by Ethan Faverino | Feb 25, 2026 | Education, News
By Ethan Faverino |
The Arizona House of Representatives passed HCR 2003, the Protect Girls’ Sports in Arizona Act, on February 23, 2026, in a vote of 32 ayes to 25 nays.
Sponsored by Rep. Selina Bliss (R-LD1), the measure now advances to the Arizona Senate. If approved by the Senate, it would refer the proposed law to Arizona voters for consideration on the November 2026 general election ballot.
HCR 2003 seeks to require schools and athletic associations to designate interscholastic and intramural athletic teams or sports as “males/men/boys,” “females/women/girls,” or “coeducational/mixed,” based on an individual’s biological sex as recorded at birth on the original birth certificate. Teams designated for females would not be open to biological male athletes.
The resolution also includes stronger privacy protections, prohibiting schools and athletic associations from authorizing individuals to use restrooms, locker rooms, shower rooms, or other private athletic facilities not designated for their biological sex, effective January 1, 2027.
The measure restores and strengthens elements of Arizona’s 2022 Save Women’s Sports Act (SB 1165), which faced partial blocks by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, creating uncertainty for schools, families, and athletes.
“Today the House acted to protect fair competition for girls across Arizona,” stated Rep. Bliss. “Women’s sports were created because biological differences matter. When those differences are ignored, girls lose roster spots, scholarships, and opportunities they earned. HCR 2003 gives voters the chance to protect female athletes and establish clear, durable rules for schools.”
Additional provisions of the proposed law include:
- Allowing athletes to participate on teams aligned with their biological sex or on coeducational teams.
- Prohibiting government entities, licensing organizations, accrediting bodies, or athletic associations from taking adverse action against schools or associations that maintain separate teams for female athletes.
- Providing a private cause of action for athletes deprived of opportunities or harmed by violations, including for injunctive relief, damages (including for psychological, emotional, or physical harm), attorney fees, and costs.
- Protecting against retaliation for reporting violations, with similar legal remedies available.
- Applying to public and qualifying private schools serving K-12.
“Court rulings have created uncertainty for schools and families,” Rep. Bliss added. “This referral allows Arizona voters to decide whether girls’ sports should remain for girls. It protects privacy in locker rooms and showers and restores clarity statewide.”
HCR 2003 now heads to the Arizona Senate for further consideration. If approved, it will be on this year’s general election ballot.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Ethan Faverino | Feb 20, 2026 | Education, News
By Ethan Faverino |
Arizona lawmakers have introduced legislation aimed at preventing disruptions to public school operations by prohibiting teacher strikes and coordinated work stoppages, while tying state funding more closely to in-person classroom instruction.
House Education Committee Chairman Matt Gress (R-LD4) and Senate Education Committee Chairman Hildy Angius (R-LD30) are advancing the proposal as a striker amendment to House Bill 2313.
The measure would make it unlawful for teachers in Arizona public school districts and charter schools to engage in strikes or any organized efforts to halt work against their employers.
Teachers who participate in such collective actions would forfeit key employment protections, including civil service status, reemployment rights, and benefits or privileges associated with their public school positions. These penalties would apply only to group participation in strikes or work stoppages—individual employment decisions or absences would not be affected.
“Taxpayers fund instruction delivered in classrooms,” stated Rep. Gress in a press release announcing the striker. “When adults coordinate mass callouts to shut down campuses, that is a strike in practice. It robs students of instructional time and throws working parents into chaos. Public schools exist to educate children. If someone organizes a work stoppage, they should not retain the privileges and protections of public employment. If regular school days are moved online because of coordinated political action, funding must reflect that.”
In addition, the bill directs the Arizona Department of Education to cut down a school’s base support funding when remote instruction increases as a direct result of an organized work stoppage. The legislation includes safeguards for schools operating under approved alternative instructional models, full-time online programs, or during declared emergencies.
Lawmakers say the proposal is a response to events in late January, when thousands of teachers and staff members in Tucson called out sick in connection with a nationwide protest. This action led to the temporary closure of around 20 campuses in the Tucson Unified School District, disrupting student learning and creating challenges for families.
“Parents should not wake up to closed campuses because of organized protests,” added Senator Angius. “The Tucson closures showed how a coordinated call-in can shut down learning overnight. This legislation restores accountability and stability for families and keeps the focus where it belongs, on students in seats and classrooms open.”
Consideration of the striker amendment to HB 2313 is expected soon.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Feb 16, 2026 | Education, News
By Staff Reporter |
The lone conservative voice for the Phoenix Union High School District (PXU) governing board resigned on Friday.
Jeremiah Cota blamed “unfounded and baseless attacks” by the rest of the board against him for his resignation. Cota said the district suffered “gross maladministration and injurious governance” and a “fiscally unsustainable path” under the rest of the board.
“I have been stunned to see how this board and district have engaged in a pattern of harassment and discrimination against fellow community and board members, including the baseless and unfounded accusations against myself,” said Cota. “As an enrolled member of the federally recognized San Carlos Apache Tribe, the outright persecution I have experienced as a board member from other members and direct personnel have jilted my relationships, caused damage and irrefutable harm, and created a toxic operating environment for both personal and professional endeavors.”
Cota was appointed to the board in June by the Maricopa County School Superintendent. Prior to his appointment, Cota worked for Reps. Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs.
Since being on the board, Cota has called public attention to a number of causes for concern within the district: increased violence following rejection of campus officers and contracts with left-wing activist groups, to name a few.
Last fall, the board was hit with significant budget reductions and staff layoffs over the steep decline in enrollment. District leadership, apart from Cota, blamed school choice and Republicans for their budget shortfalls.
Activists launched a campaign for his removal over his attendance at a Christmas party with fellow conservatives following Turning Point USA’s annual AmericaFest in December.
Secular AZ organized a petition that began circulating last month calling for Cota’s resignation, picked up by local media. Over 600 people signed the petition. Secular AZ also created social graphics to complement their campaign against Cota.
Board President Francisco Pastor-Rivera signaled support for the petition in interviews.
“As a board member, you represent making decisions that impact a student’s future. I think this attendance itself, and this action shows true colors all together,” said Pastor-Rivera. “I really question if a person is representing the values of the community that they serve.”
Cota inspired the ire of district leadership about a month after joining the board when he declined to recite a land acknowledgment statement, instead offering a prayer to God. Cota later went a step further and requested to remove the land acknowledgement statement entirely.
The board parliamentarian prevented Cota from finishing his prayer and told him that religious prayer could not occur before the land acknowledgment statement.
The denial of Cota’s commitment to a public display of his Christian faith spurred a legislative response in the form of House Bill 2110.
One of the leaders of Secular AZ and repeat political candidate for various offices, Jeanne Casteen, accused Cota of indoctrination in media interviews.
“They shouldn’t have been praying in the first place. If you want to pray, you can do it before the meeting and silently,” said Casteen.
More recently, Cota led the lone charge on the board to take disciplinary measures against staff who participated in anti-ICE protests on campus.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Feb 13, 2026 | Education, News
By Staff Reporter |
New email records reveal the University of Arizona (U of A) misled the public about a donation from Jeffrey Epstein.
Email records first reported on by FOIAzona proved Epstein’s donation was not “anonymous” as U of A’s vice president for communications at the time, Chris Sigurdson, claimed. U of A’s associate vice president of external communications at the time, Pam Scott, also claimed that the university had no knowledge because Epstein was not listed on the board of directors with the charity through which he donated, Gratitude America.
“At the time the donation was made by Gratitude America Ltd., Jeffrey Epstein was not listed on the board of directors and the university was unaware of his involvement,” she said. “We have no plans to repay this contribution.”
However, records reveal Epstein’s name was postmarked on the mailing documents containing the donation check bearing his charity’s name. The donation was made out to the University of Arizona Foundation.
Epstein’s $50,000 donation was made at the request of one U of A professor, Stuart Hameroff.
Hameroff’s team also helped Epstein’s team on where to send the donation. The university, through that professor’s program, gave Epstein’s charity public recognition for the donation.
In March 2017, Hameroff asked Epstein to fund an annual conference he put on through the interdisciplinary entity he founded over 30 years ago, the Center for Consciousness Studies. These conferences have occurred since 1994.
One of the center’s latest major donations was $2 million from a retired Google software developer. These funds align with the purpose of the funds put forth by Epstein: engineering consciousness. (The latest Epstein files release revealed Epstein sought, among his other endeavors into transhumanism, to create a behavioral engineering institute at Stanford University).
Hameroff is a leader with the U of A sciences: he cofounded and chairs the Center for Consciousness Studies, cochairs the Science of Consciousness, and serves as professor emeritus of the Departments of Anesthesiology and Psychology.
Hameroff didn’t need to provide Epstein with details before the financier pledged a minimum sponsorship of $50,000.
“Who are the speakers and what is the cost?” wrote Epstein. “I’m in for at least $50,000, before knowing anything.”
Epstein’s trust in Hameroff likely stemmed from the personal relationship the pair shared. The Epstein library presently returns multiple records mentioning Hameroff from 2016 through 2018.
Hameroff stayed at one of Epstein’s apartments in New York for multiple days leading up to Halloween in 2016, arranged by Gino Yu, associate professor and director of game development at Hong Kong Polytechnic Institute. Yu referred to Epstein as his “benefactor,” per Hameroff.
Hameroff called the night “memorable” in an email after the fact.
“We appreciate you staying up late with an early flight. We were tired too, but it was a memorable night,” wrote Hameroff.
Yu also wanted James Tagg, an inventor and engineer with Penrose Institute, to attend the October 2016 meeting with Epstein and Hameroff. It’s unclear if Tagg attended. However, Hameroff did later ask Epstein to provide seed money for another project, the Penrose Institute, in May 2017 during discussions of the Center for Consciousness Studies conference.
Other recently released Epstein records revealed that an investment banker and fellow Epstein affiliate, Robert Lawrence Kuhn, directed Epstein to review another consciousness program advised by Hameroff, the Shanghai Science of Consciousness Program. That email exchange took place in February 2017. It appears that program was a reference to a canceled attempt to hold the Center for Consciousness Studies conference in Shanghai, per emails.
“Attached is the Shanghai Science of Consciousness program (Stuart Hameroff put together; I advised),” said Kuhn.
Epstein, via his charity Gratitude America, was featured as a sponsor that “made the conference a reality” per program documents. Emails affirmed this promotion, as well as offers to pay for a hotel room for Epstein’s attendance at the conference.
Another U of A faculty member and famed political activist, Noam Chomsky, was a friend of Epstein as well. Chomsky was included in Epstein’s “little black book.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Feb 13, 2026 | Education, News
By Staff Reporter |
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne believes the new federal guidance on prayer in schools serves as a pathway to further purge K-12 of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).
Horne said the administration’s characterization of speech compulsion made it clear that DEI presented an impermissible threat to religious freedoms.
“The new guidance issued by the U.S. Department of Education states that ‘No public school, teacher, or school official should ever coerce or press a student to engage in speech or affirm a viewpoint that would violate the student’s sincere religious beliefs,’” said Horne. “Numerous DEI precepts violate widespread religious beliefs, such as urging students to change genders, age-inappropriate sexual lessons, and other elements that may demean a student’s religious beliefs.”
Horne clarified that the new guidance doesn’t permit schools to coerce religious expression, either. Both the superintendent and the guidance cited the 2025 Supreme Court decision, Mahmoud v. Taylor, which found that public schools mandating curriculums endorsing homosexuality and transgenderism were violating religious freedom.
“No public school, teacher, or school official should ever coerce or pressure a student to engage in speech or affirm a viewpoint that would violate the student’s sincere religious beliefs,” stated the guidance. “[A] public school cannot require a student group to adopt a particular viewpoint in order to be recognized by the school if the viewpoint violates the student members’ religious beliefs. School officials also cannot express hostility toward religious student groups by demeaning their beliefs.”
The guidance, issued last week, addresses the issue of DEI elements in the context of requirements under federal law to advise on constitutionally protected prayer in public elementary and secondary schools. This updated version replaces the last guidance issued under the Biden administration in 2023.
Horne offered a marked copy of the guidance highlighting key new provisions across the four parts of the nine-page guidance.
In order to receive federal funding, local education agencies (LEAs) must certify in writing to the Arizona Department of Education (AZED) by Oct. 1 every year that none of their policies prevent or otherwise deny participation in constitutionally protected prayer in public K-12 schools.
AZED will establish processes by which the LEAs provide that certification and by which complaints may be filed against noncompliant LEAs. AZED must also send a list of noncompliant LEAs to the Department of Education by Nov. 1.
Presently, AZED requires LEAs to answer on Critical Race Theory and DEI as part of public reporting of school grades to assist with parental choice in schools.
“We will add this question to our list and report answers not only on our website, but also, as required, to the federal government,” said Horne. “Those with unsatisfactory answers to this question will then be deprived of federal funds.”
The guidance further clarified that the Trump administration’s perspective on religious freedom within schools was unlike the “wall of separation” view undertaken by previous administrations. It cited the most recent Supreme Court decision on prayer by school officials, Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, which found that a high school football coach had a right to engage in prayer on the field after games.
“This is not the familiar but legally unsound metaphor of a ‘wall of separation’ between religious faith and public schools,” stated the guidance. “It is rather a stance of neutrality among and accommodation toward all faiths, and hostility toward none, deeply rooted in our nation’s history, traditions, and constitutional law — a stance that upholds our Constitution’s ‘recognition of the important role that religion plays in the lives of many Americans.’”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Feb 6, 2026 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona State University (ASU) professor Dr. Owen Anderson has asked the Arizona Supreme Court to hear his case challenging mandatory diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training after a lower court dismissed his lawsuit, according to a petition filed this week by the Goldwater Institute.
Anderson, a philosophy and religious studies professor at ASU, originally filed the lawsuit in 2024 against the Arizona Board of Regents. He argued that the university’s required “Inclusive Communities” DEI training violated an Arizona statute that prohibits public agencies from making employees participate in training that “presents any form of blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity, or sex.” Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14) and then-House Speaker Ben Toma (R-LD27) filed an amicus brief in support of Dr. Anderson’s lawsuit.
According to the Goldwater Institute’s petition, Anderson objects to the DEI training materials, saying they include concepts about race and identity that he believes are unlawful under state statute.
“No one should be forced to participate in divisive DEI training or endorse race-based ideology as a condition for holding a government job. That’s exactly why Arizona lawmakers banned mandatory trainings that teach discriminatory ideas about race, ethnicity, or sex. But a law without enforcement is no law at all,” Goldwater attorney Stacy Skankey explained. “We’re asking the Arizona Supreme Court to correct the lower court’s error and restore Arizonans’ right to hold government agencies accountable when they violate the law.”
Goldwater stated in a press release, “There’s no way around it—a law is meaningless if it can’t be enforced. If allowed to stand, the error by the Arizona Court of Appeals would eliminate an essential civil-rights safeguard for public employees and taxpayers. The ruling changes how Arizona laws are enforced by removing the ability of an ordinary Arizonan to ensure government officials obey the law.”
In its February filing, Goldwater said the Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that Anderson could not sue because it concluded the relevant law does not expressly provide an avenue for individuals to challenge such training in court.
The petition filed by the Goldwater Institute argues that allowing the Court of Appeals’ decision to stand would leave public employees without a means to enforce the statute and hold government employers accountable. It asks the Arizona Supreme Court to recognize an implied private right of action under the law, allowing employees to challenge alleged unlawful training mandates.
The case highlights a broader debate over DEI programs at public institutions. The previous lawsuit filed by the Goldwater Institute in March 2024 similarly challenged ASU’s DEI training and sought a court order preventing the Board of Regents from imposing or using public funds for the training, citing the same Arizona statute.
ASU has previously contested the Goldwater Institute’s claims, with university officials stating that its training reflects its commitment to inclusiveness and does not violate state law. However, as AZ Free News has previously covered, ASU lost 27 grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF) in 2025, worth approximately $28.5 million, in line with the NSF policy that ensures grants don’t prioritize certain groups or individuals.
Speaking of the ongoing lawsuit, Professor Anderson said in a statement, “Arizona State leaders broke the law when they forced me and every other employee to take part in an ideological training that taught that it’s okay to judge people on their race, ethnicity, religion, and sex. I simply refuse to do that. Ultimately, the question before the Arizona Supreme Court isn’t a left or right issue—it’s about whether a state employee has the right to hold their employer accountable when it violates the law.”
There is currently no set timeline for the Arizona Supreme Court to decide whether it will grant review of Anderson’s petition.
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.
