An Arizona mother went viral after objecting to a Phoenix Public Library storytime featuring a book she says encourages children to discuss their underwear with strangers.
Ms. Manjarrez posted a video to social media questioning why a public library would read a book encouraging preschool children to show off their underwear to strangers. Manjarrez said the book was “What Color Is Your Underwear?” by Sam Lloyd, first published in 2004.
In the book, animal characters lift up their clothes to reveal their underwear; at the end of the book, the final character is revealed to not be wearing any underwear at all.
“Why is it anybody’s business on what color underwear you have on, whether you’re adult or especially a child?” asked Manjarrez in her video.
Manjarrez claimed she was the only parent who left the storytime before it was over.
“I can’t be the only parent that got up and thought that was a completely inappropriate book for kids,” said Manjarrez.
A user, Mou Isabelle Phung, claimed in a comment that her molester used an underwear-exposure conversation similar to what the book portrays to molest her for the first time. Multiple other users attested in their comments that something similar happened to them.
“My first experience of a sexual encounter was me being five years old and being asked what color my underwear was so take that as you will,” said Phung.
A staff member at the Phoenix Public Library branch where the storytime occurred, Burton Barr Central Library, reportedly told Manjarrez that their literacy outreach librarian, Grethcen Wetter, coordinates storytimes.
A representative with Phoenix Public Library, Wendy Resnik, later told Manjarrez in an email that the book was “age-appropriate” and “lighthearted,” and intended only to “teach colors, animal identification, and prediction skills.”
“Although the title can sound surprising out of context, the content is silly, playful, and widely enjoyed by many families,” said Resnik. “The humor is entirely innocent and geared toward toddlers, focusing on silly visuals like a frog in green briefs or a horse in red boxers.”
It is unclear whether Resnik used AI to craft the email, or simply never reviewed the book herself. The book doesn’t depict a frog wearing green briefs, and nowhere does the word “briefs” appear in the book, though the first page does depict a horse wearing red boxers. The closest depiction to a frog in the book is the turtle character, depicted wearing purple underwear. AI is known for hallucinating information in its responses.
Resnik, wife of 12News political reporter Brahm Resnik, has served as the youth services coordinator for Phoenix Public Library for over 14 years.
Manjarrez stated in the caption of a video sharing the email that Resnik’s response greatly concerned her.
“I’m f——- livid because out of all the ways [to] teach children colors she thinks it’s acceptable to teach children colors through the colors of their damn underwear?” said Manjarrez.
Arizona Women of Action (AWOA) issued a statement on Manjarrez’s video, agreeing with the mother’s assessment of the book as problematic.
“Parents must speak up and demand accountability,” stated AWOA. “Protecting children’s innocence isn’t optional — it’s our responsibility.”
According to the library’s calendar, one of the city of Phoenix’s four Families First Resource Centers (FFRC) hosted the storytime. The center uses the Scholastic company’s Read and Rise programming to source the books, reportedly designed for children ranging in age from birth to five.
Phoenix’s FFRCs rely on grant funding from First Things First (FTF), the organization funded by the state through the approximately $150 million a year it collects from taxes on tobacco products.
FTF is run by its statewide board whose members are appointed by the governor, the Arizona Early Childhood Development and Health Board, and volunteers through 28 regional partnership councils.
The Phoenix South Regional Partnership Council, which oversees the area containing the Burton Barr Central Library branch, received nearly $17 million this fiscal year and the last, of which nearly $2 million was allotted to family resource centers.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Apache County has removed the Spanish language from its print ballots.
Gila and Mohave counties made the same decision ahead of the 2024 general election.
Apache County officials cited printing costs and election wait times as deciding factors for the decision to limit printed ballots to one language. As support for these justifications, Apache County noted that it will continue to offer Spanish ballot translations on their electronic vote machines. Gila County does as well.
Rep. Abe Hamadeh (AZ-08) praised the county’s decision as “pure common sense.” Hamadeh said all citizens have a duty to speak the language of their nation.
“In America, we speak English. Naturalized citizens must prove they can read [and] write it to vote, ballots should reflect that too,” said Hamadeh.
In March, Hamadeh introduced legislation to require that only English be provided on federal ballots, the Voting Only Through English Act (VOTE Act). The bill would tie federal funding to compliance, something Hamadeh said was necessary to “end[ing] multilingual madness, [and] put[ting] America first.”
The legislative proposal was in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order designating English as the official language of the U.S. The order revoked former President Bill Clinton’s Executive Order 13166 requiring federal agencies to provide materials and services in languages other than English, though it didn’t ban agencies from continuing with the practice.
“To promote unity, cultivate a shared American culture for all citizens, ensure consistency in government operations, and create a pathway to civic engagement, it is in America’s best interest for the Federal Government to designate one — and only one — official language,” stated the executive order. “Establishing English as the official language will not only streamline communication but also reinforce shared national values, and create a more cohesive and efficient society.
Another Arizona county just eliminated Spanish ballots ahead of the midterms, pure common sense!
In America, we speak English. Naturalized citizens must prove they can read & write it to vote, ballots should reflect that too.
That’s why Congressman Hamadeh introduced the Voting…
— Office of Congressman Abe Hamadeh (@RepAbeHamadeh) July 8, 2026
Not all counties are permitted to simplify their ballots by keeping only the English language. Maricopa, Pima, Santa Cruz, and Yuma counties are required under federal law to include Spanish translations on their ballots and election materials.
The law requires non-English translations on ballots and election materials for states and political subdivisions with more than 5% of citizens voting age that are limited-English proficient, and political subdivisions with more than 10,000 citizens of voting age that are a single language minority and are limited-English proficient.
Progressive advocates say all counties should cater to non-English speakers who desire to vote.
Senior campaign managers with All Voting is Local (AVL), Natalia Sells and Justa Lopez, have spoken out against these three counties’ decisions.
The two issued an opinion piece with the Arizona Daily Star claiming counties were slowly regressing toward an election system accessible only to white men.
“Whether intentional or not, these changes move us backward to a time when many Americans’ fundamental freedom to vote was limited to only White men,” said the two campaign managers.
Sells later told AZ Family that counties have a duty to be accessible to all voters.
“Counties shouldn’t be making it harder for people to be able to vote just because English isn’t their first and primary language,” said Sells.
Sells, a graduate of Arizona State University (ASU) Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, has worked with AVL since 2024.
Lopez, also a graduate of ASU, has served in managerial positions for several voter advocacy groups prior to joining AVL in March, including the Fair Elections Center, Mi Familia Vota, and Supermajority.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona’s “Save Women’s Sports Act” no longer faces a court challenge following a Supreme Court ruling.
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in West Virginia v. B.P.J. (inclusive of Little v. Hecox) that states have a constitutional right to enact laws restricting single-sex sports participation on biological sex. The court ruling affirmed that biology, not gender identity, defines sex when considering federal regulations on sex-based discrimination.
The Save Women’s Sports Act went into effect in 2022 under SB 1165. The law requires K-12 students to play on sports teams aligning with their biological sex.
The following spring, the families of two boys who identify as transgender girls sued State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne in Doe v. Horne. The boys who filed were, at the time, an 11-year-old middle schooler in Maricopa County identified as “Jane Doe” and a 15-year-old high schooler in Pima County identified as “Megan Roe.”
Roe, now identified as Grey Picciano, dropped out of the case upon graduating high school, and until this week only Doe remained in the case.
The two youths had alleged the law was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, Title IX, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act since they had either not undergone puberty or were taking puberty blockers.
The Tucson division of the Arizona District Court blocked the state law in July 2023, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling in 2024.
Horne celebrated the lawsuit’s dismissal in a press release announcement, bringing to close a three-year court battle in which Horne ultimately held the line on Arizona’s law.
“There had been numerous articles about girls who worked hard on their sports, hoping to make the team, or even get a college scholarship or compete for the Olympics. Then they had to compete with a biological boy who was bigger, stronger and faster from birth,” said Horne. “They could not compete. Their dreams were shattered and they were devastated. They no longer need to fear those outcomes.”
Horne also pointed out that, of all those named as defendants in the original lawsuit, only his office remained three years later. Attorney General Kris Mayes reportedly declined to represent Horne in the case. Horne contracted the services of Wilenchik Law Firm to represent him.
An attorney behind the lawsuit to stop Arizona’s law, Rachel Berg, senior staff attorney with the National Center for LGBTQ Rights (NCLR), told Capitol Media Services that it was Doe’s decision to dismiss the lawsuit.
“[O]ur client has decided for personal reasons that she does not want to continue with the litigation,” said Berg.
In a statement last week responding to the Supreme Court ruling, Berg claimed state laws restricting participation in single-sex sports based on biological sex would lead to institutions checking the gender of participants should they appear to be physically above average.
“Blanket bans on transgender girls playing school sports invite anyone to call for a ‘gender check’ on any girl who wants to play sports if they think she is ‘too tall’ or ‘too strong,’” said Berg. “Local schools and sports associations should be handling this issue, not politicians.”
Including the dismissed case, NCLR has filed five cases challenging Arizona laws and policies which allegedly impose unlawful discriminations against individuals who identify as transgender.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Graham Platner has dropped out of the Maine Senate race.
His exit comes after Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) withdrew his endorsement of Platner following widespread criticism of the candidate.
This is the second candidate in nearly as many months that Gallego has backed off endorsing over sexual assault claims. Back in April, Gallego rescinded his endorsement of his longtime best friend: California gubernatorial candidate and resigned congressman, Eric Swalwell.
Although other allegations against Platner detailing unseemly behavior began to emerge earlier this year, it wasn’t until reporting came out this week detailing a sexual assault allegation that Gallego ended his support.
“The allegations against Graham Platner are troubling and deeply serious,” said Gallego. “I am rescinding my endorsement.”
The allegations against Graham Platner are troubling and deeply serious.
Gallego declined to rescind his endorsement after an initial accusation of assault emerged from 40-year-old conservative pundit Lyndsey Fifield in New York Timesreporting. Fifield and others have speculated that Gallego opted not to act because he was less inclined to believe Fifield’s claims. This new allegation claiming sexual assault came from a 41-year-old Maine resident and massage therapist, Jenny Racicot.
Racicot accused Platner of raping her in 2021 when he was heavily intoxicated. Racicot offered accounts of the alleged assault in exclusive interviews with CNN and Politico. Racicot had initially lent some insight to the media about Platner’s “reckless” and “unsettling” behavior, but decided to come forward with her story after witnessing the doubts raised against Fifield’s testimony.
Platner issued a short video statement calling the allegations “troubling, serious, and false,” and that all accusations of nonconsensual behavior were untrue. Platner also indicated he would take time to “reflect” on the future of his Senate campaign.
Gallego had praised Platner as a unifier across varied voting demographics, defending him against discoveries of Platner having acquired a tattoo of the Nazi military’s skull and crossbones known as a Totenkopf, and aligned himself publicly with Antifa and socialism.
“Platner can bring out new voters, can bring out cross-voters,” said Gallego. “This guy is an authentic man.”
The senator also defended Platner’s online indications of sexual deviancy as typical military behavior. Platner had admitted to a habit of masturbating into portable public toilets and appreciating the explicit graffiti on restroom walls.
Gallego described Platner as “relatable,” though other veterans serving in Congress disagreed.
The Republican Party of Arizona called Gallego “just another fat rat jumping off the various sinking socialists’ ships.”
There is a pattern emerging – first his former "roommate" Swalwell, now his socialist buddy. Ruben is just another fat rat jumping off the various sinking socialists' ships. https://t.co/4IgTNS4WJy
— Republican Party of Arizona (@AZGOP) July 7, 2026
Other Democrats who have held onto their endorsements of Platner have also begun bowing out.
The Democratic nominee for Maine governor, Hannah Pingree, called the allegations “deeply disturbing” and urged Platner to exit the race.
“Democrats need a nominee who can beat Susan Collins in November. Graham Platner is no longer that candidate,” said Pingree. “Graham Platner tapped into something real — voters hungry for change showed up with real passion and energy. That energy doesn’t have to go away. It needs a new candidate to carry it forward.”
My statement on Graham Platner:
These allegations are deeply disturbing. Jenny Racicot is a woman who has shown real courage in sharing her story — what she's describing is serious, credible and cannot be dismissed.
For Maine, for the future of control of the US Senate, and…
Senate President and Republican candidate for attorney general Warren Petersen (LD14) has joined a court fight to ensure only citizens vote in elections.
Petersen filed an amicus brief alongside House Speaker Steve Montenegro (R-LD29) in a case where progressive advocates are challenging the Trump administration’s effort to centralize citizen data across multiple agencies in the name of voter identification verification and even immigration enforcement.
The League of Women Voters (LWV) and several of their local chapters, along with the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and five citizens, sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Social Security Administration (SSA), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Attorney General’s Office over the data centralization last September.
These advocacy groups and private citizens claim the Trump administration’s data pooling violates the 1974 Privacy Act. Judge Sparkle Sooknanan with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed with them in a ruling last month. The federal government has filed for a stay of judgment pending appeal.
Rep. Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ-08), announced his intent to file articles of impeachment against Sooknanan for the ruling, which he claimed was an overreach and weaponization of the judiciary against the executive.
“[This ruling] was a blatant and unlawful subversion of the President’s executive authority and a direct assault on election integrity,” stated Hamadeh. “Judges who weaponize their bench to interfere with the President’s constitutional duties must be held accountable.
Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan’s egregious overreaching ruling blocking President Trump’s common-sense effort to verify the citizenship of those who want to vote in our elections was the final straw.
It was a blatant and unlawful subversion of the President’s executive authority and… pic.twitter.com/ezoLJJhiba
— Office of Congressman Abe Hamadeh (@RepAbeHamadeh) July 7, 2026
Petersen argued in their amicus brief that Arizona law relies on the federal Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system to process voter registration and government benefit inquiries.
The lawmakers cited the Purcell principle, a precedent established in the 2006 Supreme Court ruling involving former Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell that declares that the courts should avoid ruling to change election rules too close to an election.
Petersen and Montenegro argued voter confidence in Arizona and other states would be jeopardized if the court declined to withhold enforcement of its ruling while the appeal was underway. Other states impacted by the district court ruling hindering SAVE usage for elections, as well as immigration enforcement, include Florida, Indiana, Iowa, and Ohio.
“Making changes to an important election-integrity system at this late stage in the election season creates unnecessary confusion for election officials and the public,” stated the brief. “This court’s order altered an election-related process in the middle of elections around the nation and thus harms the states’ interest in maintaining voters’ confidence in the electoral process.”
Their brief also argued that the ruling would fly in the face of federalism, the mechanism on which states rely to exercise their laws.
Today, I filed an amicus brief in the DC district court supporting DHS’s efforts to ensure that only citizens are voting in our elections. It may not surprise you that the ACLU is in opposition. pic.twitter.com/63JC2MJP1U
Attorney General Kris Mayes and Secretary of State Adrian Fontes have stood opposed to the Trump administration’s data centralization and voter verification efforts as alleged breaches of privacy.
Today, Judge Susan Brnovich's dismissed the DOJ's lawsuit demanding our voter registration rolls. @AZSecretary and I will continue to defend the privacy of voters against federal overreach.
