Attorney General Kris Mayes is fighting the state of Idaho’s ban on minors traveling to other states to obtain an abortion.
Mayes joined a coalition of 20 Democratic attorneys general to challenge the ban in federal court.
Those in the challenge, led by the state of Washington, are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island and Washington, D.C.
In a Tuesday press release, Mayes cast those opposed to abortions for minors as “anti-choice extremists.”
“States are free to regulate abortion within their border, but Idaho’s restrictive law goes too far,” stated Mayes. “When a state like Idaho prevents it[s] residents from getting reproductive healthcare in their home state, those patients are entitled to seek out care in a state that lets patients make medical decisions without imposition of the government.”
I will continue to take legal positions that will protect the health, safety, and privacy of all Arizonans. States are free to regulate abortion within their border, but Idaho’s restrictive law goes too far.
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) August 2, 2023
Idaho law prohibits the recruitment, harboring, and transportation of mothers seeking abortions. In the amicus brief, the attorneys general argued that the law violated the rights of interstate travel and free speech, as well as infringed on the legality of abortion in surrounding states.
The attorneys general further argued that Idaho law posed an inappropriate, and even dangerous, deterrent to abortionists and pro-abortion organizations. They claimed that abortion was safe at virtually any stage of the pregnancy, but that delays could pose an increased risk to the mother.
Parental competence was also addressed by the attorneys general. The Democratic leaders argued that up to one-third of pregnant minors had unreliable, confrontational, or dangerous parents, citing research from the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Expanding abortion access has been a defining aspect of the Mayes administration so far. In March, Mayes formed a six-member Reproductive Rights Unit within her office: the first of its kind. Heading the unit is deputy solicitor general Hayleigh Crawford.
Mayes’ abortion rights unit bears resemblance to the Justice Department’s Reproductive Rights Task Force. Both have sought to fight against various states’ attempts to restrict or ban abortion and have fought legal challenges against the prohibition of the abortion-inducing drug mifepristone.
Last month, Mayes petitioned for the Biden administration to prevent the health information of women who received an abortion from being accessed for the purpose of any criminal, civil, or administrative investigations related to abortion restrictions or bans.
Mayes is also fighting to prevent the enactment of the state’s original law on abortion — a near-total ban — over the more recent law, a 15-week restriction.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Attorney General Kris Mayes is fighting to continue government’s collusion with social media to control online speech.
Mayes joined a 21-state coalition of Democratic attorneys general to oppose a federal decision prohibiting federal officials from coordinating with social media companies to control speech. In a press release, the attorney general stated that control over free speech is paramount to public safety, implying that the government’s interest in maintaining this safety outweighed the constitutional right of speech.
“Social media companies and government officials must have open communication in order to ensure the safety of Americans online,” said Mayes. “A pillar of the U.S. government is to ensure the safety and wellbeing of its citizens. The lower court’s decision impedes on this protection and means federal, state and local officials cannot contact social media companies about dangerous online content.”
In an appeal led by New York, the 19 other attorneys general hail from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.
The coalition’s brief characterized speech control as “content moderation,” and argued that the federal government should maintain the ability to do so since it’s been doing it “[s]ince the advent of social media.”
“[I]n the experience of amici States, information-sharing and dialogue have not been coercive, but rather, helpful in ensuring that social media companies make fully informed decision about their own content moderation policies,” stated the brief.
The Louisiana Western District Court issued a preliminary injunction last month that barred the federal government from colluding with social media companies to regulate speech on their platforms.
Arizona leadership from both parties have either called for or participated in censorship.
Last March, Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer worked with the federal government on tactics to control online speech. Richer met with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Cybersecurity Advisory Committee (CSAC) Misinformation & Disinformation (MDM) Subcommittee, all under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Last September, Maricopa County rolled out a press pass program to control which outlets and reporters could gain access to government proceedings and property. Last November, the county launched a disinformation center and further limited press access. In April, Maricopa County paid a $175,000 settlement for denying press credentials to a reporter under their press pass program because his work didn’t constitute truth in their eyes.
This past March, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) asked the Federal Reserve, Treasury Department, and the Federal Deposit and Information Corporation (FDIC) whether they could work with social media companies to censor information in order to prevent a run on the banks.
Gov. Katie Hobbs, while in her former capacity as secretary of state, used the Center for Internet Security (CIS) as a middle man of sorts to censor online speech. Although requests were made for an investigation into the relationship, the transition of power in the attorney general’s office effectively made those requests dead on arrival.
Arizona government workers have also been trained by the Aspen Institute: the liberal think tank behind the coordinated cover-up of the Hunter Biden laptop story. The institute launched its first Arizona-based leadership program last year with startup funding from Walmart.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Republican Attorney General candidate Abe Hamadeh has taken his appeal for a new trial to the Arizona Supreme Court.
In the petition filed on Thursday, Hamadeh’s team argued that the state’s judicial branch had thus far failed to provide timely decisions in such a time-sensitive case. The trial court took 161 days to issue its order denying Hamadeh’s motion since the initial January filing, which included over 60 days for the judge to set oral argument, and another 60 days for the judge to issue his denial.
“Pointedly, the parties’ rights to speedy decisions have been grossly and repeatedly violated,” stated the petition. “Given the urgency to resolve all of these matters and the lack of a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy, a special action to this Court is warranted.”
Hamadeh declared that the public had the right to a full, unfettered review of the evidence. According to his petition, that amounts to “hundreds, if not thousands” of uncounted votes that would heavily weigh in his favor and, ultimately, determine him the rightful winner of this past election.
“Our justice system cannot tolerate the government withholding evidence,” tweeted Hamadeh. “Count the votes.”
🚨🚨BREAKING🚨🚨
We just filed a Special Action with the Arizona Supreme Court asking for a new trial regarding the November 2022 election.
Our justice system cannot tolerate the government withholding evidence. Count the votes. pic.twitter.com/hmqdq9lasE
This evidence, according to Thursday’s petition, indicates critical vote count discrepancies that undermine the integrity of the recount result’s 280-vote lead that declared Democratic opponent Kris Mayes the victor. This included the allegation that machine tabulators misread valid votes as undervotes.
Last month, the trial court rejected Hamadeh’s bid to further undertake the process and exploration of alleged vote count discrepancies uncovered through the recount.
Hamadeh filed a motion for a new trial in January based on alleged evidence of uncounted votes discovered through the recount process. In Thursday’s petition, Hamadeh counsel explained it wasn’t possible to obtain this evidence warranting a new trial until after the late-December evidentiary hearing.
“[T]he newly discovered evidence was information and data that government bodies not only failed to disclose but that they also wrongfully withheld,” stated the petition. “[S]tate and county officials used the power and purse of the government to take a substantive position in an election contest and to actively tip the scales of justice by withholding public records and concealing information that validated the vote count issues Petitioners raised at trial.”
The petition further argued that the trial court’s denial was due to a lack of procedural clarity in election contests, not lack of evidence.
“If elections in Arizona are to truly be free and equal, Arizonans must be assured that government bodies cannot use resource and information asymmetry to favor one candidate over another with impunity,” concluded the petition.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Up to 62 percent of Arizona’s public-school districts and charters have no written plan for maintaining current operations once relief monies run out next September.
Most districts’ lack of preparedness was revealed in an auditor general special report issued last week. 55 percent of those districts and charters revealed the absence of a plan in an auditor general report, with another seven percent failing to respond to the auditor general’s request for a written plan.
The COVID-19 relief funds presented an overall boon to public school districts and charters: from 2020 onward, district fund balances increased by 34 percent ($1.13 billion) and charter fund balances increased by 115 percent ($310 million).
However, the true amount of funding spent or remaining remains a mystery for over one-third of the schools. 213 districts and charters (36 percent) reported relief monies contradicting their reported fund balance.
The auditor general specifically named Gilbert Unified School District (GUSD) and Portable Practice Education Preparation (PPEP) for reporting to have spent all $41.5 million and $4.8 million of their relief funds, respectively. However, the auditor general found that GUSD had used $30.4 million for continuing costs, $24.7 million for salaries and benefits, and a fund balance increase. The auditor general also found that PPEP had only reported $2 million spent for employment retention salaries and benefits with student count declines, and a fund balance increase.
Due to the lack of transparency, the auditor general promised to add additional fund balance/reserve reporting to district and charter fiscal year 2023 annual financial reports and fiscal year 2025 budget forms.
Additionally, 9 districts and 16 charters haven’t corrected their cited noncompliance with statutory reporting requirements. In January, that number was 21 districts and 64 charters. 27 districts and 26 charters didn’t submit required follow-up reporting.
Districts and charters reported spending $2.2 billion of the $4.6 billion in relief funding through last June. The Arizona Department of Education (ADE) only spent 21 percent of its discretionary relief funding as of last June, leaving a remainder of $322 million (79 percent).
The district that received the most relief funding was Mesa Unified School District at $291.6 million, followed by Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) at $289.15 million, Phoenix Union High School District at $182.21 million, Cartwright Elementary School District at $124.76 million, Washington Elementary School District at $119.51 million, and Alhambra Elementary School District at $103.74 million.
Details on school expenditures using COVID relief funds remain murky at best. While the auditor general successfully categorized a number of expenditure types for schools — maintaining operations, mental and medical health, personal protective equipment, technology, school facilities, and food service — there remained the “miscellaneous” or “other” category of expenditures, totaling nearly $121.4 million already spent and over $196.45 million planned for future use.
“Miscellaneous” spending on classroom salaries and benefits totaled $21.66 million, and $23.63 million for other classroom spending. Non-classroom salaries and benefits classified as “miscellaneous” totaled $4.77 million, and $70.8 million for other “miscellaneous” non-classroom expenditures.
As AZ Free News reported last year, districts like Mesa Public Schools (MPS) refused to divulge how millions were issued in expenditures behind labels like “indirect costs,” “other,” and “etc.” MPS claimed it couldn’t produce records that didn’t exist.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Democratic leadership and Biden officials split with their go-to election lawyer, Marc Elias; a 2021 Supreme Court loss from Arizona served as a major catalyst for the breakup. In that case, Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, the court effectively gutted the federal Voting Rights Act by upholding Arizona’s restrictions on out-of-precinct voting and ballot harvesting.
Although Elias and Democratic leaders parted ways in April, it wasn’t until this past week that details of the split came to light.
According to unnamed sources who spoke with Axios, Elias went rogue in the Biden administration’s eyes: filing lawsuits without notice or consent, with Biden leaders only learning of them via social media or mainstream reporting; racking up large bills, such as the $20+ million payout from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Biden campaign for defending the 65 lawsuits challenging the 2020 election results; and public criticism of a bipartisan election bill crafted by key Biden leadership and Democrats.
Elias’ tactics also differed from the reported desires of Biden leadership. While Elias viewed all fights as worth taking up, Biden officials wanted to be more selective.
Elias was a longtime legal bulldog for the DNC. In 2016, Elias served as general counsel for the 2016 campaign of presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. Following Clinton’s loss, Elias served as a principal player in the Russiagate scandal. As Clinton’s general counsel, Elias billed for his hire of the opposition research firm, Fusion GPS, that created the Steele dossier: the Russian collusion allegations against former President Donald Trump leaked to Buzzfeed ten days before Trump’s inauguration that became a shadow over Trump’s entire presidency.
In 2020, Elias’ work resulted in key reforms to election law that lent to Democratic victories and the defense of challenges to President Joe Biden’s election.
As AZ Free News reported last November, Elias’ firm launched in 2021, Elias Law Group, was a listed address for the Black Lives Matter headquarters. The firm stated in the latest BLM’s IRS filing that it maintains all of BLM’s books and records. According to Federal Elections Commission (FEC) records, the Black Lives Matter PAC paid Elias’ firm over $14,800 from January to December of last year. Per their latest FEC filing on Monday, BLM has paid Elias’ firm nearly $3,000 so far this year.
One of the other main recipients of the BLM PAC’s disbursements is Premier Political Compliance founded and led by the former compliance director Christine Neville of the Perkins Coie firm, where Elias served as partner prior to launching his own firm. Both Neville and Elias departed Perkins Coie to launch their respective firms in 2021.
Elias has increasingly positioned himself as a public figure on the topic of election law and, as evident by working with BLM, other social issues. He has appeared in numerous interviews and maintained a consistent social media presence.
Last year, however, Elias deleted all tweets prior to April 4 without explanation. Around that time, federal investigators began to close in on those behind Russiagate. About a month before Elias purged his Twitter, the FEC fined the DNC and Clinton $113,000 for misrepresenting payments for opposition research used to create Russiagate.
Biden’s former chief of staff and re-election campaign leader, Ron Klain, said that relations between Elias and Biden leaders remain amicable despite the split.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
