by Matthew Holloway | Jan 16, 2026 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
An Arizona State University faculty member, who also serves as an associate director, was captured on video acknowledging that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programming continues at ASU despite Executive Orders and U.S. Department of Education (DOE) policies directing the elimination of the programs.
In footage from Accuracy in Media (AIM) circulating online, an ASU official identified as Rebecca Loftus, Associate Teaching Professor and Associate Director of the School of Criminology & Criminal Justice, is shown discussing how DEI efforts persist at the university, saying the programming is now “just not as broadcast as it was before,” according to posts and videos shared on social media platforms.
In January 2025, the DOE announced it was dismantling DEI-related offices, removing DEI references from public-facing materials, and directing staff to eliminate related programs as part of a department-wide policy shift under the Trump administration. The department said the move was intended to end what it described as discriminatory or non-merit-based practices tied to DEI frameworks. It warned that institutions continuing such efforts could face scrutiny over federal funding.
The video, originally posted to YouTube, was later shared on X by Corey A. DeAngelis and circulated more broadly as Instagram Reels and X posts. In the footage, Loftus can be heard making statements that ASU’s diversity initiatives are still in effect, albeit with less public emphasis than in earlier years.
According to AIM, Loftus, speaking with an undercover investigator, was recorded stating that, “Most of our faculty do tend to be a little more on the liberal side. You have to be careful with the language that you use. We’re doing pretty much what we were doing before.”
The outlet reported that she went on to describe a body known as “the idea office,” an internal group responsible for “designing” criminology classes for a “majority-minority student body,” with AIM characterizing such groups as “how DEI-related instruction is being concealed through new internal structures.”
Loftus is later seen telling the investigator: “You’re not going to find very many programs that are going to broadcast it as before because the federal funding for universities, especially state-run universities like ASU… If you have federal funds that are withheld, it really makes a big impact.” She reportedly added that entire classes are still being devoted to race, ethnicity, and gender, and said that ASU has been bringing in outside figures to present these classes.
In a later clip, when confronted about the undercover video, she can be seen telling Adam Guillette, President of Accuracy in Media, that she has “no idea” what he’s talking about and urged him to “talk to our Director” before requesting he leave her office.
ASU’s use of diversity training and DEI programming has been the subject of a legal challenge in recent years.
In March 2024, the Goldwater Institute filed a lawsuit on behalf of an ASU faculty member challenging ASU’s “Inclusive Communities” training requirement as violating Arizona law prohibiting certain diversity trainings funded with public money. That lawsuit, Anderson v. Arizona Board of Regents, remains active in the state court system.
The Goldwater Institute’s online materials describe the training as covering systemic bias, privilege, and related concepts.
At the time of this report, ASU administrators had not issued a public response to the video clips widely circulated on social media, nor had the university clarified whether the recording was conducted with consent or in a sanctioned setting.
The footage has been reposted and commented on by multiple users, including calls for questions about the university’s DEI direction. One user suggested contacting the ASU Board of Trustees regarding the issue; however, no official response from the board has been posted publicly as of this report.
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 | Jan 15, 2026 | Economy, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Republican legislators have sent a $1.1 billion tax relief package to Gov. Katie Hobbs, escalating a high-stakes policy dispute over tax conformity as the state enters filing season.
According to a statement released by House and Senate Republicans, lawmakers rapidly passed House Bill 2153 and Senate Bill 1106, legislation designed to align Arizona’s tax code with federal tax reforms enacted in 2025. Supporters estimate the measures will deliver approximately $1.1 billion in tax relief over the next three years.
The bills now await the governor’s signature.
In a statement posted to X, House Republicans wrote, “With costs still high and tax season underway, Arizona families shouldn’t be left waiting. The Legislature has done its job, now it’s time for the Governor to sign this relief into law.”
Republican leaders said the legislation is intended to provide clarity and certainty for families, small businesses, and tax preparers, particularly as tax season is underway. The package fully conforms Arizona law to recent federal tax changes and codifies provisions such as preventing the taxation of tips and overtime pay.
House and Senate Republicans said the plan is focused on helping working families retain more of their earnings, supporting small businesses and job creators, and ensuring taxpayers receive clear and lawful tax guidance during the filing process.
The legislation’s passage follows criticism from the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) over Gov. Hobbs’ separate tax conformity proposal. In a press release earlier this week, NFIB Arizona State Director Chad Heinrich urged lawmakers to reject the governor’s approach and instead advance HB 2153 and SB 1106.
Heinrich argued that Hobbs’ proposal would delay tax certainty by requiring taxpayers to wait until budget negotiations conclude before knowing how Arizona will align with federal tax changes passed in 2025 — potentially leaving taxpayers without clarity until June 2026.
“It’s unclear if the left hand knows what the right hand is doing in the Hobbs administration,” Heinrich said. He criticized the proposal for abandoning 2025 tax forms already posted by the Arizona Department of Revenue and instructing taxpayers to wait until budget negotiations are finalized. “This should be a non-starter,” Heinrich said.
NFIB highlighted HB 2153 and SB 1106 as preferred alternatives, noting that the bills would fully adopt federal tax reforms enacted in 2025, including provisions tied to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which the organization said small business owners welcomed for the certainty it provided.
“Small business owners breathed a sigh of relief when the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed and collectively looked forward to the certainty that it provided,” Heinrich said. “Now, the Governor wants to upend all of that to score partisan political points, breaking precedent with how Arizona has always addressed federal tax changes.”
As previously reported by AZ Free News, legislative supporters say the GOP-backed bills offer broader tax relief than the governor’s more narrowly targeted proposal by fully conforming state law to a wide range of federal tax code changes, including those affecting businesses and itemized deductions.
NFIB noted that Arizona’s small businesses employ approximately 1.2 million people statewide and account for seven out of every ten new jobs created. The organization warned that uncertainty over tax conformity could delay business expansion and hiring.
With the legislation now on the governor’s desk, Republican lawmakers said Arizona families and businesses are waiting to see whether Hobbs will sign the tax relief package or veto another key Republican reform.
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 | Jan 15, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ-02) introduced legislation Jan. 7 to award citizen journalist Nick Shirley the Congressional Gold Medal for his reporting on fraud and misuse of public funds in Minnesota.
Crane’s office said the bill would recognize Shirley’s work documenting alleged waste, fraud, and abuse involving more than $110 million in federal and state funds in Minnesota’s Somali community, in a statement released Wednesday.
In a December 26 video cited by Crane’s announcement, Shirley detailed his investigation into social services programs in Minnesota. Following the release of the report, the Trump administration halted federal funding to businesses accused of fraud, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) ended his reelection campaign.
In a statement accompanying the bill’s introduction, Crane wrote that Shirley’s reporting “shed light on this historic scandal” and “resulted in seismic shifts to our political landscape virtually overnight.” Crane added that Shirley “stood up to a corrupt system and exposed waste, fraud, and abuse being perpetrated against the American people.”
He described Shirley as “a fearless citizen journalist,” and called his work “a testament to the power of the average American over the legacy media, and a vindication of the mission that DOGE has sought to implement.”
The Congressional Gold Medal is the highest civilian honor awarded by Congress. Recipients have historically included figures recognized for distinguished achievements and contributions to the United States.
Shirley, who is widely known as a YouTuber and content creator, responded to Crane’s announcement on X, writing that the potential award “would be cool, thank you!”
Congress has honored journalists in many ways over the last century through resolutions, Congressional Record tributes, and naming/designation actions. However, there is no official, comprehensive count of journalists honored because congressional recognition isn’t cataloged by profession, unlike the Presidential Medal of Freedom. If so honored, Shirley would join the ranks of the late Bryan Johnson, sports journalist Grant Wahl, and renowned broadcaster Edward R. Murrow.
Crane’s bill is now pending in the House. No additional legislative action, committee referral, or cosponsor information was included in the office summary.
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 | Jan 15, 2026 | Economy, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona State Representative Chris Lopez (R-LD16) introduced legislation aimed at reducing costs for ranchers and, ultimately, consumers at the grocery store.
House Bill 2152, dubbed the “No Tax on Troughs” bill, would eliminate Arizona’s transaction privilege tax on water systems and infrastructure improvements on both public and private grazing lands.
The measure targets essential ranching expenses, including fence lines, fence posts, drinking troughs, water lines, and storage tanks, by exempting them from a tax that Lopez says unnecessarily raises operational costs for livestock producers.
“Families are paying more for beef every time they check out at the grocery store,” Representative Lopez said in a press release announcing the bill’s introduction. “Ranchers are facing higher costs just to keep cattle fenced and hydrated, and Arizona is taxing those costs. That cost gets passed straight to consumers.”
Under current law, improvements to grazing infrastructure on federal grazing land, which become federal property once installed, remain subject to Arizona’s sales tax, with no reimbursement to ranchers after ownership transfers. Lopez’s proposal would end that tax treatment.
“At a time when federal land policies already make ranching harder, Arizona should not be adding another layer of cost,” he added.
The Arizona Farm Bureau has publicly argued that farms and ranches face substantial tax pressures, anticipating a potential $5,125 per year increase if federal agriculture tax provisions lapse. The Bureau added that these strains affect decisions on capital expenses like water systems and fencing.
The proposal comes as ranchers across Arizona continue to face rising operational pressures tied to drought conditions, water access, regulatory requirements, and higher input costs. Agricultural groups have warned that these factors have tightened margins for livestock producers and contributed to higher beef prices nationwide.
Arizona’s transaction privilege tax, which functions as a tax on the privilege of doing business rather than a traditional sales tax, has been the subject of multiple reform efforts in recent years as lawmakers debate exemptions and carve-outs for various industries.
Supporters of HB 2152 argue that reducing tax burdens on ranching infrastructure would help lower costs for producers, support wildlife habitat stewardship on public lands, and provide downstream relief for Arizona families at the grocery store.
Lopez represents Legislative District 16, which includes portions of Pinal and Pima Counties.
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 | Jan 14, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen (R–LD14) said he believes the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to uphold state laws that protect girls’ and women’s sports, following oral arguments in a closely watched case on whether biological males may compete in female athletic competitions.
Petersen attended oral arguments in West Virginia v. B.P.J. in Washington, D.C., where the Court heard challenges to state-level laws restricting participation in girls’ sports based on biological sex.
“It was an incredible experience to be in the Supreme Court with the justices in the room hearing their arguments,” Petersen said in an interview with AZ Free News following the hearing. “If I’m reading the room, I think we win this six to three.”
Petersen explained that much of the questioning from the Justices centered on the definition of sex under the law, rather than transgender status itself. “What it’s really boiling down to is the definition of sex,” he said. “They’ve conceded that it’s about sex. They’re not even arguing that it’s about transgender status.”
He described a moment during questioning in which Justice Alito pressed attorneys defending the challenge to the laws on how to define the term “woman,” calling the exchange revealing.
Petersen and House Speaker Steve Montenegro (R-LD29) joined the case through an amicus brief in September 2025 after Arizona Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes declined to defend the Save Women’s Sports Act. Under Arizona statute, that authority shifted to legislative leadership.
“Unfortunately, you have an attorney general who’s not willing to defend our laws,” Petersen said. “But fortunately, the statute gives the Senate President and the Speaker standing. We were able to intervene and defend the law, and we’ve taken it all the way here.”
Petersen characterized the law as “common sense” and said lawmakers felt compelled to see it defended at the highest level.
“This is the same Women’s Sports Act to protect our girls and make sure they have these opportunities,” he said. “This law needed to be defended.”
Beyond athletics, Petersen said the case raises broader questions about state authority and federal overreach. “If they get this wrong, it would be devastating,” he said. “It would mean that your daughters, your granddaughters, your sisters—their chances to compete in sports and be champions—those dreams are shot.”
Petersen noted that while most states have enacted protections for girls’ sports, a Supreme Court ruling striking those laws down nationwide would leave states with no recourse. “At least if they leave it to the states, there would be some safe harbors,” he said. “If they ruled against everybody, there would be nowhere girls could go.”
Critics of the laws argue that they discriminate against transgender individuals. Petersen rejected that framing, saying the laws preserve opportunities while maintaining fairness.
“They still have opportunities,” he said. “They can be part of a co-ed team; they can play with people of the same biological sex or even create their own leagues. What they can’t do is play in biological girls’ sports.”
He added that the issue is necessary and unavoidable, pointing to female athletes who have lost titles and opportunities under policies that allow biological males to compete in girls’ categories.
If the Supreme Court upholds the laws, Petersen said no new legislation would be required in Arizona. “We already have the law,” he said. “We just want the law that we passed to be upheld.”
If the Court issues a narrow or adverse ruling, Petersen said lawmakers may be forced to explore alternative legislative approaches, though he cautioned that a sweeping loss could take years—or longer—to undo.
“That’s why it’s so critical they get it right,” he said. “If they get it wrong, it’s no different than Roe v. Wade. It could be decades, if ever, until it gets fixed.”
The Court is expected to issue its ruling as late as June this year, according to Petersen.
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.
