Former Arizona Senate President Karen Fann said Rep. Ruben Gallego’s (D-AZ-03) support for abortion was a crime.
Gallego lamented that Arizona could limit abortions on Monday, which marked 50 years since the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decision legalizing abortion.
“Today, we should have been celebrating the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Instead, extremist officials ripped away the right to choose, leaving women in Arizona and too many other states without basic reproductive freedom,” wrote Gallego. “But make no mistake: this fight isn’t over.”
SCOTUS determined that the Roe v. Wade decision invented a constitutional right based on the “right to privacy”: a legal theory created by the late SCOTUS Justice Louis Brandeis in the 1890s. Brandeis’ invention informed the landmark decision Griswold v. Connecticut, the precursor to Roe v. Wade.
The state currently has a ban on abortions after 15 weeks’ gestation in place, enacted last year. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled last month that the state may not prosecute doctors under the pre-statehood ban on abortion. However, the court didn’t repeal the law. Instead, the appeals court clarified that the later laws, including the 15-week ban enacted last year, were the standard to follow.
State abortion laws also limit abortion access in other ways. Telemedicine health care may not be used to obtain abortion pills. However, the state doesn’t have bans on funding travel and procedure costs for women obtaining abortions outside the state past the 15-week period.
The SCOTUS decision overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked early last May. SCOTUS announced last week in a 20-page report that they were unable to identify the source of the leak. Politico published the draft opinion; it appears they’re unwilling to reveal their source.
Gov. Katie Hobbs, at the time the Secretary of State, responded to the draft leak last year with an expletive railing against those she perceived to be ruling the state.
“F**k the patriarchy,” tweeted Hobbs.
The draft leak incited mass protests and riots at the Arizona Capitol and nationwide. An activist group with the University of Arizona (UArizona) and Planned Parenthood ties petitioned to make abortion a constitutional right in the state — an effort which ultimately failed.
In a Sunday statement, President Joe Biden called on Congress to codify the legalization of abortion. Biden characterized abortion as a “constitutional right.” The president also promised a Presidential Memorandum ensuring a right to abortive medications, which Vice President Kamala Harris announced during a visit to Florida. Ahead of the announcement, Harris declared that those opposed to abortion were “extremist,” and in violation of women’s constitutional and reproductive rights.
“We are looking at a situation where extremist so-called leaders in states around our country are depriving women of the right to have access to reproductive health care,” stated Harris.
On the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, I’m in Tallahassee, Florida to discuss the fight for reproductive rights. Tune in. https://t.co/1cX4gFt96L
Arizona’s three public universities have this to say to potential employees: those opposed to modern diversity ideology need not apply.
As of last fall, Arizona State University (ASU) required diversity statements from approximately 81 percent of job applicants; Northern Arizona University (NAU) required diversity statements from 73 percent of job applicants; and the University of Arizona (UArizona) required diversity statements from 28 percent of job applicants. This data comes from a report issued earlier this month by the Goldwater Institute, a right-leaning public policy think tank.
The Goldwater Institute noted that universities both in Arizona and nationwide have even gone so far as to swap the traditional cover letter requirement with a diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) statement. The universities also encouraged applicants to incorporate critical race theory (CRT) terminology in written portions of their applications.
Though diversity efforts were long underway at these universities, the death of George Floyd in 2020 accelerated their progress at the urging of students, activists, and community members.
For UArizona and NAU, these diversity commitment disclosures are part of their Diversity Strategic Plan (DSP); ASU also implements a diversity plan, though they don’t refer to it as a “DSP.” These diversity plans are executed through independent administrative offices. For UArizona, it’s the Office of Diversity & Inclusion (ODI). For NAU, it’s the Center for University Access and Inclusion; they also have a dedicated “Diversity Fellow” or “Diversity Commission” to oversee various units at the university, which they call a larger effort to make NAU a “True Diversity University.” For ASU, it’s the Office of Inclusive Excellence.
UArizona asked applicants to issue a 500-word minimum personal statement describing their personal philosophy and future commitment to inclusivity.
Last September, NAU advanced its DEI efforts by requiring applicants to issue a “diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice” (DEIJ) statement. As part of this statement, applicants had to express comprehension of intersectionality, a commitment incorporating diversity ideology in the classroom and in research, and diversity-related community service and activities.
At NAU, we are committed to fostering a diverse and inclusive community. Beginning on June 19, 2023, NAU will observe #Juneteenth as a paid university holiday. pic.twitter.com/JzK21ILFBx
In one example given concerning ASU, the university asked postdoctoral fellow applicants to write a “diversity statement”: how their past or potential contributions to DEI efforts would advance the university’s diversity plan.
Research from @Forbes has found ASU to be the top employer in the state of Arizona.
70,000 U.S. employees were surveyed on topics such as working conditions, salary, the potential for growth and diversity.https://t.co/91ankShlde
The universities’ push for commitment to diversity ideology extends beyond faculty. As AZ Free News reported earlier this month, the UArizona College of Medicine requires students to complete diversity training, in addition to faculty and staff. UArizona is also attempting to make law school admissions more equitable by pushing for an alternative to the LSAT.
UArizona has consistently ranked high for most DEI staff.
The University of Arizona's new spaceflight training programs aim to develop classes that will enable the future of inclusive space travel. https://t.co/UQbajOrrJ7
Last May, NAU proposed that students take a 12-credit general studies program focused on diversity. Backlash prompted the university to hide the proposal behind a login page.
“The 12 credits of diversity requirements are unprecedented and puts [sic] NAU at the forefront of higher education,” stated NAU.
In 2021, ASU launched a DEI curriculum for K-5 students through its K-12 online school, ASU Prep Digital.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Attorneys siding with embattled GOP gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake are insisting that Maricopa County’s mass Election Day failures were purposeful.
Mark Sonnenklar, a roving attorney with the Republican National Committee (RNC), told AZ Free News that the county experienced few of the issues during the primary election that suddenly metastasized on Election Day: faulty printer settings and incorrect ballot paper size.
Sonnenklar said that out of the 11 vote centers he visited on the primary election day, only one had major problems with tabulation: the North Phoenix Baptist Church location.
“My theory is that the county was on a trial run for the general. I believe in my heart, my gut tells me, that they planned to create this chaos on general Election Day,” said Sonnenklar. “They were testing methods to create that kind of chaos during the primary. That’s when they were figuring out how to do that.”
None have produced evidence that the Election Day failures were intentional.
Although tabulators were the initial suspect for the mass Election Day failures across the county, it turned out to be administrative errors prior to tabulation. Sonnenklar pointed out that it wouldn’t make sense for these issues to multiply due to the sheer amount of in-person voters, since printer settings and paper size wouldn’t be affected.
On Election Day, Sonnenklar said he witnessed mass tabulator issues at six of the 10 vote centers. The widespread failures were so pervasive that Sonnenklar, alarmed, reached out to other roving attorneys across the county to gather their experiences while fresh. Many reported witnessing the same failures, which lasted around eight hours and forced thousands of affected voters to cast ballots into a “door 3” slot to be manually tabulated later.
Maricopa County largely dismissed voter concerns, assuring that door 3 ballots would be tabulated properly and opting to push off a review of the chaos for a post-certification investigation. An estimated 71 sites (44 percent) out of the 211 vote centers were impacted (Lake’s attorneys claim that 132 sites were impacted, or 59 percent).
“I was receiving calls from everyone I knew in the Valley,” said Sonnenklar. “I knew there was a massive problem.”
Poll worker testimonies of election machine issues leading up to Election Day, given during the election certification in late November, aligned with Sonnenklar’s evidence gathered. Similar testimonies were also given during the Maricopa County Superior Court hearing in Lake’s lawsuit challenging the 2022 election results.
Sonnenklar stated that there were at least three primary causes of the tabulator malfunctions: timing marks and small white specks, which were uncovered before Lake’s trial, and incorrect ballot paper size, which was revealed during the trial.
Sonnenklar claimed that he spoke with election officials at various vote centers about the tabulator issue. He cited one example from a Mountain View vote center inspector who reportedly showed him that the timing marks weren’t printing correctly. The inspector backed up her claim with nearly 200 ballots fed into box 3 with faulty timing marks.
“She was definitive. She said that the problem was the timing marks on the ballot not printing dark enough,” said Sonnenklar. “She had 175 ballots that she had taken out of box 3. She showed me every one of those ballots and they were gray, they weren’t black. They hadn’t printed dark enough. All 175 of the ballots rejected by the tabulators had gray timing marks instead of black timing marks.”
As for the white specks: Sonnenklar said that another poll worker noticed that the bubbles indicating the chosen candidates weren’t filled in completely. They appeared to have little white specks where the printer failed to fill them in.
“He asked the voter if they would be willing to color in the white spec with the felt-tipped Pentel pens,” said Sonnenklar. “Every single time that the voter did that, it went through the tabulator just fine.”
The third issue, the ballot paper size, was discussed by Lake’s witness Clay Parikh, an information security officer, during the trial. Parikh testified that ballots from six of the six vote centers he inspected the day before Election Day printed 20-inch ballots on 19-inch paper. Sonnenklar noted that these six vote centers were selected randomly, and expressed concern that this represented a rate of 100 percent of vote centers being problematic.
Maricopa County didn’t dispute the erroneous ballot paper size, noting that it was a recurring issue over the last few years. However, they did dispute the number of affected vote centers (three versus Parikh’s sworn six) and pressed Parikh to admit that these ballots could be duplicated and counted. Parikh noted that those reprinted ballots could be counted, if done correctly. Sonnenklar questioned why the county didn’t solve the problem completely.
“The county maintained that the 19-inch paper on 20-inch ballots only occurred at three vote centers and that they knew about that problem from three prior elections,” said Sonnenklar. “Bottom line is, we think there were multiple reasons why the tabulators failed. In one case it was printers not printed properly. And in another case it was 19-inch paper printing 20-inch ballots.”
Sonnenklar insisted that the court wrongly dismissed Lake’s case because the judge, Peter Thompson, failed to consider whether the affected voters could’ve changed the outcome of the election. He said the judge only considered one legal standard, whether fraud occurred, but didn’t address if there was enough misconduct to render the election outcome “uncertain.” Sonnenklar contended that the judge created a high legal standard inconsistent with legal precedent.
Lake lost by over 17,100 votes, around the same number of voters affected by mass Election Day failures. Though this margin may seem slim, another race was even closer. Hamadeh, also contesting his election, lost by just over 500 votes.
“We just had to prove that the number of votes in the election could have changed the outcome of the election. I don’t think the defendants ever countered that,” said Sonnenklar. “On the legal front, I think we have a very strong grounds for appeal here. I think we made a pretty good case for overturning the decision of the trial court.”
Sonnenklar will be filing a reply brief to the county and Hobbs’ responsive briefs.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Gov. Katie Hobbs assumed that the California mass shooting responsible for 10 deaths on the Chinese New Year was a hate crime against Asians. The suspected shooter was an Asian man, later found dead from self-inflicted gunshot wounds in a white van.
Though Hobbs apparently was unaware of the shooter’s race when she issued her Sunday morning statement, the governor assumed that the perpetrator was a non-Asian man committing a hate crime.
“These mass shootings can’t continue, and Arizona stands united with the AAPI community against hate,” wrote Hobbs.
Devastated by the news out of Monterey Park. My heart breaks for the victims, their families & friends, and all those impacted by this gun violence during Lunar New Year celebrations These mass shootings can't continue, and Arizona stands united w/ the AAPI community against hate
GOP legislators criticized Hobbs’ response as a knee-jerk default to perceived racism.
Gun violence, racism, whatever…..
Politicize in 3,2,1 and go…
How about we wait a few days and let the facts come out and then make an educated statement. Would that be so hard? 🤦♂️ #Shamefulhttps://t.co/Ge6Gw4sO3l
Law enforcement issued a description of the suspected shooter on Sunday morning: a 5’10”, 150 lb Asian man, approximately 30 to 50 years old. The shooter killed 10 and wounded 10 after opening fire in a Monterey Park, California ballroom late Saturday night.
Breaking: The Los Angeles Sheriff's Office has released a photograph of the #MontereyPark mass shooting suspect. He is a middle-aged Asian male. Leftist activists and Democrats had immediately blamed the deadly shooting, which killed at least 10, on white supremacy & racism. pic.twitter.com/WveyKZEQ3a
Police believe that the suspected shooter attempted to open fire at a second dance hall less than half an hour later, but those inside took the gun away from the suspect.
The LA County Sheriff says that the Monterey Park suspect has been described as an Asian male pic.twitter.com/dSh690qJ3E
This isn’t the first time that Hobbs falsely claimed that a crime was motivated by hate. In October, after Hobbs’ campaign office was broken into, Hobbs’ campaign manager Nicole DeMont accused the perpetrator of being a political activist radicalized by her Republican opponent, Kari Lake.
“The threats against Arizonans attempting to exercise their constitutional rights and their attacks on elected officials are the direct result of a concerted campaign of lies and intimidation,” state Hobbs.
In reality, the burglar turned out to be a 36-year-old homeless illegal immigrant.
Though Hobbs has been outspoken about crimes that were or were perceived to be racially-motivated against non-white individuals, Hobbs has remained silent on hate crimes against white individuals. Hobbs didn’t issue any public statements regarding the Christmas parade massacre that killed six in Waukesha, Wisconsin in November 2021.
We lost ten beautiful lives yesterday in an act of white supremacy. My heart goes out to the victims and their families.
We must address the rise in racially motivated extremism. Every American deserves to be safe in their homes, schools, supermarkets, and everywhere else.
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.
