Charges against Rebekah Massie, the Surprise mother who was arrested while exercising her First Amendment rights at a city council meeting, were tossed out by North Valley Justice Court Judge Gerald Williams last week. As previously reported by AZ Free News, Massie was to be tried for trespassing after she criticized the Surprise City Attorney during a city council meeting. Judge Williams agreed when defense counsel moved that the trespassing charges against Massie be dismissed with prejudice, meaning they cannot be refiled, and called the charges “objectively outrageous.”
Massie’s attorney Bret Royle, explained, “Rebekah should never have been detained, let alone criminally charged, for speaking her mind. That’s the kind of thing that happens in tyrannical countries, but should never happen here. No American should face jail time for exercising their freedom of speech, and we’re relieved the court agreed.”
Just one day after hearing from attorneys representing Massie and the city, Judge Williams released a scorching three-page ruling, pointedly noting that the city has since rescinded the policy Massie was arrested under, which prohibited the public from criticizing city officials during council meetings.
He wrote in part, “No branch of any federal, state, or local government in this country should ever attempt to control the content of political speech.” He added, “In this case, the government did so in a manner that was objectively outrageous.”
“The Defendant should not have faced criminal prosecution once for expressing her political views,” Williams added. “The Court agrees that she should never face criminal prosecution, for expressing her political views on that date at that time, again.”
JUSTICE: A judge just THREW OUT the criminal charge against an Arizona mom who was arrested and frog-marched out of a city council meeting for criticizing a city attorney’s pay.
The judge slammed the government’s suppression of her free speech as “objectively outrageous.” pic.twitter.com/G9eAgXaRMt
In the unusual case, Surprise city prosecutors recused themselves, citing a conflict of interest, and Massie’s charges were handled by the City of Phoenix Prosecutor’s Office. The Phoenix Prosecutors argued that the case should be dismissed without prejudice allowing the city to potentially re-file charges.
In court documents, Royle argued that the charges against Massie should be dismissed with prejudice based on a lack of evidence to support Massie’s arrest to begin with.
“Ms. Massie was not ‘remaining unlawfully’ as she was within her rights to remain in the chamber despite being asked to leave by Mayor Hall and Officer Shernicoff,” Royle told the court. In his ruling, Williams concurred, observing that Massie’s arrest, originating as it did from city council policy, regulated political speech and “would trigger scrutiny,” under constitutional legal analysis.
A lawsuit against the city by Massie, represented by FIRE is ongoing. In a press release from the FIRE, Massie said, “For more than two months I’ve been living with the threat of punishment and jail time — being taken away from my kids, even — for doing nothing more than criticizing the government. Free speech still matters in America, and I can’t tell you what a relief it is to have people on my side standing up for our rights with me.”
FIRE attorney Conor Fitzpatrick said in a statement, “This is an incredible win for Rebekah and an important message to government bureaucrats around the country that the First Amendment bows to no one. The fight goes on in Rebekah’s lawsuit against the City of Surprise, Mayor Hall, and Officer Schernicoff. We want to make it crystal clear to governments across the United States that brazenly censoring people and betraying the First Amendment comes with a cost.”
As recently reported by AZ Free News, KFYI’s James T. Harris released internal video he obtained of Surprise Police Chief Benny Piña seeming to defend Massie’s arrest, telling officers, “What happened last week in a council meeting resulted in what I think everybody in the world is calling an illegal arrest and a violation of someone’s First Amendment rights. That’s clearly not what we’re about, and that’s not what happened.”
In a statement emailed to AZ Free News after Judge William’s ruling, FIRE attorney Adam Steinbaugh said, “The police chief says their conduct exemplifies the ‘mission’ and ‘philosophy’ of the Surprise Police Department. A judge said their conduct was ‘objectively outrageous.’ We agree with the judge, and the Surprise Police Department should do some soul-searching.”
Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick responded to a formal complaint against him to the Commission on Judicial Conduct from Save Our Schools Arizona (SOSAZ) regarding comments he’s made while campaigning for retention in the 2024 Election. Justice Bolick summarized his response in three words before addressing it more fully: “Bring it on.”
In a press release, SOSAZ claimed that Justice Bolick’s comments at a campaign event covered by Politico violate “several provisions of the Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct.” The group suggested that his speech at a Pentecostal Church in Sun City stating he would continue “fighting for conservative principles,” while standing near a cardboard cutout of President Donald Trump, breached public confidence in his “independence, impartiality, integrity, and competence.”
The activist group wrote, “SOSAZ’s written complaint asserts that Justice Bolick’s active campaigning at a Republican Party event violates several provisions of the Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct, which states that judges ‘should aspire at all times to conduct that ensures the greatest possible public confidence in their independence, impartiality, integrity, and competence.’ Justice Bolick’s appearance and comments at this Republican Party meeting certainly do not meet this standard, and we should expect better of our judges, especially those sitting on the state’s highest court.”
Speaking with KJZZ, SOSAZ Executive Director Beth Lewis told the outlet, “It’s not impartial and judges really do need to act with impartiality at all times.”
“Bolick has politicized the courts. It’s also been shown in his decisions, which are directly related to our work at Save Our Schools Arizona,” Lewis claimed. “His ideologically-based decisions have directly impacted our ability to fund our schools for many years.”
I honestly cannot describe the feeling of voting “NO” on Judge Clint Bolick tonight. Bolick has repeatedly politicized the Court and devastated public education.
😡As part of Ducey’s packed Court, he overturned #Prop208, which would have sent $800M per year to AZ classrooms 🧵 pic.twitter.com/ENg1AuCdMC
SOSAZ is running an extensive “do not retain” campaign against retaining Justice Bolick and fellow Justice Kathryn King. Bolick and King are the only two Supreme Court Justices facing retention votes this year. According to the Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance Review, both Bolick and King received extremely high marks to meet the standards on the merits of their decisions.
In an email statement obtained by AZ Free News, Bolick responded to SOSAZ’s complaint:
“A political organization that is opposed to my retention as an Arizona Supreme Court justice has reportedly filed a judicial ethics complaint against me. My response: Bring it on.
I have spent much of my career as a lawyer and judge defending and protecting free-speech rights. I am glad to have the chance to stand up for my own and other judges’ free-speech rights.
Judges necessarily enjoy fewer free-speech rights than others. But we have the right to forcefully defend ourselves against an unprecedented campaign to replace judges solely for political reasons.
In doing so, I adhere meticulously to judicial ethics rules. Judges cannot endorse candidates for office, and I do not (not even my wife). Judges cannot ask for money to support their campaigns, and I do not. Judges may not talk about pending cases or issues that may come before the Court, and I do not. In short, we are forced to ‘campaign’ with one arm tied behind our backs. Our opponents have no such restraints.
The rules do allow us to speak at partisan events, although we cannot serve as party officers and cannot endorse candidates. That is no problem for me, as I have been a registered independent for more than two decades and am the only independent to ever serve on the Court. Since the campaign to remove Justice Kathryn King and me from the Court, I have spoken at both partisan and nonpartisan events.
During the retention campaign, I feel like I spend half my time defending against liberal critics over judicial opinions they do not like, and the other half against conservative critics of opinions they do not like. My colleagues and I were ‘censured’ by the Maricopa County Republican Party executive committee for voting against their wishes in election cases. As a judge committed to the rule of law, I see criticisms from both sides as a badge of honor.
The group’s news release makes clear this is about politics, not judicial ethics. Its executive director, Beth Lewis, tweeted that her vote against me was ‘personal,’ ‘gleeful anger,’ and ‘revenge.’ Filing a judicial ethics complaint for ‘revenge’ is an abuse of process.
But I hope they will pursue it even after the election because we need a clear precedent protecting the free-speech rights of judges to defend themselves, and I will be proud to have my name in the caption.
-Clint Bolick
One minor factual correction in the complaint: I was the last justice appointed to a five-member Court, which later was expanded to seven.”
Reporting released last week could redefine the border issue for Republicans and worsen already negative views of the Biden-Harris administration’s handling of border security. An internal memo from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) obtained by NBC News revealed that 30% of the multi-billion dollar border surveillance system is non-functional.
“Nearly one-third of the cameras in the Border Patrol’s primary surveillance system along the southern U.S. border are not working, according to an internal agency memo sent in early October,” NBC News reported.
“The large-scale outage affects roughly 150 of the 500 cameras perched on surveillance towers along the U.S.-Mexico border.” According to the outlet “severe technical problems,” have beset the networked camera system known as the Remote Video Surveillance System. Border Patrol officials who spoke anonymously cast the blame on outdated equipment and outstanding repair issues.
The system has been in operation since 2011 and was designed to “survey large areas without having to commit hundreds of agents in vehicles to perform the same function.” Two CBP officials told NBC that while some repairs were affected in early October, more than 150 repair orders are still outstanding and some areas of the border are still not visible to CBP surveillance as a result.
A CBP spokesman told the outlet that 300 new towers using more advanced technology have been installed along the border, but didn’t address the gaps described by the anonymous officials.
“CBP continues to install newer, more advanced technology that embrace artificial intelligence and machine learning to replace outdated systems, reducing the need to have agents working non-interdiction functions,” the CBP spokesman said.
As reported by Reason, spiraling costs began with a $1 billion outlay in 2010 that notably led to a 2017 GAO report filled with damning internal and external assessments “regarding the performance, cost, and schedule for implementing the systems,” that resulted in the cancellation of future installations of the SBInet systems.
In a similar accounting, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), addressing NBC News’ findings wrote, “U.S. Border Surveillance Towers Have Always Been Broken.”
EFF Director of Investigations Dave Maass wrote that the report is not a bombshell, but said, “What should actually be shocking is that Congressional leaders are acting shocked, like those who recently sent a letterabout the towers to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. These revelations simply reiterate what people who have been watching border technology have known for decades: Surveillance at the U.S.-Mexico border is a wasteful endeavor that is ill-equipped to respond to an ill-defined problem.”
Maas referred to a 2021 study from the DHS Inspector General which indicated that the situation had not improved.
“CBP faced additional challenges that reduced the effectiveness of its existing technology. Border Patrol officials stated they had inadequate personnel to fully leverage surveillance technology or maintain current information technology systems and infrastructure on site. Further, we identified security vulnerabilities on some CBP servers and workstations not in compliance due to disagreement about the timeline for implementing DHS configuration management requirements.
CBP is not well-equipped to assess its technology effectiveness to respond to these deficiencies. CBP has been aware of this challenge since at least 2017 but lacks a standard process and accurate data to overcome it.
Overall, these deficiencies have limited CBP’s ability to detect and prevent the illegal entry of noncitizens who may pose threats to national security.”
A set of follow-up plans, the Arizona Border Surveillance Technology Plan and the Southwest Border Technology Plan, then came into effect priced at approximately $6 billion and were successfully combined into the Integrated Surveillance Towers network in 2022. But the integration of these systems has evidently had little effect. With Maas noting, “Border authorities and their supporters in Congress are continuing to promote unproven, AI-driven technologies as the latest remedy for years of failures, including the ones voiced in the memo obtained by NBC News.”
Surprise Police Chief Benny Piña has found himself once again taking wide criticism stemming from the arrest of a mother who defied the city council while exercising her First Amendment rights. Along with the initial arrest, the Chief is now at the center of a firestorm after an internal department video from a week after the incident was obtained by KFYI’s James T. Harris. The video features Piña giving officers “a few things to avoid when confronted by a 1st Amendment auditor,” and defending the woman’s arrest.
Rebekah Massie, a mother from Surprise, was arrested in front of her 10-year-old daughter after criticizing the Surprise City Attorney Robert Wingo in August in a now-viral video. Massie and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) subsequently sued the city, and the council eventually reversed the policy that led to her arrest.
In the Surprise Police Department video created a week later, Piña is seen telling officers, “What happened last week in a council meeting resulted in what I think everybody in the world is calling an illegal arrest and a violation of someone’s First Amendment rights. That’s clearly not what we’re about, and that’s not what happened.”
Curiously, the Chief advised officers not to be completely open or truthful to what he called “First Amendment Auditors.” “[There are a] few things to avoid when confronted by a First Amendment auditor,” Piña said.
Piña introduced Sgt. Jamie Rothschild and suggested that the criticisms against him and the department are the work of “trolls and bots.” He responded to calls to fire Steve Shernicoff, the arresting officer.
The Chief told officers, “We took action that night to complete what we normally would do which is a use of force report. We took real quick action to make certain that we were in line with what our policy is and what our philosophy is, which is to take next steps to make certain that we were in a position of power to show that we, specifically Officer Shernicoff, acted with absolute speed to carry out the mission as directed that evening.”
He added, “When something doesn’t look right, or something doesn’t look popular, that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.”
Footage of the meeting and of Massie being led out as her child cried quickly went viral within days of the arrest. Bodycam footage was later released by Surprise PD.
The footage shows that Piña was present during the arrest and did not intervene. Massie was charged with trespassing, resisting arrest, and obstructing government operations. Following the uproar in response to the incident, State Senator John Kavanaugh publicly called for Attorney General Kris Mayes to investigate the arrest.
“In Arizona statutes, we have a provision that specifically says, ‘[a] public body may make an open call to the public during a public meeting, subject to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions, to allow individuals to address the public body on any issue within the jurisdiction of the public body,’” said Kavanagh.
“Protecting freedom of speech, especially in public government settings, is incredibly important to our democracy. Regardless of where they stand, members of the public deserve the opportunity to voice their opinions and concerns to city leaders.”
AZ Free News has reached out to Massie via her representation from FIRE for comment. As of this report no response has been received.
While the Biden-Harris administration is still boasting of the success of the CHIPS and Science Act, the Intel Corp. announced it will cut 15,000 jobs across the nation, “as part of the broad-based cost savings plan.” New reports show that almost four hundred of those job cuts will be at the company’s Ocotillo campus in Chandler.
As reported by Phoenix Business Journal, the series of layoff has come despite an upcoming injection of billions of taxpayer dollars via the CHIPS Act aimed at expanding the Chandler facility. Intel as a whole has approximately 12,000 employees in Arizona.
In a written statement Intel explained, “As part of the broad-based cost savings plan we announced in August, we are making the hard but necessary decisions to reduce the size of our workforce. These are the most difficult decisions we ever make, and we are treating people with care and respect. These changes support our strategy to become a leaner, simpler and more agile company as we position Intel for long-term sustainable growth.”
According to The Center Square, the office of Arizona’s Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs was quick to announce the mobilization of state taxpayer-funded resources being made available to the laid off Intel workers.
Spokesman Christian Slater told the outlet, “The Governor’s Office is already mobilizing rapid response resources at DES to connect affected workers with the resources they need to receive support and find new employment. Ensuring that every Arizonan has access to good-paying jobs is a top priority for Governor Hobbs, and she will continue bringing together workers and businesses to navigate challenges, create jobs and build an economy that helps every Arizonan thrive.”
The company was recently granted up to $8.5 billion in CHIPS Act funding, leading to scrutiny over their 15k global layoffs.
I've been asking AZ politicians about this, given that AZ was one of the four states to which the money was allocated for Intel.https://t.co/m2sIsRzW1i
In an August statement, Hobbs stressed Intel’s expansion in the state after the non-specific “cost savings plan,” was announced saying, “They’re expanding here. We’re thrilled to have their expansion here. We’re working with them on workforce initiatives to grow the skilled pipeline of workers that they need. We’re continuing to do that.”
Any direct mention of the billions of dollars earmarked for Intel via the CHIPS Act was decidedly absent from the Hobbs administration’s statement. However, a statement from the office of Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ) doubled down on the multi-billion-dollar giveaway, which failed to prevent the layoffs.
Kelly’s office wrote that the round of layoffs, “further underscores the importance of the CHIPS Act.” His office added, “American companies like Intel are facing unprecedented competition from China, but thanks to the CHIPS Act, we’re making sure Intel, and other companies can manufacture the most advanced chips right here in America—creating thousands of construction jobs, and generating even more good-paying, permanent technician jobs in Chandler and across the state that don’t require a four-year degree.”
As reported by the New York Post in August, despite the passage of the CHIPS Act, Intel suffered a staggering $1.6 billion in losses, with CEO Pat Gelsinger saying, “Simply put, we must align our cost structure with our new operating model and fundamentally change the way we operate,” per the memo published to the firm’s website. “Our revenues have not grown as expected – and we’ve yet to fully benefit from powerful trends, like AI. Our costs are too high, our margins are too low.”
When the initial announcement broke in August, Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake placed the blame for Intel’s problems squarely on the Biden-Harris administration in a post to X, writing, “For over 45 years, Arizona has been Intel’s U.S. manufacturing powerhouse. In the last job reports, Intel Shares plunged 20%, forcing them to lay off more than 15% of their employees. These are the devastating consequences #Bidenomics is having on our state. In the US Senate, I will work with President Trump to cut the deficit, turbocharge the economy, & bring back good jobs so that all companies both big & small can thrive in State 48.”
For over 45 years, Arizona has been Intel’s U.S. manufacturing powerhouse.
In the last job reports, Intel Shares plunged 20%, forcing them to lay off more than 15% of their employees.
These are the devastating consequences #Bidenomics is having on our state.
Intel’s CEO also noted that staff drawdowns through voluntary exits in September via “early retirement and separation offerings,” already had the company almost halfway to its 15k downsizing goal. But Gelsinger warned at the time, “We still have difficult decisions to make and will notify impacted employees in the middle of October.”
