by Matthew Holloway | Nov 16, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona’s House GOP members presented a unified front Wednesday as Congress ended the weeks-long federal government shutdown, criticizing Democrats for prioritizing politics over the disruptions it caused Arizonans. Rep. Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ08) delivered one of the sharpest rebukes, claiming Democrats triggered the shutdown by refusing to back a Continuing Resolution similar to extensions they supported under the Biden administration.
“Make no mistake about it; the Democrats’ disgusting shutdown was only about attacking President Trump. They didn’t care if Americans were collateral damage,” Hamadeh said.
He described spending Veterans Day with families and servicemembers in his district who faced suspended federal services, adding that many urged him to “hold the line” until a deal was reached.
Hamadeh described his team as “energized” as the government reopens, saying, “We know we have our work cut out for us as the nation recovers from the Democrats’ misguided shutdown. While my team has been staying on top of casework and legislation, the shutdown prevented us from having full access to the personnel and services taxpayers pay for. As a result, we are going to be working overtime to ensure that we minimize the damage the Democrats created. I encourage my constituents to reach out to my office for any assistance with federal agencies they might have.”
Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ02) echoed the criticism, describing the lapse in funding as “the longest federal government shutdown in U.S. history.” Crane said the shutdown strained food banks, caused travel delays, and left rural families unsure whether they could access key services.
“Last night, I once again voted to fund the federal government. The American people should never be used as leverage to advance a political agenda,” said Rep. Crane. “To those who dealt with missed paychecks, worked without pay, and lived with great uncertainty, your determination and resolve are admirable. To the amazing people of rural Arizona who stood by one another during this challenge, I’m grateful for your strength and dedication to each other.”
In a post to X he wrote, “The American people should never be used as leverage to advance a political agenda.”
Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ06) faulted Democrats for rejecting what he called a “clean CR,” arguing that their last-minute demands forced the shutdown.
“Every single Democrat who voted against this clean CR voted for a government shutdown,” Ciscomani said in a statement. He told local reporters the standoff was driven by a “long wishlist of policy items” that Democratic leaders attempted to insert at the eleventh hour, “using our government as hostage to push their policy agenda through.”
Ciscomani visited with families in his district whose services were interrupted during the shutdown, including parents of disabled children and veterans dependent on federal support. He said he intends to monitor agency performance closely as operations resume.
The Tucson Republican soundly condemned Arizona Democrats in a post to X, “This shutdown was completely unnecessary and overdue to end. It’s disappointing to still see so many democrats, especially Arizonans, voting to remain shut down. “
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ05) issued his own statement praising the House’s vote to reopen the government, thanking conservatives who pressured leadership to reject Democratic terms and focus on fiscal restraint. Biggs applauded colleagues for what he called a “moment to permanently shrink the federal bureaucracy, restore constitutional limits, and return power to the states.”
The shutdown ended Wednesday after the House approved the Senate-passed funding package, and President Trump signed the bill into law, restoring government operations while avoiding the policy disputes that sank earlier versions. Democrats contend they rejected the previous CR because of Trump-aligned provisions and budget riders they argued would worsen long-term fiscal conditions.
Rep. Hamadeh framed the episode as senseless and revealing of Democrats’ priorities.
“The Democrats accomplished nothing with their senseless shutdown,” Hamadeh said, concluding, “except to show – without a doubt – that they do not put Americans first.”
As agencies reopen, GOP congressional offices across the state say they are preparing for an increase in casework as constituents attempt to navigate backlogged systems. Crane and Hamadeh both urged constituents to reach out as services begin returning to normal.
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 | Nov 14, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona’s top elected leaders — Democrats and Republicans alike — have joined forces to demand federal action after the seven Colorado River Basin states missed a critical deadline to finalize post-2026 water-sharing rules. In a letter to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, they warned that refusal by upper basin states to commit to verifiable conservation has pushed the negotiations to a breaking point.
The letter, dated November 11, 2025, highlights Arizona’s role as a leader in water conservation and criticizes upper basin states for refusing to commit to verifiable reductions, which the signatories say have stalled a seven-state agreement needed to sustain the river amid ongoing droughts.
The seven Colorado River Basin states—four in the upper basin (Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico) and three in the lower basin (Arizona, California, Nevada)—missed a federal deadline on November 11th to submit a consensus plan for sharing water shortages after 2026, when current operating guidelines expire. Federal officials, including the Bureau of Reclamation, have urged the states to reach an accord to avoid potential court intervention or unilateral action by the Trump administration.
In the letter, the Arizona leaders commended Burgum’s efforts over the past year to develop a framework preserving the century-old 1922 Colorado River Compact, which allocates water among the states. They emphasized the river’s critical role in fueling Arizona’s advanced technology ecosystem, world-class agriculture, military bases, and communities home to millions, including 22 of the basin’s 30 Native American tribes.
“Arizona’s cutting-edge semiconductor industries and IT infrastructure are making it possible for the onshoring of manufacturing operations that are critical for maintaining American technological leadership,” the letter states. It notes that Yuma County, one of the world’s most sophisticated agricultural regions, produces over 90% of the winter leafy greens supplied to the United States and Canada each year.
The signatories stressed that Arizona’s allocation is vital not only to the state’s citizens but to national economic growth and independence. They warned that the upper basin states’ refusal to offer “meaningful, verifiable conservation commitments” over the last two years risks these foundations of growth.
Arizona has positioned itself as a basin-wide leader in water efficiency, the letter asserts, partnering with California and Nevada to propose creative and significant post-2026 operating criteria. Under most scenarios, Arizona’s plans would conserve 1.5 million acre-feet of water per year, representing more than 27% of the state’s entitlement in most years. This follows more than 3 million acre-feet in efficiencies already offered by the lower basin states since 2023 to stabilize Lakes Mead and Powell.
In contrast, the letter points out that upper basin states have repeatedly refused to implement any volume of binding, verifiable upper basin reductions. “This extreme negotiating posture—four of the seven Basin States refusing to participate in any sharing of water shortages—has led to a fundamental impasse that is preventing successful development of a 7-State consensus plan for management of the Colorado River,” it reads.
The group urged Burgum to use his authority to ensure that any alternative considered by the Department of the Interior “contains measurable and enforceable conservation requirements” for the upper basin, guaranteeing the resource remains available for Arizona’s contributions to the economy and national security.
Signatories to the letter include Governor Katie Hobbs (D), Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14), House Speaker Steve Montenegro (R-LD29), Senate Democratic Leader Priya Sundareshan (D-LD18), and House Democratic Leader Oscar De Los Santos (D-LD11).
A joint statement from the seven states and federal officials acknowledged the missed deadline. Still, it affirmed a shared recognition of the basin’s challenges, with negotiators committing to continuing talks despite the setback. Lake Mead’s surface elevation stood at 1,057 feet as of recent measurements, with commenters noting that’s just 37 feet above levels that could trigger a “devastating” crisis for Arizona, including potential mandatory cuts to urban and agricultural users.
The full text of the letter is available here.
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 | Nov 14, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Arizona Supreme Court recently declined to review an Appeals Court ruling holding the City of Tucson liable for a public nuisance caused by homeless encampments, siding with three property owners who suffered property damage and financial losses. The Goldwater Institute highlighted this case as “welcome news for all Arizonans,” following the adoption of voter-approved Proposition 312.
The case, Bradford v. City of Tucson, comes on the heels of a similar court ruling against the City of Phoenix over its “Zone” encampment and is now being highlighted by the Goldwater Institute alongside voter-approved Proposition 312—a 2024 measure that lets property owners seek refunds when cities decline to enforce basic public nuisance laws.
Filed on behalf of three Tucson residents, the lawsuit sought injunctive relief against the City of Tucson, after homeless encampments near their homes and businesses in the Navajo Wash developed with makeshift toilets, dangerous fires, and individuals engaging in violent and criminal behavior.
The appellate court, reversing a trial court ruling against the residents, found that the “record is replete with testimony of specific incidents which proved that camping in the Navajo Wash has caused unsanitary and indecent conditions that invade the rights of the neighboring residents and business owners,” and demonstrated that Tucson was not shielded from liability “because the City knew the activity of homeless camping in this location was being carried on and that it repeatedly and continually caused a nuisance, yet consented to it anyway.”
Prop 312 now gives property owners a reimbursement tool in situations like those described in Bradford v. Tucson, allowing Arizonans to seek relief when a municipality “follows a policy, pattern, or practice of declining to enforce existing nuisance laws prohibiting illegal camping, obstructing public thoroughfares, loitering, panhandling, public urination or defecation, public consumption of alcoholic beverages, or possession or use of illegal substances, or maintains a public nuisance,” according to the Goldwater Institute’s explanation of Prop 312 claims.
Reimbursements are capped at the amount of property taxes paid the prior year, with any excess eligible for reapplication later.
Goldwater explained the law’s necessity on its website:
“Rampant homelessness is overtaking Arizona’s cities, as municipalities refuse to enforce laws against public camping, loitering, intoxication, and other nuisances. The result has been a rise in violent crime, biohazardous pollution, property destruction, and even death. Residents and business owners have had to take matters into their own hands, installing fences, hiring security, and cleaning up garbage, human waste, and other hazardous materials themselves—services the city is supposed to provide with the tax money these residents pay every year.”
Under Prop 312, once the Department of Revenue notifies a municipality of a claim, the city has 30 days to accept or reject it. If rejected, property owners may challenge the decision in superior court; if the city does not respond in time, the refund is deemed approved. Goldwater has offered to assist residents, saying, “If you believe your claim was improperly denied and you would like legal assistance, please contact us! Our lawyers may be able to help you.”
Claims are filed through the Department of Revenue’s online portal at prop312reimbursement.aztaxes.gov, which requires proof of property ownership, tax payment, and mitigation costs. The department notifies cities and issues approved reimbursements by check.
The decision represents a major blow to a large Arizona city’s assertion of immunity and underscores growing frustration with Tucson’s approach to homelessness amid public safety concerns.
In an op-ed Monday, Timothy Sandefur, Goldwater’s vice president for legal affairs, urged city leaders to act:
“Homelessness is a tragic and frustrating issue. But policies that leave people living on the streets aren’t the answer. Instead, they only create a new set of victims: the innocent taxpayers who must pay for police protection that they don’t receive. The time has come for city officials to shoulder their responsibilities—instead of forcing homeowners to shoulder the costs.”
Sandefur also warned that property owners in other states lack similar protections, citing Utah, and encouraged lawmakers elsewhere to “follow Arizona’s lead” by adopting Goldwater’s proposed Safe Neighborhoods Act.
Correction Notice: A previous version of this story incorrectly linked the Bradford v. Tucson case to the Goldwater Institute and cited an unrelated ruling.
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 | Nov 12, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
President Donald J. Trump issued a sweeping proclamation granting unconditional pardons to dozens of figures tied to 2020 alternate-elector efforts on Friday. Trump described the move as ending a “grave national injustice” while shielding allies from potential federal prosecution.
The pardon, signed by Trump acting under Article II, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, explicitly states that it “ends a grave national injustice perpetrated upon the American people following the 2020 Presidential Election and continues the process of national reconciliation.”
The proclamation covers any advice, organization, execution, participation in or advocacy for proposed slates of electors – whether recognized by state officials or not – submitted in battleground states, including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, where alternate elector certificates were filed in an effort to challenge results certified for then-candidate Joe Biden. It applies to federal offenses only and does not extend to state-level charges, nor does it pardon Trump himself, with the document noting: “This pardon does not apply to the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump.”
Ed Martin, a Justice Department attorney serving as U.S. Pardon Attorney, announced the pardons late Sunday on X, posting images of the four-page proclamation and stating, “Breaking: President Trump pardoned the 2020 Alternative Electors. Thank you: @POTUS for allowing me, as U.S. Pardon Attorney, to work with @WhiteHouse, along with @AGPamBondi, @DAGToddBlanche & SG John Sauer, to achieve your intent—let their healing begin. #Federalist74.” Martin shared the document in a reply to his earlier post with the comment, “No MAGA left behind.”
The pardon names 77 individuals explicitly, though it states the list is not exhaustive and encompasses broader conduct tied to the alternate elector efforts. Prominent figures included are former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani; attorneys Sidney Powell, John Eastman, and Kenneth Chesebro; former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows; Trump campaign aides Boris Epshteyn and Christina Bobb; and Georgia Republican Party officials David Shafer, Cathy Latham, and Shawn Still.
Among the Arizona Republicans named are former state GOP Chair Dr. Kelli Ward, Dr. Michael Ward, former U.S. Senate candidate James (Jim) Lamon, former state Sen. Anthony Kern, state Sen. Jake Hoffman, and Turning Point USA COO Tyler Bowyer.
These pardons do not affect ongoing state prosecutions, however, such as those currently pending review by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes.
Dr. Kelli Ward responded to the pardon in a statement posted to X writing:
“President @realDonaldTrump has issued a Federal pardon which will protect us from future Federal Democrat lawfare. @jimmythemole001 [Dr. Michael Ward] and I are grateful for this and we maintain our innocence as well as our right to challenge elections in America. Thanks to @EagleEdMartin, @CletaMitchell, and others for not forgetting all of us and the 2020 election debacle that has caused so much harm to our great country.
It’s been a long road and we aren’t quite at the end yet. We still face state charges though a state judge has already ruled the state violated our rights and the Appeals Court refused to take up the case. The Democrat AG has until 11/21/25 to decide whether she will appeal to the state Supreme Court to continue her partisan targeting of her political adversaries or if she will drop the case. Keep us in your prayers.”
Other named recipients include: Jenna Ellis, Jeffrey Clark, Scott Hall, Harrison Floyd, Ray Smith, Misty Hampton, Trevian Kutti, Michael Roman, Stephen Cliffgard Lee, Robert Cheeley, Mark Amick, Kathy Berden, Joseph Brannan, Carol Brunner, Mary Buestrin, Daryl Carlson, James “Ken” Carroll, and Brad Carver.
The alternate elector documents were created in December 2020 and asserted that President Trump had won those states while the results were being contested, following the precedent of the 1960 Presidential Election in Hawaii. They were submitted to Congress and the National Archives ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021, electoral vote certification. None of the 77 individuals faced federal charges, rendering the pardons largely preemptive against potential future prosecutions, according to reports. Separately, Trump pardoned more than 1,000 individuals convicted in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach, which stemmed from efforts to disrupt the election certification.
Acting-CEO of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, Kari Lake, praised the action early Monday on X, writing, “God bless you, President @realDonaldTrump, for pardoning these folks. Most of them are incredible Patriots. They didn’t deserve what came their way.”
Replies to both posts reflected divided sentiment, with supporters calling the recipients “honorable” and victims of “political persecution.” At the same time, critics labeled them “anti-American” and the pardons a “perversion of justice.”
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 | Nov 11, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona GOP leaders are in court defending three abortion restrictions they say protect women and deter coercion after Attorney General Kris Mayes declined to defend the state laws. The Plaintiffs, supported by the Center for Reproductive Rights, argue that the statutes defy the 2024 constitutional amendment legalizing abortion up to fetal viability.
The lawsuit, Isaacson v. Arizona, was filed in May 2025 by Phoenix obstetrician-gynecologist Dr. Paul Isaacson, a Proposition 139 supporter. Isaacson was joined by Dr. William Richardson and the Arizona Medical Association in the lawsuit, which challenges:
- A “reason ban” barring abortions based solely on fetal abnormalities (non-lethal or otherwise), gender, or race.
- A “two-visit requirement” requiring a second clinic visit and 24-hour delay after viewing an ultrasound.
- A telehealth ban prohibiting diagnosis, prescription, or mailing of abortion medication via phone or video.
Isaacson dropped a related federal case in April 2025 to advance this state challenge and was joined by the Arizona Medical Association and two other OB-GYNs.
Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Steve Montenegro intervened to defend the laws, represented by attorney Emily Gould of Holtzman Vogel, after AG Kris Mayes declined to defend them, according to KJZZ. In June 2023, Governor Hobbs signed an executive order centralizing abortion-related prosecutions in the Attorney General’s office, a move Mayes said underscores their shared commitment to “fight … to protect the rights of Arizonans to make their own private medical decisions without interference.”
The case is before Judge Greg Como in Maricopa County Superior Court, who denied a motion for dismissal from Petersen and Montenegro, and ordered a three-day evidentiary hearing to explore the laws’ impact on abortion in Arizona.
Defendants’ witness, Phoenix OB-GYN Dr. Steven Nelson—who manages miscarriage care but has not performed abortions—backed the telehealth ban, stressing in-person exams detect coercion via nonverbal cues like facial expressions in trafficking scenarios. Gould, representing Petersen and Montenegro, cited American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists data and argued that at least 10% of abortion patients later report coercion. Nelson urged limiting telehealth to emergencies, as it “prohibits all of this,” and said he would provide such services only in the most dire cases.
Plaintiffs’ Wednesday witnesses—including Isaacson and experts from the Center for Reproductive Rights and ACLU—argued the laws burden low-income and rural patients with over two-hour drives and confidentiality risks in abusive settings. They argued that pre-abortion ultrasounds are unnecessary for early dating with reliable menstrual tracking. Experts clashed on the 24-hour delay’s health value, with one testifying that it undermines women’s autonomy and timely care.
Isaacson claimed the restrictions “create unnecessary barriers to essential reproductive health care,” echoing concerns from the Arizona Medical Association about access for vulnerable groups.
On ultrasounds, Nelson countered these arguments and described them as “essential to dating” pregnancies, estimating 60% of patients misjudge gestational age due to implantation bleeding. He noted ultrasounds pinpoint asymptomatic ectopic pregnancies, often undetected until seven weeks, requiring specific interventions. Nelson suggested local physicians could handle initial visits to ease rural travel burdens.
On day two of the hearing on Thursday, Judge Como indicated he may treat the record as sufficient for a permanent injunction, with closing arguments pending, according to Courthouse News. The hearing was set to continue on Friday, but as of Monday, no additional information was publicly available regarding the case.
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.
