by Matthew Holloway | Aug 31, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The legal fight between Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap and the County Board of Supervisors escalated Monday. America First Legal filed two motions on Heap’s behalf, and Arizona’s legislative leaders submitted an amicus brief supporting him.
In a press release, the County Recorder’s Office stated that the motions filed by America First Legal “reveal how the County Board of Supervisors and County Attorney Rachel Mitchell have weaponized county government against duly-elected Recorder Justin Heap simply because he dared to fulfill his statutory duties and protect the sanctity of Arizona elections.”
Heap said in a statement, “It’s unfortunate that the Board’s unprofessional and bad faith actions have forced us to litigate this issue; however, it’s significantly more unfortunate that the Board continues to deny the voters of Maricopa County the positive, common sense election integrity reforms that they voted for last November when they elected me. As I’ve promised from day one, I am working to ensure honest, secure, and transparent elections for every voter in Maricopa County. I am not, and will not, waiver in my commitment to executing on this promise. I’m grateful to America First Legal for standing by my side in this battle.”
America First Legal detailed Heap’s allegations in the first filing: “The Defendants — the members of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (‘BOS’) — have crossed from fiscal oversight into outright sabotage. Ignoring [state law] and decades of precedent, the BOS has refused to fund the Recorder’s ‘necessary expenses’ — from modern ballot-processing equipment to indispensable IT staff — while simultaneously seizing control of the very election functions its stonewalling endangers. The BOS’s obstruction is not mere bureaucratic foot-dragging; it is a calculated power grab that throttles the Recorder’s constitutional duty to administer secure, timely elections.”
In an amici filing in support of Heap, Arizona House Speaker Steven Montenegro and Senate President Warren Petersen’s legal representation call for a strict interpretation of state statutes which govern the responsibilities of the county recorder and board of supervisors. They argue that the “court should narrowly conclude that, based on the statutes’ plain language, when the statute authorizes ‘the county recorder or other officer in charge of elections’ to act, it is the recorder’s duty to ensure the statute is complied with unless the recorder expressly agrees to delegate that duty to another ‘officer in charge of elections.’”
As previously reported by AZ Free News, the months-long negotiations between Heap and the Board, led by Chairman Thomas Galvin, devolved steadily since Heap’s election and the replacement of Stephen Richer in January until finally collapsing into litigation in June.
The crux of the disagreement between the Board of Supervisors and County Recorder Heap rests upon a Shared Services Agreement (SSA) agreed to by Heap’s predecessor, Richer, who ardently opposed the election integrity efforts that Heap ran for office to enact. For nearly six months, the two county offices negotiated; however, Heap and the Supervisors were unable to reach an agreement, culminating in a lawsuit filed by Heap.
Since then, Heap has alleged that the Supervisors have “taken retaliatory actions” describing a series of measures that “make it impossible for him to do his job, including removing nearly all his election-related IT staff; seizing the servers, databases, and websites necessary to fulfill his duties; and restricting access to necessary facilities and equipment,” as reported by The Federalist.
In a second filing, Heap and America First Legal introduced allegations involving Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell, bringing a third County office into the fray in a dispute over who may represent the County Recorder, an attorney chosen by Heap or Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell. In the legal brief, they allege, “Attorney Mitchell originally appointed a criminal defense attorney to advise the Recorder; however, in April, America First Legal agreed to represent Heap pro bono, a move that Mitchell objected to.”
“When the Recorder complained that the original attorney appointed for him lacked sufficient subject matter expertise, County Attorney Mitchell appointed former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould to advise the Recorder only during negotiations with the Board. However, County Attorney Mitchell and the Board did not allow Justice Gould to litigate on the Recorder’s behalf,” the filing revealed.
But according to AFL, that wasn’t the end of it. “In May of 2025, Justice Gould specifically asked the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for permission to litigate on Recorder Heap’s behalf but was not allowed to do so because the scope of his representation was limited to negotiation of the SSA and did not include litigation, and, accordingly, the County would not compensate him for litigation-related work.”
Mitchell responded by penning a letter to the AFL attorneys, writing in part, “This letter is to inform you that I am the Recorder’s attorney and that you do not represent the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office or Recorder Heap in his official capacity.”
Per The Federalist, AFL attorney James Rogers retorted that the “County Recorder is allowed to pick his own lawyer in litigation,” adding that Heap “is not subject to the whims of the county attorney.”
In the midst of the complex legal battle between the Recorder’s Office and the Board of Supervisors, which has drawn the attention of legislative leaders, the dispute with Mitchell adds yet another layer of infighting within the already divided county government, with the calendar counting down to the 2026 elections.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Aug 30, 2025 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona State University’s online component, ASU Online, has partnered with several California community colleges to launch a new pilot program. The initiative allows California online undergraduates and alumni to save 22% on tuition—about $130 less per credit hour than Arizona residents pay.
According to a press release issued by ASU Online, the special rate for California students comes “with no income requirements or special applications needed to receive the special tuition.”
The release added that “the pilot program helps break financial barriers and creates an accessible, seamless transfer pathway for California residents to complete a degree.”
“Our university is committed to enhancing access to high-quality education for all students capable of college-level work,” ASU President Michael Crow said in a statement. “Providing top online learning opportunities and making ASU’s world-class faculty available to the enthusiastic learners in our neighboring state will prepare more skilled graduates, strengthen our shared region and support a better future.”
In a post to X, ASU Online posted enthusiastically, “Big news! Students & alumni of our California Community College partners can now transfer to @ASUOnline and save 22% on tuition through the California Community College Achievement Plan! Who’s ready to finish their degree?”
The emphasis on the educational outcome of California students and the substantial discount being offered under the pilot program is striking given that the Arizona Board of Regents 2021 Financial Aid Report (the most recent available) found that 55 percent of undergraduates from ASU, 55 percent from NAU, and 47 percent from UArizona graduated in debt. The report explained that “the average debt load at graduation was $24,447 at ASU; $21,461 at NAU; and $25,343 at UArizona.” According to the Board, approximately 4.5% of ASU students are defaulting on their loans.
ASU reported in the release that it currently has approximately 15,000 California students enrolled online. Anecdotally, citing one alum’s story, they claim that these students are “making meaningful contributions to the state’s economy,” specifically California’s economy, not Arizona’s.
AZ Free News has reached out to Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives Steve Montenegro, who sits ex officio on the Joint Legislative Auditing Committee (JLAC), which has legislative oversight over ASU, the Arizona Board of Regents, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tom Horne. No comments were received before filing this story.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Aug 29, 2025 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne weighed in on the scandal involving Cartwright Elementary School District board members Lydia and Cassandra Hernandez. The mother-daughter duo allegedly tried to smuggle a box-cutter style knife into Maryvale High School just days after a fatal stabbing there claimed the life of a 16-year-old student. Horne called for both women to resign their public offices immediately.
As reported by Fox10, Officials with the Phoenix Union High School District (PXU) told the outlet that on August 25th, Arizona State Rep. Lydia Hernandez (D-LD24) and her daughter, Cassandra Hernandez, created a disturbance at Maryvale High School by “knowingly bringing an unauthorized weapon onto campus.” Lydia Hernandez denied the school district’s accusation in response to an inquiry from Fox10 but declined to comment further.
PXU confirmed in a statement that the two women were “attempting to circumvent our safety systems and knowingly bringing an unauthorized weapon onto campus.”
The district stated in its announcement, “We will pursue all legal options, including pressing charges and trespassing the individuals from coming back to our campuses.”
Both women were recording the incident on their phones. At that point, “Lydia told the staff that she was video recording the interaction and that she was testing the weapon detection systems,” PXU said in a news release. Both women were then escorted from the premises.
Arizona SPI Horne released a statement condemning the women for the incident, saying, “This was an outrageous and indefensible stunt. For two school board members, one who is also a state legislator, to deliberately provoke a security disruption at a school is unconscionable. To do it at Maryvale High School where a student was tragically murdered in a classroom just a week earlier is unbelievably insensitive to the trauma that was inflicted on the students, teachers and staff of that school. These two board members should resign immediately.”
Horne continued, “The safety of our campuses is an absolute priority. Security personnel and safety officers need to do their jobs, and they cannot be diverted from protecting the campus by a juvenile and unnecessary act such as this. The actions of these board members show they do not appreciate the seriousness of ensuring campuses are safe places and the Cartwright Board must include members who are committed to school safety.”
Phoenix City Councilmembers Betty Guardado and Anna Hernandez released a joint statement similarly calling for both women to resign, according to KTAR.
“Their actions disrupted the fragile environment at Maryvale High School, were a blatant disregard for safety and school protocol, and were gravely insensitive to the students, families, and school staff still mourning the Maryvale student who died last week,” Guardado and Hernandez said. “The choice to target a school still reeling from trauma speaks volumes about their judgment and priorities as leaders. Such actions jeopardize the safety of students and staff alike, showing an alarming lack of responsibility and failure as public officials.”
Arizona House Democrat Leaders reacted with a statement saying, “The incident spelled out in the School District’s statement is serious and shocking.” The Democrat leaders noted that while they have “not yet had an opportunity to speak with Rep. Hernandez to get an explanation from her perspective…it should go without saying that nobody — elected official or otherwise — should engage in such reckless and potentially criminal behavior on a school campus.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Aug 28, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Last week, Arizona’s Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes issued an opinion stating that roughly 200,000 voters mistakenly listed in state election records as having provided proof of U.S. citizenship should remain on the rolls, despite questions about their citizenship status and potential conflicts with Arizona law.
As reported by AZ Free News in November of last year, 218,000 voters were confirmed by Senate President Warren Petersen to have obtained their driver’s licenses prior to the 1996 requirement to apply with proof of citizenship, went on to get a duplicate license, and then registered to vote for the first time or re-registered to vote after 2004.
For over 20 years, they were caught up in a compatibility issue between the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and the state’s voter registration system.
According to VoteBeat’s Jen Fifield, AG Mayes’ opinion marks a notable departure from how election officials have been working to remedy the problem with counties issuing notices to voters in an attempt to collect the information.
“If an Affected Voter responds by providing such evidence, that should dispel doubt,” Mayes wrote. “But if an Affected Voter does not respond, the mere lack of response does not, under current law, authorize the county recorder to cancel the voter’s registration, in whole or in part.”
Fifield, citing the Arizona Attorney General’s manual, noted that it is unclear whether or not the county election officials will conform to Mayes’ formal opinion, which is advisory in nature and does not carry the force of law.
“County recorders may take steps to inquire whether the affected voters are U.S. citizens, including by asking them to provide satisfactory evidence of citizenship,’’ Mayes wrote.
Mayes’ opinion came in response to a request made in May by fellow Democrat Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes. In a statement, Fontes said he has appreciated Mayes’ guidance, writing, “The opinion stands for the notion that these folks have a right to vote,’’ he told the AZ Capitol Times.
“And it falls to the government to prove otherwise–which is the way every other accusation, every other denial of rights exists,” Fontes said. “So the burden has shifted back to where it belongs.’’
In a statement, Fontes wrote, “The consistent treatment of voters caught up in this situation between counties is most important to ensure everyone’s voting rights are protected. I am glad we now have a clear path forward.”
Arizona Republican Party Chairwoman Gina Swoboda agreed with Mayes’ opinion, in particular her assessment of the county recorder’s limited authority to cancel registrations.
“If the recorders have affirmative proof that one of the voters is a non-citizen, they may initiate a notice and cancellation process,” Swoboda told the AZ Capitol Times. “But they may not otherwise do so because of this error.”
Coconino County Recorder Aubrey Sonderegger told the Arizona Republic that the news was welcome. “It’s exactly what Coconino County has been doing all along,” she said. “We have more than cut our list in half.”
She added that “These people weren’t doing anything nefariously” but were merely caught up in the timing of the voter registration standard changing. “I’m very relieved to hear the AG opinion,” she said. “It just means we can keep doing what we’ve been doing.”
According to the Secretary of State’s office, the current number of affected voters stands at 202,760. Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap issued a notification on June 26, 2025, to the 83,000 county voters on the list, informing them that they must submit proof of citizenship within 90 days. Failure to do so will result in reclassification as federal-only voters, and they will not be issued state and local ballots.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Aug 27, 2025 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Former University of Arizona (U of A) ethics professor Daniel Grossenbach is suing the school with the help of Liberty Counsel, after being fired for publicly advocating for his parental rights at Catalina Foothills School District (CFSD) meetings.
Grossenbach, a CFSD parent and resident, is the founding member of ‘Save CFSD,’ a “non-profit organization focused on educating parents about school board policies and issues and fundamental parental rights.” According to the lawsuit, he was “unceremoniously terminated” by U of A leaders, “at the demands of internet trolls’ intent on silencing his speech.”
In a press release issued Friday, Liberty Counsel announced the lawsuit on Grossenbach’s behalf. The Christian legal ministry explained, “In 2023, Grossenbach spoke several times at school board meetings, which [were] attended by hundreds of concerned parents, and delivered two-to-three-minute, pre-written speeches. He routinely included a disclaimer that he spoke for himself and not for his employer, and expressed without hate, slander, or violence how the district’s policies violated parental rights.
“The lawsuit then states that ‘anti-religious zealots turned digital critics’ coordinated over social media to silence Grossenbach and SaveCFSD by getting him fired from his job. Subsequently, numerous anonymous complaints were filed against him with the University of Arizona encouraging the university to discipline him for speaking out about his rights and beliefs.”
Liberty Counsel revealed, “In November 2023, the university informed him that it would not be renewing his part-time teaching contract for the following Spring ethics courses citing it had received funding for a full-time faculty member. However, the university never hired a full-time professor nor offered his ethics course the following Spring. In fact, the university posted advertisements soliciting resumes for additional part-time professors meeting Grossenbach’s exact skills and experience to teach similar courses he had been teaching for years.”
The attorneys argue that despite Grossenbach’s good performance and positive reputation, U of A terminated his employment “after discovering that he was an outspoken Christian advocating for change within his local school board to protect his family.” They claim the university subsequently stalled the disclosure of public records regarding his termination for 239 days in violation of Arizona law.
“[The University of Arizona’s] actions have inflicted irreparable damage to Professor Grossenbach’s professional career and reputation, ended his academic pursuit of a doctorate degree, decreased his earning potential, and reduced his income,” wrote Liberty Counsel. “Further, when Professor Grossenbach was terminated, he lost a potential textbook publishing deal, furthering his financial loss and reputational damage.”
According to the lawsuit, Grossenbach was terminated on November 30, 2024, after serving in his role for over three years “on the basis of complaints lodged by anonymous online censors targeting his constitutionally protected speech regarding his sincerely held religious beliefs, in his private capacity, separate and apart from the workplace.”
The professor filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and obtained a Notice of Right to Sue on May 25, 2025.
“Professors at public universities and colleges do not shed their constitutional rights to free speech and religious exercise when they work for a university,” said Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver. “Professor Daniel Grossenbach engaged in constitutionally protected speech, religious expression, and religious exercise and was speaking on matters of public concern regarding his faith, morality, and the community. The University of Arizona cannot fire a professor for his protected speech. Viewpoint discrimination is unlawful and violates the First Amendment and religious discrimination violates Title VII.”
Liberty Counsel is seeking a permanent injunction to declare the university’s Nondiscriminatory and Anti-Harassment Policy and Statement of Professional Conduct illegal and unlawful, along with compelling U of A “to reasonably accommodate the religious beliefs and practices of its employees.” The lawsuit also asks the court to reinstate Grossenbach to his former position, restore his benefits, and award damages.
Grossenbach’s efforts with ‘Save CFSD’ and exposure of controversial whistleblower audio released in May have been reported on by AZ Free News. The Professor also penned an op-ed on AZ Free News in October 2024 discussing his termination.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
