Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) has sued the Washington Elementary School District (WESD), alleging unconstitutional discrimination against Christians.
ADF filed the lawsuit on Thursday against WESD, claiming that the district’s recent decision to end a contract with Arizona Christian University (ACU) due to its religious beliefs on biblical marriage and sexuality constituted unlawful discrimination.
In a press release, ADF Senior Counsel David Cortman, claimed that WESD violated both the U.S. Constitution and state law by ending its contract with ACU based on the university’s religious beliefs.
“Washington Elementary School District officials are causing irreparable harm to ACU every day they force it to choose between its religious beliefs and partnering with the area’s public schools,” said Cortman.
AZ Free News first broke the story about WESD’s alleged discrimination last week, documenting how WESD Governing Board Member Tamillia Valenzuela, a self-identified neurodivergent queer furry, led a crusade to purge Christians from WESD.
Valenzuela said during the board’s Feb. 23 meeting that ACU’s mission to prioritize the teachings of Jesus Christ weren’t aligned with WESD priorities. WESD had contracted with ACU to have university students complete their student teaching and practical coursework at one of WESD’s campuses. All five of the governing board members voted to terminate WESD’s contract with ACU. 16 ACU students were involved with WESD at the time.
In January, Valenzuela also condemned the district for allowing Grand Canyon University (GCU) students to serve as interns with WESD. GCU is a private Christian university. Unlike with ACU, WESD opted to maintain its contract with GCU.
The Arizona Department of Education (ADE) condemned WESD’s decision to terminate its contract with ACU.
“Terminating a contract based on religious practices is unacceptable. The teachers from ACU sign a contract that adheres to the district’s guidelines, and it’s ill-advised to cut off an educator pipeline as our schools struggle with staffing,” stated ADE.
Terminating a contract based on religious practices is unacceptable. The teachers from ACU sign a contract that adheres to the district's guidelines, and it's ill-advised to cut off an educator pipeline as our schools struggle with staffing. https://t.co/6Y9Z24VXtK
— Arizona Department of Education (@azedschools) March 9, 2023
Social justice activists rallied around Valenzuela, issuing a call to action for community members to wear cat ears to Thursday’s board meeting.
Earlier this week, Democratic legislators also issued their support for Valenzuela. The Democrats claimed that criticisms of WESD and Valenzuela were coordinated by Republicans and intended to “demonize and demoralize school leaders, LGBTQ+ students, and our public school system.” The Democrats also claimed that criticisms of the district and Valenzuela would result in violence against officials and even students.
The Democrats’ statement didn’t address the concerns that WESD’s actions resulted in potentially unlawful religious discrimination against Christians.
Press Release: Senate Democrats Extend Support to the Washington Elementary School District & Board Member Tamillia Valenzuela pic.twitter.com/vhb0FBxGHe
— Arizona Senate Democrats (@AZSenateDems) March 7, 2023
Save Our Schools Arizona (SOSAZ), an anti-school choice teachers’ union activist group, helped get Valenzuela elected to WESD’s board last year.
Had a wonderful morning collecting signatures to get Tamillia Valenzuela on the ballot for Washington Elementary SD! 🌻❤️ We desperately need more diversity & representation on our local school boards! Can you chip in $5, $10, $20 for Tamillia today? https://t.co/NYvuKHcA9Vpic.twitter.com/IrmpjcOQxK
— Beth Lewis, SOSAZ 🆘 🏜🎓 (@AZBethLewis) May 14, 2022
During Thursday’s board meeting, Valenzuela claimed that lawmakers were bullying LGBTQ+ students by not accepting their lifestyles. Valenzuela claimed that realizing alternative sexualities constituted the fullest realization of humanity.
“There is a difference between acceptance and tolerance, and members of our society have been merely accepted, merely tolerated for their existence. We have watched as our children have been bullied for having autonomy,” said Valenzuela. “Know what Christ’s teachings were: it was love, it was acceptance. It was not cursing people out on Facebook and Twitter, it was not spreading misinformation.”
Valenzuela’s remarks elicited a mixed chorus of clapping and boos.
Watch the board meeting below:
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Planned Parenthood of Arizona (PPAZ) expanded its services last week to include vasectomies after months in limbo awaiting court battles over the state’s existing abortion laws.
The medical director of PPAZ, Jill Gibson, revealed that vasectomy requests increased following the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruling last June in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturning Roe v. Wade.
“We just started hearing that these patients really wanted to step up at this time,” said Gibson. “They recognized that, with their ongoing protected bodily autonomy, they still had a right to participate in preventing pregnancy in ways that maybe didn’t have the same importance as before the Dobbs decision.”
Planned Parenthood’s Southern Arizona Regional Health Center in Tucson will be the first clinic to offer these expanded services. PPAZ plans to roll out these services to other locations in the near future, with the Phoenix area slated to receive them next.
Gibson told The Arizona Republic that PPAZ hadn’t offered vasectomies for at least a decade. The renewed service costs $750 without insurance; PPAZ won’t offer reversals of these procedures.
@pparizona now offers vasectomies! #Vasectomy is a safe & extremely effective form of permanent #birthcontrol. We offer the no-scalpel, no-needle vasectomy procedure.
— Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc. (@PPArizona) March 1, 2023
PPAZ expanded their services despite the move of Arizona’s major cities to effectively decriminalize abortion. Tucson, Phoenix, and, most recently, Flagstaff all passed resolutions opposing the SCOTUS decision and encouraging their local law enforcement to deprioritize violations of abortion law.
Additionally, both the governor and attorney general support opposition to any restrictions on abortion. Gov. Katie Hobbs said on the campaign trail last October that she wouldn’t put any limits on abortion, even up to birth. Attorney General Kris Mayes has repeatedly promised to not uphold the law and go so far as to prevent county attorneys from enforcing abortion law, even as recently as last week.
State law currently bans abortions after 15 weeks’ gestation. The pre-statehood law banning abortion completely was nullified in the Arizona Court of Appeals in December after it declared the law unenforceable, though the court refused to repeal the law.
While PPAZ has modified its business model to offer more services, other abortion providers have resorted to crowdfunding to stay afloat. Desert Star Family Planning, an independent Phoenix abortion clinic, has requested $80,000 to remain open.
They have raised over $9,200 so far from just over 100 donors since launching the crowdfunding effort in early January.
— Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc. (@PPArizona) March 6, 2023
Brittany Fonteno, the president of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona (PPAZ), said in a January interview that despite the ruling nullifying the pre-statehood abortion ban, lawmakers were infringing on constitutional rights, which she claimed included abortion.
“They don’t want people to know what their rights are, they don’t want people to be able to make their own decisions about their bodies,” said Fonteno.
Attorney General Kris Mayes revealed over the weekend that her office has been encouraging pharmacies to give out abortion pills.
Mayes issued the remarks in an interview with MSNBC last Saturday discussing a multistate lawsuit against the FDA for imposing allegedly burdensome regulation on mifepristone, a drug used for abortions. Joining Mayes on the live interview were Attorneys General Kathy Jennings (Delaware) and Ellen Rosenblum (Oregon).
“We are one of those states who have actually encouraged Walgreens, and CVS, and other pharmacies to continue to offer the medication despite that pressure by Republican AGs,” said Mayes.
The attorney general criticized GOP attorneys general in other states, specifically Texas, for opposing abortion.
“You see that effort by some of those GOP attorneys general to continue to try to limit the access of women to abortion in every possible way they can find,” said Mayes. “Despite the fact that Roe was overturned, and it was sent back to the states, they’re still making these efforts in states to limit a woman’s access to abortion. And that’s why actions by Democratic AGs largely are so important. We’re going to continue to fight going forward.”
A total of 12 states joined the lawsuit against the FDA: Rosenblum and Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson led the lawsuit, joined by Nevada, Delaware, Illinois, Connecticut, Colorado, Vermont, New Mexico, and Rhode Island. The states requested a preliminary injunction to halt the restrictions on mifepristone, which require that health care providers be specially certified by the drug distributor in advance, patients and providers be willing to sign an agreement certifying that the patient has decided to take drugs to end their pregnancy, and pharmacies be specially certified to fill a prescription and dispense the drug.
Mayes claimed in a press release on the FDA lawsuit that mifepristone is safe. The FDA restrictions, specifically a risk evaluation mitigation strategy (REMS), ensure that mifepristone’s benefits outweigh any risks. Congressional Research Service (CRS) noted that the FDA is looking to roll back these REMS regulations.
During the MSNBC interview, Mayes also revealed that she plans to set up a “reproductive rights” unit in her office. She further added that she wouldn’t prosecute anyone for providing an abortion, even if they broke state law, and would do everything in her power to prevent county attorneys from enforcing abortion law. Mayes noted that she’s able to defy law because she and Gov. Katie Hobbs are Democrats.
“You do have a state like Arizona that has a Republican legislature, thankfully we have a Democratic attorney general and a Democratic governor now who will stop that kind of thing,” said Mayes. “I have been clear here in Arizona that we will never prosecute a woman, a doctor, a midwife, a nurse for abortion. But we have 15 county attorneys in Arizona and I’ve been clear also that I will fight any effort by a county attorney to prosecute.”
Mayes’ pledge to not prosecute aligns with her campaign promise to oppose abortion law.
As your next Attorney General, I will absolutely not allow the arrest or imprisonment of our reproductive healthcare providers, including doctors, nurses, PAs, midwives, pharmacists or others. This is outrageous.
Mayes claimed abortion is a constitutional right, and indicated that she would take legal action to fight current abortion restrictions. Arizona law currently bans abortion after 15 weeks.
“We are prepared to take action in support of those constitutional rights,” said Mayes.
At least three cities have effectively decriminalized abortion: Tucson, Phoenix, and, most recently, Flagstaff.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Last week, Gov. Katie Hobbs’ veto streak killed a bill with strong bipartisan support. It was one of the 15 bills vetoed by the governor so far: SB1184, SB1248, SB1523, SB1524, SB1525, SB1526, SB1527, SB1528, SB1529, SB1530, SB1531, SB1532, SB1533, SB1534, and SB1535.
The bill that earned strong bipartisan support was SB1248, which originated from HB2529 by State Rep. T.J. Shope (R-LD08). SB1248 would’ve repealed the mandate for regulated health professions seeking an expanded scope of practice to undergo a statutory sunrise review. It passed 21-9 in the Senate, with five Democrats and all Republicans voting for it; in the House, it passed 42-18, with 12 Democrats joining all Republicans in voting for it. Hobbs vetoed the bill last week.
Talonya Adams, the woman twice vindicated in court for racial discrimination faced under Hobbs, said the legislature’s override of Hobbs’ veto “jeopardized her relevancy.”
“A principled [government] comprised of co-equal branches will eventually check a branch that exploits its power, with a [two-thirds] veto override,” said Adams.
.@GovernorHobbs obsession w/the #veto stamp is an unforced error that has jeopardized her relevancy.
A principled govt comprised of co-equal branches will eventually check a branch that exploits its power, with a 2/3rds veto override.
— Talonya Adams 🇺🇸 (personal acct) (@TalonyaAdams) March 5, 2023
So far, the legislature hasn’t overridden any of Hobbs’ vetoes.
In a letter explaining her decision to veto SB1248, Hobbs argued that fixing part of the problem with scope of practice expansion wasn’t sufficient for her since the government couldn’t ensure that these expansions would result in “equitable access to care.” She argued that the legislature needed to ensure equity in health care.
“Without the sunrise application process, provider groups could fast-track their priorities through the legislative process without adequate attention to why the change is necessary, or if it will impact communities with the greatest needs,” wrote Hobbs.
The same day that she vetoed the heavily-bipartisan legislation, Hobbs pledged to work with Democratic leadership to “find real solutions” to current state issues.
Looking forward to working with you to find real solutions to our state's toughest challenges and to build an #AZforEveryone! https://t.co/4KLzRGxlR6
It wasn’t until last week that Hobbs allowed bills to pass unscathed by her veto stamp: SB1103 and SB1171. Hobbs said she signed these two bills because they were “good,” indicating that all other past legislation wasn’t.
— Governor Katie Hobbs (@GovernorHobbs) March 4, 2023
SB1103 from Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14) allows the legislative body of a municipality or county to authorize administrative personnel to approve construction plans without public hearing. The intent of the legislation was to expedite home construction approvals in an effort to counter the ongoing housing shortage.
SB1103 passed 59-0 in the House and 25-3 in the Senate. Only Minority Leader Raquel Terán (D-LD26), Minority Caucus Chair Leah Alston (D-LD05), and State Sen. Anna Hernandez (D-LD24) voted against it.
JUST IN- Senate Republicans are working to cut the red tape that's responsible for slowing home construction and contributing to our housing shortage in Arizona.
SB1171 from State Sen. J.D. Mesnard (R-LD13) aligned Arizona tax law with changes made to the federal tax law by Congress. The legislation passed without any opposition in either the House or Senate.
The state is facing a lawsuit filed Monday over an alleged violation of state law with the early ballot signature verification process outlined in the secretary of state’s Election Procedures Manual (EPM). The plaintiffs requested special action relief due to an alleged lack of an equally plain, speedy, and adequate legal alternative remedy for their grievance.
Statute requires that envelope signatures match those on the voter’s registration record. If not, the county recorder must contact the voter and confirm that the voter personally completed and signed the early ballot affidavit.
However, the current EPM — written by Gov. Katie Hobbs in her former capacity as the secretary of state — instructs county recorders to validate early ballot affidavits if they determine the signature matches any signature in any election-related document available to them. The lawsuit argued that the EPM’s allowed materials aren’t legally considered “registration records” and therefore not lawful comparative references for conducting signature validation.
“[T]he signatures encompassed within the EPM’s errant instruction cannot be used either to effectuate the registration of an individual or to lawfully amend an existing registration,” stated the lawsuit.
Arizona law doesn’t explicitly define the term “registration record.” However, the lawsuit argued that the natural understanding of the term relates to a document effectuating or amending voter registration that contains voter-supplied information required by federal and Arizona law, as well as a signed certification attesting to the provided information.
“A properly executed and submitted registration form, as may be amended and updated by the registrant from time to time, ‘constitute[s] an official public record of the registration of the elector,’” stated the lawsuit. “Accordingly, the ‘record of the registration of the elector — i.e., her “registration record,” consists of the complete and facially valid federal and state forms submitted by that individual, and any amendments thereto made by the submission of new forms, an early ballot request form, a response to an Active Early Voting List notice, or a provisional ballot envelope.”
Citizens may register to vote using forms provided by the federal or state government; both forms require full name, residential address, date of birth, a government-issued ID number, political party affiliation if applicable, and a signed, sworn attestation of eligibility (including U.S. citizenship). An Arizona voter registration form also requires telephone number, location of birth, occupation, father’s last name or mother’s maiden name, age, proof of citizenship, and statements affirming residency, status of any other existing registration, and any absence of disqualifying felony conviction.
The lawsuit stated that the named defendant, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, has gone beyond his lawful jurisdiction and gone against statute by upholding Hobbs’ EPM. Fontes refused to heed lawmakers’ requests to reject Hobbs’ EPM earlier this year.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC), a nonprofit social welfare corporation specializing in limited government that includes election integrity; Restoring Integrity and Trust in Elections, a Virginia-based nonprofit social welfare corporation specializing in election integrity; and Dwight Kadar, a Yavapai County resident and elector.
AFEC President Scot Mussi told AZ Free News that Hobbs’ EPM essentially rewrote state law to make invalid voting easier.
“The current election procedures manual adopted by the Secretary of State has rewritten state law regarding signature verification for mail-in ballots,” said Mussi. “The result is a process that invites questionable methods and opportunities for abuse during the signature review process. It’s time for the courts to bring this illegal EPM practice to a halt.”
Early ballot voters aren’t required to prove their identity through documents or additional personal information, like a birthdate or Social Security number. The sole validator for early ballot voters is the affidavit form signature on the exterior of the envelope housing the ballot. By signing the affidavit form, a voter attests under penalty of perjury that he has not voted and will not vote in any other jurisdiction, that he has registered to vote in the correct county, that he understands that multiple voting is a felony, and that he personally voted the ballot enclosed and signed the affidavit.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
