by Daniel Stefanski | Apr 11, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Arizona Republicans and Democrats traded insults over the status of a legislative proposal that would increase restrictions on firearms across the state.
Earlier this month, Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes expressed her outrage over the Legislature’s failure to consider HB 2791, which would have regulated guns in the hands of certain Arizonans. The bill was sponsored by Democrat State Representative Stacey Travers and co-sponsored by a bipartisan duo: Republican Kevin Payne and Democrat Laura Terech.
Mayes said, “I’m disappointed, and I’m angry that even narrowly-tailored gun violence prevention bills like the one we worked to introduce this session don’t stand a chance with our current legislature.”
She added, “Our bill that would’ve given us more tools to address threats of violence at our schools is not moving forward this legislative session. But we’re committed to Arizonans to keep on trying in order to protect public safety.”
The bill laid out the process by which an education protection order is filed, adjudicated, and executed in the state of Arizona. Such an order would “prohibit the defendant from possessing, controlling, using, manufacturing, or receiving a firearm for the duration of the order, [or] order the transfer of any firearm in the defendant’s possession or control, including any license or permit that allows the defendant to possess or acquire a firearm, to the appropriate law enforcement agency for the duration of the order,” or both.
Republicans disagreed with the attorney general’s sentiments about the bill. Senate President Warren Petersen wrote, “I’m extremely proud that we blocked legislation that would make it harder for you to defend yourself from criminals and harm.”
Representative Alexander Kolodin also weighed in, saying, “Let Kris Mayes take your guns away? That would be a hard NO from me!”
Travers, the bill sponsor, took umbrage with Kolodin’s attack on her proposal. She argued that HB 2791 has the “same due process as current orders of protection and constitutional rights. Higher threshold to issue order, and (existing) discretionary firearm restrictions. Includes mental health component. Protects LEO, Schools, Kinds. Not reinventing the wheel. Just saving lives.”
The Democrat State Representative promised to re-introduce the bill in 2025, calling it “a great bill with huge bipartisan and community support.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Apr 10, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A judicial decision from Arizona’s high court may have significant political ramifications in the swing state for the 2024 election.
On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court issued its opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Mayes, finding that the state’s near ban on abortion, which was established in 1864 and reaffirmed several times since, was, in fact, the guiding law on the controversial issue. The vote in the State Supreme Court was 4-2, with one justice recusing himself.
The four prevailing justices wrote that they “merely follow[ed] our limited constitutional role and duty to interpret the law as written…. The legislature has demonstrated its consistent design to restrict elective abortion to the degree permitted by the Supremacy Clause and an unwavering intent since 1864 to proscribe elective abortions absent a federal constitutional right – precisely what it intended and accomplished in 36-2322.”
They added, “To date, our legislature has never affirmatively created a right to, or independently authorized, elective abortion. We defer, as we are constitutionally obligated to do, to the legislature’s judgment, which is accountable to, and thus reflects, the mutable will of our citizens.”
The decision from the Arizona Supreme Court ended one chapter of the state’s abortion saga and confirmed the legal theory of former Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, who, soon after the Roe v. Wade reversal from the Supreme Court of the United States, issued a statement about Arizona’s abortion status. In a statement made on June 29, 2022, Brnovich said, “Our office has concluded the Arizona Legislature has made its intentions clear regarding abortion laws. ARS 13-3603 is back in effect and will not be repealed in 90 days by SB 1164. We will soon be asking the court to vacate the injunction which was put in place following Roe v Wade in light of the Dobbs decision earlier this month.”
Brnovich went to court in Pima County Superior Court to lift the injunction on the abortion law in question and was successful.
However, the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the ruling from the Superior Court, leading to the consideration from the state’s Supreme Court.
The outraged reaction from Democrats was swift, while the responses from Republicans were mixed.
Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs said, “It is a dark day in Arizona. We are just fourteen days away from of one the most extreme abortion bans in the country. But my message to Arizona women is this: I won’t rest, and I won’t stop fighting until we have secured the right to abortion. That is my promise to you.”
Attorney General Kris Mayes, also a Democrat stated, “This is far from the end of the debate on reproductive freedom, and I look forward to the people of Arizona having their say in the matter. And let me be completely clear, as long as I am Attorney General, no woman or doctor will be prosecuted under this draconian law in this state.”
Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma, both Republicans, issued a joint statement, saying, “During this [60-day waiting period], we will be closely reviewing the court’s ruling, talking to our members, and listening to our constituents to determine the best course of action for the legislature.”
The conservative Arizona Freedom Caucus cheered on the Court’s opinion, posting, “Today, the Supreme Court of Arizona made the correct ruling, upheld the intent of the legislature, and preserved the rule of law today by ruling that the pre-Roe law will remain effective. … As Republicans, we should be proud of the fact that today the lives of the preborn are more protected than they have been since SCOTUS’ fatally flawed Roe decision more than a half century ago. As Republicans, we should be unashamed in proclaiming the value of life.”
Republican Senator Wendy Rogers also weighed in on the news of the day. She wrote, “Then, as now, LIFE must be upheld in the laws of the land. I will vote against any laws that would dimmish life in Arizona, including any laws that would dilute our existing statutes. Defending life is the right thing to do.”
The Senate Democratic Leadership released a statement after the announcement from the Court, writing, “The Republican-appointed Arizona Supreme Court has decided to criminalize abortion in Arizona by upholding the 1864 territorial abortion ban and end legal abortion in all cases unless necessary to save the life of the mother. It’s a worse-case scenario Democrats predicted and have been preparing for, working to see the future of reproductive freedom in the hands of Arizonans.”
Arizona for Abortion Access, the group working to plant a constitutional amendment on abortion on the November ballot, expressed its anger over the judicial opinion. It said, “Today, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled to uphold a devasting near-total ban on abortion from 1864, a territorial law in place before Arizona became a state. This means Arizona now has one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the nation.”
The group revealed that it had over 500,000 signatures from Arizona voters – well over the threshold needed to qualify for the ballot.
Last year, one of Arizona’s top pro-life leaders, Cathi Herrod from the Center for Arizona Policy, came out in fierce opposition to these efforts from pro-abortion interests, alerting her followers that this measure “would tear down virtually all pro-life precautions and make it nearly impossible to regulate abortion.” Herrod also explained how, if passed, the constitutional amendment would likely allow the likelihood of abortion at all stages of life in the womb, stating, “The broad exemption of ‘mental health’ of the mother after viability is widely understood, even in the courts, to mean virtually anything the abortion provider wants it to mean, including stress or anxiety. Even barbaric partial-birth abortion is legal under this exemption.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Apr 10, 2024 | Education, News
By Staff Reporter |
A transgender high school teacher received a three-year suspension of his teaching certificate for multiple alleged offenses, which included discussing his sex life and conducting private storage closet excursions with students.
Erin Quigley — a man who identifies as a woman — up until recently taught sports medicine for Amphitheater High School at Amphitheater Public Schools (APS) in Tucson.
In response to an investigation launched last year by the Arizona State Board of Education (ASBE), Quigley agreed to a negotiated settlement in which Quigley’s teaching certificate would be suspended for three years. Quigley also agreed to take the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification Prevention and Correction course.
ASBE’s case file on Quigley noted that he gave a student a gold necklace under the pretext of being a “secret admirer” and texted that student to discuss his personal life. According to ASBE, Quigley regularly gave out his personal phone number to students. On at least one occasion, Quigley was reported to have given his home address as well when he invited the entire class to his house for a Thanksgiving dinner.
The student gifted the necklace also reported that Quigley publicly discussed his sex life with students, offering details about how he had sex with many women in the past. Quigley also reportedly encouraged his students to share their sex lives — such as whether they were sexually active or if they needed Quigley to buy condoms for them — and other private information with him.
Another student in Quigley’s class reported that Quigley would periodically leave his classroom to take several other students into a storage closet for up to 20 minutes at a time, leaving the other students unattended.
Quigley also reportedly asked students to hook him up with their “hot aunts.”
In one reported instance, Quigley participated in a prank requested by another student in which Quigley told a female student that he heard two heartbeats through his stethoscope on her midsection, and offered to buy her a pregnancy test.
Quigley also reportedly divulged details of the abuse he experienced from his father, as well as the gender transition processes he had yet to undertake.
ASBE further reported that Quigley managed multiple school clubs granting him off-campus time and access to his students.
ASBE began investigating Quigley after receiving a report of unprofessional conduct from the high school’s general counsel and associate to the superintendent last January.
According to a feature by Northern Arizona University (NAU), Quigley received his Career and Technical Education (CTE) Bachelor of Science in Education (BSED) in 2015, followed by a CTE graduate certificate in 2016.
However, neither of NAU’s commencement programs from 2015 (May, December) listed any CTE BSED candidates named “Erin Quigley,” nor do they list any individuals with the last name “Quigley.” NAU ceased digitizing its full commencement programs after 2015.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Apr 10, 2024 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The U.S. leader of a top global feminist organization, Women’s Declaration International (WDI), urged Arizona’s Democratic lawmakers to support a bill protecting women’s rights by ending gender identity codifications.
Senate Bill 1628, the Women’s Bill of Rights by Senator Sine Kerr, was passed in the House last week and will head to the governor’s desk. SB 1628 would codify new definitions for sex-based terms used in statutes, administrative rules, regulations, and public policies. It’s unlikely the bill will be codified: Governor Katie Hobbs has openly expressed her disapproval for similar bills she deems against LGBTQ+ ideology.
“The purpose of this act is to bring clarity, certainty, and uniformity to the laws of this state regarding sexual discrimination, equality of the sexes and benefits or services that are specifically provided to males and men and females and women,” read the bill.
WDI USA President Kara Dansky, a Democrat, wrote in an Arizona Daily Independent op-ed that the popularized replacement of the concept of sex with gender identity results in the discrimination and oppression of women.
“[The victories of women’s rights] are being thrown out, including by Democratic women leaders, because of the nonsensical, psuedoscientific concept of ‘gender identity’ — the idea that somehow sex isn’t real, that a person can be the opposite sex, or that there is some mysterious third sex class (there isn’t),” said Dansky. “There is nothing progressive about pretending sex isn’t real.”
Dansky’s organization most recently filed a brief in the ongoing Washington court case determining whether a female-only nude spa may exclude men.
Significantly, SB 1628 would declare in no uncertain terms that the term “sex” indicated the existence of only two sexes: male and female, biological truths established at birth which are “objective and fixed.” The defined term “sex” further explicitly excludes concepts like “gender identity” or similar terms, which the bill noted imparted subjective senses of self and antonymous with the term “sex.”
The legislation further clarified that differences in sex development wouldn’t establish a third sex, such as those cases in which an individual with a congenital and medically verifiable disorder or difference in sex development. In those cases, the bill specifically directs compliance with accommodations according to federal and state law.
Other definitions given for sex-based terms included:
- “Male,” meaning an individual who has, had, will have or would have, but for a developmental anomaly or accident, the reproductive system that at some point produces sperm for fertilization of female ova;
- “Boy,” meaning a human male who has not yet reached adulthood;
- “Man,” meaning an adult human of the male sex;
- “Father,” meaning a male parent of a child or children;
- “Female,” meaning an individual who has, had, will have or would have but for developmental anomaly or accident, the reproductive system that at some point produces an ova;
- “Girl,” meaning a human female who has not yet reached adulthood;
- “Mother,” meaning a female parent of a child or children;
- “Equal,” meaning the recognition of the equality of sexes but not sameness or identicality;
With those definitions, Senate Bill 1628 would effectively root out gender identity protections by replacing the term “gender” with “sex” in all laws, rules, publications, orders, actions, programs, policies, and signage. The bill also directed the sex-based segregation of environments like bathrooms, locker rooms, living facilities, athletics, domestic violence shelters, and sexual assault crises centers.
Further, public schools as well as those agencies that collect vital statistics related to sex would identify all individuals as either male or female.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Apr 9, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A bill to prevent human-initiated roadblocks in Arizona was vetoed by the state’s Democrat governor.
Last week, Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed SB 1073, which would have “expand[ed] the criminal classification of obstructing a highway or other public thoroughfare to make it unlawful for a person, having no legal privilege to do so and after receiving a verbal warning to desist, to intentionally interfere with passage on: 1) any roadway in or leading to an airport; or 2) a highway, bridge or tunnel currently holding 25 or more vehicles or people” – according to the purpose statement from the Arizona Senate.
In her veto letter to Senate President Warren Petersen, Hobbs wrote, “Recognizing the sanctity of constitutionally protected rights, it is critical that we approach these matters with precision to avoid infringing on Arizonans’ freedoms.”
Before the governor’s action, Senator John Kavanagh, the sponsor of the bill, had issued a statement after the Arizona Legislature gave his proposal a bipartisan stamp of approval. He said, “The current political climate, locally and around the world, has provoked a rise in unruly protests, and it’s important to put safeguards in place to prevent these protests from causing harm to our citizens. A few months ago, a group of protestors blocked the westbound lanes of the Bay Bridge heading into San Francisco for four hours. Trapping drivers in their vehicles for this long can have potentially deadly consequences. There were multiple vehicles carrying organs that were supposed to be going to a place for a transplant. Somebody could have encountered a medical emergency during that time with no way of getting to a hospital. And although not a life and death situation, there were no restrooms for hundreds of drivers and passengers.”
On the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak system, representatives from the Arizona Police Association endorsed the legislation; while representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, Arizona National Organization for Women, State Conference NAACP, and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona indicated their opposition to the bill.
SB 1073 passed the State Senate with a 16-13 vote (with one member not voting). The bill received a 36-19 bipartisan result in the State House (with four members not voting and one seat vacant).
When the bill was being considered in the Arizona House Judiciary Committee, Democrat State Representative Analise Ortiz said, “Passing bills like this will give prosecutors more power to come after people because of their political speech. This is terrifying.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Apr 9, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A joint Arizona legislative committee hearing made some discoveries about the state governor’s water policies in juxtaposition with the reality of housing affordability and supply.
Last week, both the House Natural Resources, Energy & Water Committee (NREW) and the House Commerce Committee held a joint hearing “to hear testimony from experts on the current state of water policy and its impact on housing supply and affordability in Arizona.”
State Representative Gail Griffin, the Chairwoman of the House NREW Committee issued a statement following the hearing, saying, “Good news! Updated groundwater modeling conducted in 2024 shows Arizona has water. According to independent hydrologists at Matrix New World, the comprehensive groundwater model that was released in June 2023 does not actually describe the amount of groundwater that is available in the basin. The Arizona Department of Water Resources decided unilaterally to model certain wells under the assumption that they would be placed on the side of a mountain rather than in the heart of the aquifer. In addition, the June 2023 model substantially over-estimated groundwater demand while substantially under-estimating future supply to reflect current best practices in water management or the fact that it is currently illegal to build residential subdivisions in the Phoenix metropolitan area without replenishing groundwater.”
“Clearly, this administration is targeting single-family homes and the American way of life,” said NREW Vice Chairman Austin Smith. “Some members of the Governor’s Water Policy Council have an issue with single-family homes and want to see future suburban development come to an end across the state. Governor Hobbs’s water policy and moratorium on new housing development has effectively put urban growth boundaries around the largest cities in our state. These policies didn’t work in states like Oregon and Washington and have only made housing affordability worse. What we’re seeing is a rogue administration that is attempting to use the power of the executive branch to circumvent the legislature and implement illegal housing and population control in Arizona.”
“Arizona is one of the fastest growing states in the nation and relies on new home construction to maintain an affordable housing supply and low-cost standard of living for millions of people,” added Commerce Committee Chairman Justin Wilmeth. “Home ownership is also one of the most effective ways to build generational wealth and lift future generations out of poverty. Bad water policies that prevent the development of new homes directly conflicts with our ability to ensure that first-time homebuyers can purchase at a price that they can afford. If the Department doesn’t change course, millions of people will be excluded from the opportunity to experience home ownership and be forced to pay rent forever.”
“Arizona’s regulatory environment is premised on the foundation that a person who submits an application for a regulatory approval under one set of rules will be entitled to have their application reviewed under that same set of rules,” said Commerce Committee Vice Chairman Michael Carbone. “Arizona water policy under the current administration, however, is the only place where the government has said that the rules can change at any time without notice, even if a developer has already submitted an application under the old set of rules. This is simply irresponsible – no matter how laudable the cause – and has impacted several major housing developers in Arizona who had invested hundreds of millions of dollars in capital improvements to bring thousands of new single-family homes online. These developers played by the rules and did everything they were supposed to do, yet they were denied due process of law in the handling of their applications. The Department must update the June 2023 groundwater model with the latest science and well placement data and lift the moratorium on new housing development without further delay.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
