The Arizona Senate’s leader referred two state officials to the Department of Justice (DOJ) to be investigated for obstruction.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14) announced the referral on Tuesday. Petersen, who is also running for attorney general, accused Attorney General Kris Mayes and Secretary of State Adrian Fontes of obstruction of justice and tampering with a witness concerning the federal probe into Arizona election records.
“The threats of the Attorney General and Secretary of State are incompatible with United States Constitution, which enshrines the grand jury in our constitutional order, and only serve to hinder voters’ confidence in our elections,” stated Petersen in his letter to the DOJ.
Today I referred Kris Mayes and Adrian Fontes to the Department of Justice for obstruction of justice and tampering with a witness. It is disturbing to see their resistance to an election integrity investigation.https://t.co/pRJ3mJgsuEpic.twitter.com/MwOS1wQBwB
The referral emerged in response to Mayes and Fontes requesting information from the state senate concerning its compliance with a recent federal grand jury subpoena of 2020 election records.
In response to Petersen’s referral, Fontes accused the senate president of jeopardizing voters’ safety and security.
“My main concern for ensuring privacy of personal information in voter registration data, as required by law, remains,” said Fontes.
PRESS RELEASE: Secretary Fontes Responds to DOJ Referral and Ongoing Political Theater pic.twitter.com/HN2hP5UKcd
— Arizona Secretary of State (@AZSecretary) April 7, 2026
Last month, the two Democratic officials issued a joint letter ordering county recorders not to comply with the federal subpoena. Contrary to what Petersen claimed in Tuesday’s letter, Mayes and Fontes argued compliance with the federal subpoena would violate both federal and state law.
“It is the states’ authority and responsibility to hold elections — not the federal government,” stated the pair’s letter. “Without direct congressional action, the United States Constitution does not authorize or allow the federal government to insert itself into a state’s election procedures, much less authorize the DOJ to unilaterally build a national voter database.”
Mayes called the subpoena “a weaponization of federal law enforcement in service of crackpots and lies,” and Petersen “an unrepentant election denier” spreading conspiracy theories and false stories of election fraud.
Petersen said the pair’s request from the state senate suggested their intention to interfere with the federal investigation.
Petersen based his referral on a legal analysis from the law firm Snell & Wilmer, which he said defended the state senate’s compliance with the federal subpoena and posited that the request by Mayes and Fontes constituted obstruction of justice and witness tampering.
In Petersen’s letter to Arizona District Attorney Timothy Courchaine, the state senate president accused Mayes and Fontes of ulterior motives linked to election meddling.
“Instead of fighting over these issues, we should all be working together to ensure the election integrity necessary to realize our country’s democratic promise,” said Petersen. “The Attorney General and Secretary’s phobia of fair and secure elections is impossible to explain absent nefarious motives.”
Mayes’ reelection campaign manager, Delaney Corcoran, said in a response that Petersen’s referral was a means to “seek retribution against his political enemies.”
Mayes made a similar claim when news of the federal subpoena emerged last month.
“One of the Republicans hoping to challenge me this fall is reigniting his SHAM ‘Cyber Ninja’ 2020 election audit conspiracies to the disservice of Arizonans,” said Mayes. “It’s a disgusting politicization of government and a waste of time and [money].”
One of the Republicans hoping to challenge me this fall is reigniting his SHAM ‘Cyber Ninja’ 2020 election audit conspiracies to the disservice of Arizonans. It’s a disgusting politicization of government and a waste of time and $. Just know, I’ll never stop protecting your vote.
A Phoenix-area school district instituted a new policy requiring oversight of books in the classroom.
Queen Creek Unified School District (QCUSD) began enforcing the policy in January after its governing board approved it unanimously in December.
The policy required the district to restrict general access to materials containing sexually explicit content within school and classroom libraries; develop procedures for site-level review, inventory, and parental access to the inventory list of all classroom library collections; and establish an accessible opt-out procedure for school or classroom library materials not directly related to content, curriculum, or standards.
Although Arizona law has long prohibited exposing children to sexually explicit materials, Arizona libraries and schools continued to offer books containing sexually explicit materials under the defense of the necessity of educating children on topics of sexuality and identity.
Books with sexually explicit content offered to minors in the past by school libraries throughout the state have included titles popular nationwide: “All Boys Aren’t Blue” by George M. Johnson, “Gender Queer: A Memoir” by Maia Kobabe, “The Bluest Eye” by Toni Morrison, “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” by Stephen Chbosky, “Tricks” by Ellen Hopkins, “Looking for Alaska” by John Green, “Me and Earl and the Dying Girl” by Jesse Andrews, “Crank” by Ellen Hopkins, “Sold” by Patricia McCormick, and “Flamer” by Mike Curato.
QCUSD Board member Kelli Anderson introduced the classroom library oversight policy after recognizing that district policy on oversight extended only to school library books. In a press release, Anderson reported that the primary complaint from parents concerned the books brought into classrooms.
“Before this policy, complaints about classroom books were the number one issue I heard from parents,” said Anderson. “Since it went into effect, I have received zero complaints from parents.”
Anderson said QCUSD’s action should be adopted by all other districts in the state as best practice.
“[A]fter listening to parents and reviewing our policies, it was clear there was a gap that needed to be addressed,” stated Anderson.
Arizona Women of Action (AZWOA), a parental advocacy nonprofit and Arizona chapter of America’s Women, agreed with Anderson’s assessment.
“This policy closes a major loophole and restores trust between schools and families,” stated AZWOA in a press release. “It empowers parents, supports teachers, and ensures students are learning in environments that are transparent and accountable.”
According to AZWOA, at least one parent has already reported seeing a difference in school handling of inappropriate books. That parent allegedly told AZWOA that his elementary-aged child’s school contacted him prior to the policy compliance deadline to recover a classroom library book deemed inappropriate under the new policy.
The parent also reportedly said he wasn’t aware his child had access to such materials in the classroom.
At the beginning of last summer, the Maricopa County Library District piloted a “parental choice” program at the Queen Creek library enabling parents to choose which books, if any, their child may not check out.
Months later, in September, the county removed sex education books from the children’s sections to the adult non-fiction sections at 12 of its 14 libraries.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
The transgender mayoral candidate for Fountain Hills was accused of using the town’s logo in his campaign materials.
Last month, the town of Fountain Hills issued a cease-and-desist letter to town council member Brenda Kalivianakis for incorporating the town’s logo into his mayoral campaign logo.
The Fountain Hills logo is based on the town’s famous 560-foot fountain, the tallest in the world when it was first built in 1970.
The logo’s depiction of the fountain has a saucer-shaped base resting on three horizontal lines representing water, three slated prongs protruding upward on each side from the base, a nozzle in the center of the base out of which emerges a jet of water curving up to the left, and two lighter-colored curves bending downward. The town adopted the logo in 2023.
Kalivianakis’ logo has many of the same markers: the three water lines, the saucer-shaped base, the three prongs on either side of the center nozzle, the upward arc of water curving to the left, and the two lighter shades of curves bending downward from the water.
The main difference between the town’s logo and Kalivianakis’ campaign logo is the latter has two additional lines coming off the upward arc of water to form the letter “K,” and the words “Brenda for Mayor” to the left of the fountain symbol.
On Monday, Kalivianakis posted a press release from his campaign addressing the cease-and-desist letter. He argued his logo was “clearly distinguishable and creates no likelihood of confusion with the Town’s mark,” and claimed contentions had more to do with his speech than the logo.
Per Kalivianakis, the town will hire a trademark attorney and potentially bill him for the costs. Kalivianakis called it a waste of taxpayer dollars.
“Using taxpayer resources to target a candidate’s campaign materials raises serious questions about selective enforcement and interference with protected speech,” stated Kalivianakis’ press release.
Kalivianakis closed with a plea for donations to his campaign.
Mayoral and council candidates all received a cease-and-desist letter from the town attorney, Jennifer Wright, last month. At that point, it wasn’t made clear who, specifically, was at fault for the trademark violation out of all the candidates.
However, Kalivianakis told the Fountain Hills Times that he believed the cease-and-desist was a politically motivated, targeted attack by Wright aimed at him.
“I’m disappointed that the highly partisan Town Attorney is attempting to manipulate a local election by threatening trademark litigation. My logo is not a recreation of the Town’s official logo,” said Kalivianakis. “It is a fair use depiction of our community’s most recognizable landmark, something that has long been a tradition in political campaigns.”
In 2023, Kalivianakis was cleared of an ethics complaint by an outside attorney. The complaint alleged Kalivianakis violated the town code by requesting a director investigate and remove a sign allegedly in violation of sign code rather than communicating that request through the town manager.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Republican lawmakers are challenging Pima County over its resolution to prevent federal immigration enforcement from using county property.
House and Senate leadership filed a complaint with Attorney General Kris Mayes on Monday requesting an SB1487 Investigation. There is only one other active complaint under this designation, relating to a similar regulation prohibiting federal immigration enforcement activity on city property passed by the city of Phoenix.
In February, Pima County adopted a resolution, “Protecting County-Owned Properties,” prohibiting county departments, agencies, and employees from giving federal officials access to county buildings without a court warrant. The policy also barred departments, agencies, and employees from voluntarily assisting, facilitating, or cooperating with immigration enforcement.
The policy also prohibited county property from being used for staging areas, processing locations, or operations bases for immigration enforcement. The county defined staging area to include an assembling, mobilization, or deployment of vehicles, equipment, materials, or personnel for immigration enforcement.
Pima County Supervisor Rex Scott told AZPM that federal agents would have to justify themselves to county officials.
“If somebody with an enforceable warrant comes in, wanting to deal with what we’ve heard are the ‘worst of the worst,’ they’re going to be able to do that,” said Scott. “These warrantless, random sweeps that we’ve been seeing around the country are not going to happen on county property.”
Pima County Supervisor Tanya Nunez went a step further. She told KOLD that ICE needed to cease operations entirely.
“It’s a first step, it’s an important step, but it is really just the beginning. We need to have ICE not operate anywhere in our community, not just county property,” said Nunez.
According to the supervisors, the goal of the resolution was to prevent mass deportations and to limit immigration agents to warrant-based actions.
GOP leadership in the legislature say this resolution violates Arizona law prohibiting subdivisions of the state from limiting or restricting the enforcement of federal immigration laws, and the Supremacy Clause included in the Arizona Constitution.
Senate President Warren Petersen called the resolution a “radical” undermining of public safety in a press release.
“We’re seeing Democrat-run local governments put radical political agendas ahead of public safety,” said Petersen. “Instead of supporting law enforcement and protecting their citizens from crime, they’re creating barriers that make it harder to enforce the law and easier for criminals to stay in our communities.”
Senate President Pro Tempore TJ Shope argued these patchwork mandates from municipalities would only undermine law and order.
“This is about making sure our laws are applied consistently across Arizona,” said Shope. “When one county decides to go rogue, it creates gaps that undermine enforcement statewide. Arizonans expect coordination between all levels of government, not policies that tie the hands of law enforcement.”
House Majority Leader John Kavanagh questioned whether Mayes would have an biased approach, given her outspoken criticisms of ICE.
“Given her record and her public opposition to immigration enforcement, there is a serious question about whether she can review this case objectively. This is not a policy debate. The law is clear, and it must be applied,” said Kavanagh.
The city of Phoenix passed a regulation similar to Pima County’s resolution last month.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona’s school choice program allows participants to use funds to pay for college, per a reminder from the state’s top elected education official.
Tom Horne, Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction, promoted this usage of Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program funds in an interview with The Center Square last week.
Horne said this option was more than just a benefit to families. The superintendent made the case that higher education directly correlated to strengthening Arizona’s economy.
“We want kids to go to college,” said Horne. “The percentage of college-educated students in a state has something to do with the success of its economy.”
This is not a new allowance. Arizona law has allowed this use of school choice funds since universalization occurred in 2022 under the former governor, Doug Ducey. Arizona was the first state to open school choice to all students.
Over 102,800 students have enrolled in the ESA program for the 2025-2026 school year, as of last week.
Horne is touting the benefits of the ESA program amid attacks from various special interests.
The Arizona Department of Education (AZED) is under pressure from a major media outlet, 12News, and anti-school choice organizations over misspending rates within the program.
12News reported that 20 percent of ESA expenditures were improper purchases. AZED reported the misspending rate amounted to less than two percent.
12News argued both figures can be true depending on the context, but Horne argued that was not the case. He said the actual amount of fraudulent purchases out of all misspending was 0.3 percent.
“The people who’ve made these criticisms fundamentally did not understand. To start with, [12News] said there was 20 percent fraud,” said Horne in a KTAR interview last month. “The 20 percent figure was the percentage of purchases under $2,000 to see if they were okay or not. But only 20 percent of that 20 percent were improper. That’s four percent. And the other thing to know is, they’re not all fraud. A lot of times it’s innocent mistakes.”
While Horne continues to defend and promote the merits of the ESA program in its present form, both supporters and detractors of the program argue changes need to be made.
Horne’s primary election challenger, Treasurer Kimberly Yee, announced last month that reforms were needed to reduce improper spending, starting with a switch in the reimbursement vendor.
Regardless of the outcome of this election, either Horne or Yee may face new challenges from school choice opponents.
The benefit to pay for higher education through the school choice program, and universalization as a whole, may be limited later this year pending the outcome of a ballot initiative seeking to place an income cap on eligibility.
Under the initiative, only families earning less than $150,000 a year would qualify to enter the ESA program. That income ceiling would be adjusted annually.
Under that income cap, approximately 15 percent of current ESA students would be removed from the program.
The initiative would also further restrict the list of allowable purchases. All tutors, schools, and service providers would be required to fall under State Board of Education oversight, and pay a fee and register annually with AZED to receive ESA funds.
It would also eliminate the current ability for families to rollover funds. All unspent funds would be recouped and returned to the state. That would, effectively, end ESA students’ ability to set aside funds over the years to pay toward college.
The Arizona Education Association and Save Our Schools Arizona are behind the ballot initiative, “Protect Education Act,” filed last month (this version superseded a previous version, the “Protect Education, Accountability Now Act”).
The initiative requires nearly 256,000 signatures to make the ballot.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
