The Arizona State Senate is considering HB 2880, a bill that would prohibit individuals from establishing or occupying encampments on university and community college campuses. The bill, sponsored by State Representative Alma Hernandez (D-LD20), passed the Arizona House of Representatives with a 41-17-2 vote and outlines enforcement procedures and penalties for violators.
The legislation defines an encampment as a temporary shelter, including tents, set up on campus for overnight or prolonged stays. If an individual or group is found in violation, university or college administrators would be required to order the encampment dismantled and direct the individuals to vacate. Failure to comply would result in charges of criminal trespass and possible legal action, including removal by law enforcement.
Additionally, students who refuse to leave could face disciplinary action under their institution’s student code of conduct. Violators would also be held liable for any damages resulting from the encampment, including costs related to removal, campus restoration, and property repair.
The bill aligns with Arizona laws protecting free speech on college campuses, allowing restrictions only when expression violates laws, disrupts university operations, or falls outside First Amendment protections. While supporters argue that the bill upholds campus safety and prevents disruptions, critics contend it could limit protest activities and infringe on student rights.
The issue of campus encampments recently came to the forefront in Arizona following the arrests of protesters at Arizona State University (ASU). According to reports, multiple demonstrators were detained during an anti-Israel protest on campus, where students and activists had set up an encampment in defiance of university regulations. Law enforcement intervened after the protest was deemed disruptive to campus operations.
The incident at ASU has intensified discussions surrounding HB 2880, with supporters arguing that the bill is necessary to prevent similar disruptions, while critics claim it could be used to suppress student activism. The event highlights the broader national debate over the limits of protest on college campuses and the role of law enforcement in maintaining order. Several states have introduced similar legislation in response to high-profile protests that have disrupted campus operations.
If enacted, the bill would require enforcement by campus security and local law enforcement agencies. The Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) and community college governing boards would ensure compliance with student conduct policies.
The bill now awaits further deliberation in the Senate. As the debate continues, lawmakers, university administrators, and students will likely weigh the balance between maintaining order on campuses and protecting the right to protest.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The Arizona State Board of Education (ASBE) declined to approve the new handbook for the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) Program.
ASBE discussed the proposed 2025-2026 ESA Handbook during its meeting on Monday. Though it had the opportunity to approve the handbook during the meeting, a majority of the board indicated a desire to abstain from voting on the handbook until their upcoming April meeting.
Arizona Department of Education (ADE) Superintendent Tom Horne motioned for ASBE to take a vote on the handbook, but no other board member seconded his motion.
The ESA executive director, John Ward, said the new handbook was more user friendly, with information clarified and organized, redundancies reduced, hyperlinked statutes and rules, a clarified list of spending limits on items associated with risks of abuse, and a new chapter on enrollments.
A point of concern for ASBE board members related to ESA Program approvals of expenditures, namely of the sort opposed by Attorney General Kris Mayes.
Mayes’ Government Accountability Unit launched an investigation into the ESA Program over its expense authorizations last July. Mayes accused the ESA Program of approving supplementary materials without documentation of a curriculum nexus, approving certain curriculum materials without curriculum documentation, and approving textbook expenses without documentation demonstrating a qualified school or eligible postsecondary institution requires it.
During Monday’s meeting, Ward clarified there were certain “common” educational items for which the ESA Program didn’t require curriculum in order to not burden families, such as pencils and paper. Ward said the attorney general’s letter prompted them to split the supplemental materials listings into two: those that will always require a curriculum nexus and those that are general educational items which, pending the ongoing court case’s outcome on the matter, may never require a curriculum nexus.
There were over 87,600 students reported within the ESA program as of Tuesday.
The ESA Program continues to be a source of conflict between statewide officials.
Governor Katie Hobbs targeted the ESA Program during her State of the State address in January. Hobbs’ criticisms prompted a rebuttal from Horne; he said the governor was ignorant to the administration of the program.
In his explanation of the new ESA Program Handbook earlier this month, Horne dismissed one major opposing claim: that the program needs to reimburse parents without question of the expenses.
Horne said the ADE’s oversight of expenditures successfully prevented abusive charges, such as a $5,000 Rolex watch and a $24,000 golf simulator.
“[These are] abuse of things that are not really for the educational benefit of the child. It’s obvious there has to be some limitations,” said Horne.
Unlike his predecessor, Horne has repeatedly stepped up to defend the ESA Program.
“Parents should have the choice to be sure their child is in a school that meets the needs of that child,” said Horne. “The ESAs are really not really a challenge to the public schools; they supplement them and make sure that all students are in an environment where needs are being met.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A bill requring schools to use students’ real names and biological pronouns is making its way through the Arizona legislature.
SB 1002, sponsored by Arizona Senator John Kavanagh (LD-3), would prohibit school districts, charter schools employees, or independent contractors from referring to any student by a pronoun differing from their biological sex or a name other than their legal name without parental consent. It also prevents a school district or charter school from requiring an employee or independent contractor to use a pronoun that differs from a person’s biological sex, if doing so is contrary to their convictions.
The bill has moved to the Arizona House of Representatives where it awaits approval by the caucuses and a final vote.
Explaining the bill in a video, Sen. Kavanagh said that his bill “has to do with school staff and teachers using a pronoun or a nickname for a student that is not aligned with that student’s biological sex. The bill says that no school personnel can call a student by such an inappropriate pronoun or nickname unless the parents consent. And in addition when the parents do consent, no school employee can be forced to call the person by the pronoun that does not align with their biological sex if it violates the employee’s religious or moral beliefs.”
He continued, “This is important because students that want to be called by a different name or pronoun than their biological sex, or so-called transgendered students, many of them have a condition called gender dysphoria, which causes a lot of anxiety, sometimes even suicidal thoughts. So, the parents may know about this and may have the child under psychiatric care and the child’s doctor may have told the parents do not entertain a different pronoun or name that’s different from the from the child’s real sex because it could harm the child. So, we certainly don’t want school personnel harming children and threatening their psychological well-being or driving them to suicide. So, we’re going to require parental permission because also it’s a matter of parents’ rights. Parents determine what’s good for their children, not a school staff member or a school teacher, however well-meaning they may be.”
As noted in the text of the bill, Arizona’s Parental Bill of Rights “reserves parental rights to a parent of a minor child without interference from the state, a political subdivision or other governmental entity or any other institution.” Among the rights enshrined in the laws A.R.S. §§ 1-601 and 1-602 are parental rights to direct their children’s “education, upbringing and moral or religious training,” and making healthcare decisions on their behalf.
Rep. Abe Hamadeh wants to include children in the Trump administration’s plan to Make America Healthy Again (MAHA).
Hamadeh partnered with former NFL player and Hall of Fame member Brett Favre to announce the new Congressional Fitness Challenge (CFC), a voluntary national initiative similar to the Presidential Fitness Test (PFT). The PFT was a program implemented from 1956 until its replacement with the Presidential Youth Fitness Program (PYFP) in 2013.
“Our message is simple: reviving physical excellence among America’s youth will build a stronger nation,” said Hamadeh and Favre in an opinion piece for Outkick. “The Congressional Fitness Challenge is bringing back that same competitive spirit – updated for a new era. Just like generations before us, today’s kids deserve the chance to test themselves, measure their progress, and strive for greatness. At the very least, they deserve to be as healthy as they can be.”
🚨NEW🚨
Our message is simple: reviving physical excellence among America’s youth will build a stronger nation.
That's why Congress Hamadeh has partnered with NFL legend @BrettFavre to introduce the Congressional Fitness Challenge. #MAHA
— Office of Congressman Abe Hamadeh (@RepAbeHamadeh) March 24, 2025
The CFC includes a one-mile run or walk, pull-ups or flexed arm hang, curl-ups or sit-ups, a shuttle run, and sit-and-reach — very similar to the PFT. The CFC also recognizes three achievement levels: gold (top 85th percentile), silver (top 75th percentile), and bronze (top 50th percentile).
Hamadeh and Favre asserted the CFC’s importance related to the inherent results of physical fitness: confidence, leadership, the drive to succeed, and an overall stronger and mentally healthier nation.
“The Congressional Fitness Challenge is an invitation – not just to kids, but to parents, teachers, coaches, and lawmakers – to invest in the next generation,” said the pair. “America has never backed down from a challenge. This is our chance to lead, participate, and build a healthier, stronger future.”
The PFT varied over the decades of its existence. In the final years of its existence, students could achieve the PFT’s Presidential Physical Fitness Award by scoring within the 85th percentile of their gender’s age range in five activities: curl-ups or partial curl-ups, shuttle runs, v-sit reach or sit and reach, one mile run, and pull-ups or right angle push-ups.
Unlike the PFT and its emphasis on specific fitness indicators, the PYFP focused on “comprehensive” measures of health.
Within the CFC, congressmen may use office budgets to promote and recognize the fitness achievements of children within their district.
Arizona’s childhood obesity rates have risen in recent decades.
According to the CDC, one in five U.S. minors are obese — about 15 million as of 2020. Obesity is more prevalent in Hispanic and Black children, and children in low-income families.
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) State of Childhood Obesity reports approximately 19 percent of Arizona youths ages 10 to 17 having obesity. 13 percent of Arizona children ages 2-4 participating in WIC were obese. Similarly, 13 percent of Arizona high school students were categorized as obese.
RWJF pulls its data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, the WIC Participant and Program Characteristics, the National Survey of Children’s Health, the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
The Arizona Legislature is considering a constitutional amendment that would restrict preferential treatment and discrimination based on race or ethnicity in public education, government spending, and hiring practices.
House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 2042, sponsored by Rep. Steve Montenegro (R-LD 29), would reinforce existing constitutional protections by prohibiting state agencies, schools, and employers from favoring or disadvantaging individuals based on race or ethnicity. If approved by the Legislature, the measure will be placed on the next general election ballot for voter approval.
HCR 2042 expands Arizona’s existing anti-discrimination policies by banning the use of race or ethnicity as a factor in hiring, promotions, admissions, or contracting decisions in public institutions. It also would prevent state-funded institutions from compelling employees, students, or contractors to support race-based policies as a condition of employment or academic advancement.
In addition, HCR 2042 would prohibit public funding for university offices (like DEI offices) or initiatives that promote preferential treatment based on race or ethnicity, restrict diversity training that endorses race-based privilege, intersectionality, or the idea that neutral policies perpetuate racial injustice, and ensure that disciplinary policies in public schools and workplaces do not treat individuals differently based on race or ethnicity.
The bill allows exemptions for academic research, student organizations, legal compliance, and mental or physical health services provided by licensed professionals.
Proponents of the bill say that preferential treatment—whether through race-based hiring, admissions, or funding allocations—undermines fairness and meritocracy. Equal treatment under the law is a fundamental principle that should apply to all individuals, regardless of background, and race-based policies can create resentment and devalue achievements by making qualifications appear tied to identity rather than merit.
Supporters of the legislation also argue that neutral, colorblind policies are the best way to ensure fairness in education, employment, and government programs. They say that government should not fund initiatives that favor one racial or ethnic group over another, as this can lead to unintended discrimination.
HCR 2042 was approved by the House Government Committee in a 4-3 vote and now awaits further legislative debate. If passed, Arizona voters will decide on the measure in the next statewide election.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne released a statement this week regarding the Primavera Online charter school, Arizona’s largest charter school operator. Primavera is facing revocation of its charter from the Arizona State Board for Charter Schools due to low academic results.
Responding to calls for him to intervene, Horne, who holds a seat on the board, stated, “I have no power or influence over that.” In his statement responding to calls to stop the revocation from Attorney Jesse Binnall, who represents Primavera, Congressman Andy Biggs (R-AZ), and Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen, Horne explained that the role of regulating charter schools is divided in Arizona between the Arizona Department of Education and the Board for Charter Schools.
Horne stated, “The legislature chose to divide jurisdiction regarding charter schools between the Arizona Department of Education and the Charter Board. The current issue is within the jurisdiction of the Charter Board. I have no power or influence over that. If I were to try to influence it, the Charter Board would resent the trespass on their turf, and it would do more harm than good. There is likely to be an appeal to an administrative law judge, and the school needs to marshal its evidence to present to the administrative law judge. If I am asked for any data or other information that the department has, I will of course immediately provide it regardless of which side requests it.”
Speaking at a press conference in front of the Capitol, Binnall, who formerly worked on President Donald Trump’s legal team, compared the potential closure of Primavera to lawfare designed to stifle school choice. He said, “The voters of this country have spoken loud and clear … that President Trump’s agenda, which includes school choice, is highly favored by the voters. Instead of getting on board with this policy, you have some people that are trying to use various versions of lawfare … in order to get in the way of school choice.”
BREAKING: Trump lawyer Jesse Binnall CALLS OUT enemies of education freedom in Arizona for trying to dismantle a charter school that's currently serving more than 8,000 children.
— Corey A. DeAngelis, school choice evangelist (@DeAngelisCorey) March 20, 2025
“We have to be confident that these people who serve … the people of Arizona are going to do the right thing for the children of Arizona,” he continued. “The right thing for the children of Arizona … is to help organizations like Primavera be more successful, not try to take away school choice.”
Primavera holds a designation as an alternative school owing to its focus on providing an education to at-risk students. In a board meeting on March 4th, Primavera Online founder and CEO Damian Creamer said that the school was incorrectly designated while he was on leave caring for his ailing wife and was graded as if it were a traditional school. Officials from Primavera argued that the school would’ve received a passing “C” grade if it had been properly designated.
