries began offering the emergency overdose treatment last week. Narcan, or naloxone, is a nasal spray that reverses opioid and fentanyl overdoses.
Mayor Kate Gallego touted the Narcan kit rollout as life-saving. Gallego told reporters that civilians and other city workers may now intervene as first responders.
“By placing Naloxone in the hands of city employees and making it more accessible to residents, we’re creating a network of potential first responders who can make a significant impact in emergency situations,” said Gallego.
Today, I joined city employees and partners to launch our new public naloxone program, which makes Narcan available at all @PhxLibrary locations.
Narcan can reverse the effects of opioid overdose and save lives. Pick up a kit at a library near you, and spread the word! https://t.co/kurD8Od7GC
The Phoenix Public Library system didn’t post any announcements on their social media pages about the new overdose kit rollout, but did feature the young winners of their summer reading competition.
Library-goers may witness Narcan administrations while reading or dropping off their borrowed books.
A demonstration from @PHXFire on how to administer Narcan to someone suffering from an opioid overdose. Starting today, you can pick up a free kit with the lifesaving medication from any Phoenix public library. @KTAR923pic.twitter.com/w69n8N0o5J
As of last week, AZDHS reported nearly 800 opioid deaths, over 2,400 non-fatal opioid overdose events, and over 5,000 emergency and inpatient visits related to suspected opioid overdoses so far this year. First responders were able to administer Naloxone in about 4,000 out of 5,200 suspected opioid overdose responses (77 percent).
Compared with 2022 totals, there are 312 less opioid deaths and over 400 more non-fatal opioid overdose events this year compared to this time last year. However, AZDHS noted that data for the last four months may still be in the process of being collected.
It may be that the death count for this year will be greater than last year. The last four months currently report a sharp decline in opioid deaths compared to last year and 2021, but the first four months of the year overall represented an increase in deaths from last year and from 2021.
However, the opioid death total dropped by 89 from 2021 to 2022, from around 2,000 to around 1,900.
Emergency and in-patient visits for suspected drug overdoses are occurring at similar rates this year compared with last year: over 5,700 this year compared to around 5,600 this time last year and around 6,800 this time in 2021. There are less suspected opioid overdose first responder responses compared to this time last year: around 5,200 compared to 6,300.
A majority of opioid overdoses are due to fentanyl. Last year, nearly 66 percent of Phoenix-based opioid deaths involved fentanyl.
