Arizonans may have gained valuable insight into the future direction of their state – thanks to a surprising action from a neighboring state.
Last week, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed an Executive Order to declare a State of Public Health Emergency due to gun violence. According to the New Mexico Governor’s Office, Grisham’s action plan “includes a suspension of open and concealed carry laws in Bernalillo County, temporarily prohibiting the carrying of guns on public property with certain exceptions.”
Today, I signed an executive order declaring gun violence a public health emergency. To my fellow citizens: get loud. Step up. Demand change: from your neighbors, from your friends, from your communities, from your elected leaders. Enough is enough. More coming from me tomorrow. pic.twitter.com/jOt4fv4YDC
The move from the New Mexico Governor was met with both support and opposition, with even members of her own party taking issues with what or how the governor was using her executive powers in this situation.
While Grisham’s order was controversial enough, the Arizona House Democrats Caucus created news of its own by appearing to post an endorsement of the action.
Arizona Republicans currently hold slim majorities in both the state’s House and Senate chambers, but both political parties are vying for control of the Legislature in the next election. With a Democrat Governor at the helm of the state, a Democrat takeover of the state legislature would likely have serious repercussions from a policy standpoint, which would undoubtedly include some proposal or action against Second Amendment freedoms.
Republican Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell was quick to respond to the House Democrats’ post, vowing to see them in court if it ever came to that point on this issue of restricting Arizonans’ constitutional freedoms.
— County Attorney Rachel Mitchell (@Rachel1Mitchell) September 9, 2023
The General Counsel for the Arizona House Republicans, Linley Wilson, added, “Who’s going to tell them? Or maybe they already know that in addition to the AZ & U.S. constitutions, ARS 26-303(L) has been on the books in Arizona since 2007. Fun fact: the AZ House vote on SB 1258 to protect 2A rights during an ‘emergency’ was 55-0-5.”
Who’s going to tell them? Or maybe they already know that in addition to the AZ & U.S. constitutions, ARS 26-303(L) has been on the books in Arizona since 2007. Fun fact: the AZ House vote on SB 1258 to protect 2A rights during an “emergency” was 55-0-5. https://t.co/ZKcqj0C3UBpic.twitter.com/lnElXTaWv1
Jonathan Turley, a legal analyst and national columnist, opined on the latest from New Mexico, writing, “The order, in my view, is flagrantly unconstitutional under existing Second Amendment precedent. It could also be a calculated effort to evade a ruling by making the period of suspension so short. Many will of course celebrate the boldness of Grisham in taking away an individual right under a cleaver measure. It is, however, too cleaver by half. If not found moot at the end of the period, New Mexico could supply a vehicle to curtail future public health rationales.”
The order, in my view, is flagrantly unconstitutional under existing Second Amendment precedent. It could also be a calculated effort to evade a ruling by making the period of suspension so short…https://t.co/aURAa8Ict9
Arizona Senator Frank Carroll also weighed in on the New Mexico Governor’s decision, saying, “I’m appalled at what has transpired in the great state of New Mexico. Their radical Democrat Governor is setting a dangerous precedent by violating their law-abiding citizens’ constitutional right to protect themselves, their family, and their property against dangerous criminals. Every single American should be outraged at the reckless political agenda that continues to be forced by the Left to control you and undo the principles of freedom, liberty and democracy established by our nation’s Founding Fathers.”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: @RepFrankCarroll Condemns New Mexico's Ban on Guns, Vows to Protect Arizonans from Deliberate Violation of Constitutional Rights ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/VoVMjOyfAd
The state’s Senate President, Warren Petersen, made it abundantly clear that a Republican-led Legislature would not stand for such a measure from the governor, stating, “Criminals will be emboldened by the executive order issued by New Mexico’s governor. Law abiding citizens will be left unarmed as criminals ignore the law and paper executive orders. Takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun. Takes good force to stop evil force.”
Criminals will be emboldened by the executive order issued by New Mexicos governor. Law abiding citizens will be left unarmed as criminals ignore the law and paper executive orders. Takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun. Takes good force to stop evil force.
An internet search engine giant is making a significant investment in the Grand Canyon State.
Last week, Google unleashed a significant announcement, revealing that it would soon be constructing a $600 million data center in Mesa, marking the first time the company has put down physical roots in Arizona.
Governor Katie Hobbs, who attended the event with Google executives and other local leaders, issued the following statement to commemorate the news for her state: “Google’s investment in Arizona will be critical for the Mesa community and our state’s economy. Arizona continues to attract global technology leaders due to our skilled workforce, dynamic economy and focus on innovation. We are proud to welcome Google to Arizona and look forward to the many opportunities this partnership will bring.”
Google's $600 million investment in a new Mesa data center is a great example of how Arizona is leading the way in sustainable growth while creating good paying jobs in the process. There is no better time or place to invest in technology and innovation than right here and right… pic.twitter.com/ouUEMto0DT
Mesa Mayor John Giles added, “The City of Mesa is thrilled to welcome Google to our community. Google’s decision to designate Mesa as the home for its first facility in Arizona underscores its profound confidence in our city and residents.”
Mesa will be home to @Google's first facility in AZ, with an over $600 million investment into our community. Our city is a great place to locate a business and we continue to compete on a global scale. We look forward to a strong relationship with Google. https://t.co/rq9Nk76AHJpic.twitter.com/7k2bMyaf0R
According to a release published by the City of Mesa, “the new Mesa data center will help power popular digital services – like Google Search, Gmail, Maps, Google Cloud, and others – for people and organizations worldwide.”
The Vice President for Google’s Data Centers, Joe Kava, said, “We are proud to put down roots in Arizona with both the data center in Mesa and the Phoenix cloud region. Not only do data centers help keep digital services up and running for people and businesses, they are economic anchors in the communities where we operate. We are appreciative of the continued partnership with the local leadership across the state.”
In addition to the multi-million-dollar infrastructure project, Google revealed that the Phoenix area would soon be welcoming “a new Google Cloud region to complement its existing network of regions around the world, bringing Google Cloud technologies closer to local customers – ranging from small, medium and large businesses to public sector entities and other organizations – to help them deliver digital services to their own users more reliably and at higher speeds.”
The Arizona Governor’s Office stated that “Google’s Mesa facility is the first data center in the United States to use zero-water cooling and has announced plans to be completely carbon-free and pursue net-zero emissions across its operations by 2030.”
Per an internal economic report, Google “helped provide $11.43 billion of economic activity for tens of thousands of Arizona businesses, publishers, nonprofits, creators and developers in 2022,” and “more than 367,000 Arizona businesses used Google’s free tools to receive phone calls, bookings, reviews, requests for directions and other direct connections to their customers.” Google also “provided $15.55 million of free search advertising to Arizona nonprofits through the Google Ad Grants program in 2022.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
On Monday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in a lawsuit arguing against the state’s ban on abortions solely for genetic defects.
In the case, Isaacson v. Mayes, pro-abortion doctors and groups appealed the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction against Arizona’s ban on abortions based on genetic defects.
The legislature passed the ban, SB 1457, back in 2021.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the ban are abortionists Paul Isaacson and Eric Reuss, along with the National Council of Jewish Women, Arizona National Organization For Women, and Arizona Medical Association.
Isaacson was a Phoenix-based abortionist with Family Planning Associates. Reuss was a Scottsdale-based OBGYN and former board member for Planned Parenthood of Arizona.
Judges Roopali Desai, Ronald Gould, and Andrew Hurwitz heard the oral arguments. While Desai and Hurwitz were engaged in the arguments with their questions, Gould hardly spoke except to request an adjustment of the livestream audio.
In March, House Speaker Ben Toma (R-LD27) and Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14) stepped up to defend the ban after Attorney General Kris Mayes said she would refuse to enforce the law. Mayes is acting as the defense in the lawsuit currently.
During Monday’s oral arguments, the main question at hand was whether the plaintiffs had Article III standing. Article III of the Constitution, as held by the Supreme Court, requires plaintiffs to prove an actual or imminent alleged injury that is concrete and particularized.
Jessica Sklarsky with the Center for Reproductive Rights argued on behalf of the plaintiffs that they suffer undisputed economic harms and threat of prosecution due to the abortion ban. The district court determined that the plaintiffs failed to meet the standard set by the 2014 Supreme Court case Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus, which determined that pre-enforcement challenges satisfy the Article III standard and are justiciable when a statute’s enforcement is sufficiently imminent.
Sklarksy also argued that the abortion ban qualified as a vague law, and therefore violated due process rights.
“Vague laws force those they govern to either avoid doing anything that is arguably covered by the law, or to engage in that conduct with the constant threat of arbitrary enforcement,” said Sklarsky.
Denise Harle with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), counsel on behalf of Toma and Petersen, countered that no Article III injury exists due to the lack of a credible threat of enforcement.
Harle pointed out that all 15 county attorneys have acceded their authority to Mayes, and that Mayes has disavowed enforcement of abortion law. Harle also pointed out Gov. Katie Hobbs’ executive order in June usurping all county attorneys’ authority on abortion law and conferring it to Mayes.
Hurwitz and Desai pushed back against Harle’s reference to Mayes and Hobbs’ conduct, arguing that Mayes didn’t issue a disclaimer in this case specifically detailing her intent to not enforce the law.
Hurwitz indicated that Toma and Petersen’s support of the law, as well as the private enforcement aspect of the law, indicated a credible threat of enforcement.
“Does the law really require that a credible threat be communicated? If the state of Arizona passes a statute and the two leaders of the legislature are here defending its constitutionality, isn’t that enough to show there is a credible not a certain but a credible threat of enforcement?” asked Hurwitz.
Harle disagreed, saying the potential for private enforcement constituted a hypothetical. She alluded to the arrangement by Hobbs and Mayes to not enforce abortion law.
“[T]he theoretical possibility of an injury sometime in the future is too conjectural when it’s not imminent,” said Harle.
Desai followed up by stating that the court’s decision in Tingley v. Fergusoncould apply to this case. In that case, a family counselor challenged the state of Washington’s ban on conversion therapy as a violation of free speech and religious practice. Harle responded that the existence of a law alone wasn’t sufficient for direct injury.
“Virtually anyone could look at a law, say ‘I’m not sure what that means, I’m going to do something or not do something’ [and] that would be enough for a federal court to weigh in and adjudicate the merits of that claim on a facial challenge,” said Harle.
Watch the full hearing here:
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Department of Defense (DOD) headed to Arizona State University (ASU) this week to seek out more diversity hires.
On Tuesday and Wednesday, the Biden administration’s DOD came through its Taking the Pentagon to the People Program (TTPTTP) initiative. The program was created by the DOD’s Office for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (ODEI).
In a press release, ASU advised students that the DOD was seeking out a “diverse workforce.” ASU executive vice president and chief operating officer, Chris Howard, said that the Pentagon was aiming for “inclusive excellence.”
According to a DOD Equity Action Plan from last April, TTPTTP’s express purpose is to “improve racial equity in the U.S., and bolster the ranks and presence of minorities working in DOD.”
The following includes the speakers and recruiters present at the event:
Air Force Civilian Services: Kristine Billings, Affirmative Employment program manager;
Air Force Personnel Center: Ed Bujan, Force Renewal Programs chief recruiter; Crystal Garza, Force Renewal Talent Management Branch Diversity and Inclusion program manager;
Arizona Army National Guard HQ: Lance Leon, executive officer;
Army Combat Capabilities Development Command: Michael Bailey, acting director; Ja-Neen Owens, Technology Integration and Outreach Branch HBCU/MI program manager;
Army Intelligence and Security Command HQ: Michael Nilius, senior exploitation analyst;
DOD Civilian Personnel Advisory Service: Desiree Seifert, associate director; Bruce Bixby, HR Specialist;
DOD Counterintelligence and Security Agency: Israel Sanchez, recruiter; Kevin Lukacs, Developmental Division Team Chief;
DOD Diversity Management Operations Center: Victoria Bowens, Diversity & Inclusion associate director;
DOD Finance and Accounting Service: Maylene Vazquez de Jesus, DFAS Limestone career programs coordinator; Michelle Lugo-Bonet, DEI program manager;
DOD Human Resources Activity: LaTasha Dawkins, Senior Disability Program manager; Sam Drummond, Workforce Recruitment Program director;
DOD Institute of International Education: Michael Saffle, Boren Awards Program specialist;
DOD Language & National Security Education Office: Larry Rentz, principal consultant with Rentz Group;
DOD Logistics Agency: Honney Barner, PEO Strategic Communications & Collegiate Partnerships director; Martina Miles Johnson, R&D operations integrator;
DOD Office of Force Resiliency: Olivia Logan, Violence Prevention Cell communications specialist;
DOD Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness: Charmane Johnson, ODEI;
DOD SMART Scholarship Program: Corinne Beach, deputy program manager;
DOD Threat Reduction Agency: Daisy Valentin, Outreach Program manager; Rudy Chavez, Test Diagnostics Branch engineer; Kiran Shah, Test Diagnostics Branch chief; Jesus Elias, Human Resources Division ABQ chief; Sharon Morrow, small business director; MiChele Stevenson, Mentor-Protege Program manager;
Department of the Air Force: Ed Bujan, Force Renewal Programs chief; Crystal Garza, Diversity and Inclusion program manager;
Department of the Navy: Cache Carter, FA Staffing and Classification section head;
National Guard Bureau: Jacqueline Ray-Morris, DEI Special Emphasis Programs Equal Employment Opportunity manager;
Naval Criminal Investigative Service: Shelagh Hopkins, intern program specialist; Sam Tubb, NCIS Pacific Operations desk officer; Eric Powers, field training agent/investigator;
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force: Jenise Carroll, Office of Diversity and Inclusion deputy director;
Office of Naval Research: Michael Simpson, Naval STEM Grants Program Officer;
Prevention Workforce Representative: Elizabeth Gaylor, prevention researcher; Laura Neely, senior research psychologist; Olivia Logan, communications specialist;
U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command HQ: Rita Scamurra, HR specialist; Ken Schimpf, offensive cyber capability developer; Michael Nilius, senior exploitation analyst;
Washington Headquarters Services: Mary Michelle Eveleigh, Human Services Directorate Talent Acquisitions and Outreach Branch chief recruiter;
White House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic Opportunity for Hispanics: Melody Gonzales, executive director; Emmanuel Caudillo, Management and Program analyst; Kevin Lima, deputy director; Jasmin Chavez, confidential assistant
Work-Life and Special Programs Division: Mininia Hawkins, Work-Life and Special Programs Division chief
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Mesa Public Schools (MPS) board member and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) East Valley chapter president Kiana Sears says more discussions about race need to occur.
Sears issued the remarks in an interview with The Mesa Tribune regarding the recent Supreme Court decision effectively ending the practice of affirmative action in college admissions. Sears advocated for the use of equity in policy, rather than equality, to make up for systemic racial inequalities. She acknowledged that people may have the same capabilities, but that circumstances should be mitigated to equalize outcomes.
“There is a local angst about the [ruling], especially in the climate where you have seen,” said Sears. “There’s no difference in the capacity of people to learn and to grow and to actually learn[,] but you have unnatural and man-made barriers and institutional barriers that make it harder for some people.”
According to Sears, avoidance of prioritizing race in conversations is due in part to the demonization of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and related concepts like “inclusivity.” Upon taking office in January, Arizona Department of Education (ADE) Superintendent Tom Horne disavowed the presence of CRT in schools and launched a hotline for parents to report inappropriate lessons on racial, gender-based, sexual, and social and emotional ideologies.
Over the summer, ADE reported receiving numerous valid complaints of inappropriate materials at schools, including MPS. Horne reported at the time that MPS was working with ADE to resolve the complaint.
“A teacher reported through the hotline that the Mesa school district has a training program for teachers that clearly states that certain Americans are ‘living under a system of white supremacy.’ That is a divisive and bigoted statement that has no place in education,” said Horne. “We are individuals, entitled to be judged by what we know, what we can do, our character, and not the color of our skin.”
During this most recent interview, Sears accused the hotline of creating a climate of “fear and intimidation.”
Sears also implied that race-conscious interactions and practices result in a greater good for everyone.
“[It’s important] to make sure if we have a population that is not doing as well, for whatever reason, we remove those barriers,” said Sears. “We know we’re as strong as our weakest link. No matter who, what, when, why, let’s remove all of those barriers.”
Sears was twice chosen as the MPS representative to attend the National School Boards Association (NSBA). MPS opted to remain with NSBA despite the national controversy over their 2021 letter to President Joe Biden requesting a federal investigation into parents attending school board meetings.
In addition to attending the NSBA events, Sears was elected the secretary/treasurer of NSBA’s National Black Council of School Board Members Board of Directors. Two other Arizonans serve on that board: chair Devin Del Palacio with the Tolleson Union High School District, and regional director Lindsay Love with Chandler Unified School District.
Following the SCOTUS decision, Sears’ NAACP branch held an event, “Affirming Black Brilliance,” to discuss strategies for ensuring racial equity in education. It appears that Sears runs the publicity for the branch as well, since she is the only point of contact for all press, media, and public comment requests.
Sears became the NAACP branch president in 2021. Last January, STN featured Sears for her roles as an NAACP president and MPS governing board member. Similarly to her recent call to action, Sears called for a greater focus on race.
Arizona List, a committee for pro-abortion Democratic women, endorses Sears in her role as an MPS Governing Board member.
In addition to her role as an NAACP president and MPS board member, Sears serves as the program director for Arizona State University (ASU) Faith Based Outreach and Community Partnerships.
Sears was the 2018 Democratic nominee for the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC). The Arizona Attorney General’s Office launched and later dropped an investigation into Sears for failing to disclose dormant businesses when she launched her campaign, upon a referral by the Secretary of State’s Office. Sears said at the time that these were name-only businesses, meaning she and her husband filed for business names to reserve them with the intent to one day turn them into actual businesses.
Last year, Sears’ campaign was again mired in controversy. Sears faced bribery accusations for her hire of former Democratic State Rep. and Minority Leader Reginald Bolding, through his political consulting firm “Blue Wave Victory.” Sears paid Bolding’s company over $18,000 in a contract that Bolding’s then-opponent, now-Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, alleged was influence peddling.
Bolding managed the firm alongside the former first vice chair for the Arizona Democratic Party and former congressional candidate, Jevin Hodge, to provide services for Sears’ campaign. In a complaint letter to former Attorney General Mark Brnovich, Fontes’ campaign accused Bolding and Hodge of having “sold their positions as a means of access to others in exchange for monetary gain.”
As Fontes’ letter noted, Bolding’s political consulting firm operated out of the same building and suite as his controversial nonprofits.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Arizona’s Republican Schools Chief is taking the state’s Democrat Governor and Attorney General to court.
Last week, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne announced that he had “filed a lawsuit against Governor Katie Hobbs and Attorney General Kris Mayes for a judicial declaration that all schools must obey a voter passed and protected initiative that English language learners must be taught in English immersion rather than dual language.”
In a statement that accompanied the press release, Horne said, “Governor Hobbs is named as a defendant because of a court of appeals decision stating that the governor is a proper defendant in these kinds of cases because of the constitutional requirement that she see it to it that the laws are faithfully executed. Attorney General Mayes is named because the same case states that an action questioning the constitutionality of a law names the Attorney General. A law passed by the legislature in 2019 has been interpreted by some as authorizing dual language instruction. This is incorrect because the voter-protection law is part of the Arizona Constitution and any change to a voter-protected initiative must further the purpose of what voters intended. Dual language instruction is the opposite of the initiative’s purpose.”
The Arizona Department of Education provided context for the initiative in question, adding, “The initiative, which passed by a margin of over 60%, states explicitly: ‘All children in Arizona public schools should be taught English by being taught in English, and all children shall be placed in English language classrooms.’”
Horne also said, “The fundamental purpose of the initiative is that students be taught throughout the school day in English, so they become proficient in English quickly, and can succeed academically, and not that they be taught half a day in another language, which would stunt their ability to master English.”
According to the Department, “the lawsuit also names as a defendant the Creighton school district, which is among the handful of districts defying the law established by the voter approved and protected initiative. The district’s rate of English Language Learners becoming proficient in English last year was 5.1%. This contrasts with some districts referred to in the complaint that have structured English immersion and who’s rates range from 23.87% to 33.03%.”
The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court for the State of Arizona in the County of Maricopa. Horne asked the Court to declare that “A.R.S. 15-756.01 is unconstitutional if its intent was to authorize dual language without waiver, because it does not further the voter-protected initiative’s purpose that children be taught in English for the entire school day, in order for them to quickly become proficient in English”; and that the State Board’s dual language model, if it is without statutory waivers, is in violation of Arizona law, and the Defendant Attorney General’s opinion that district and charter schools can rely on the State Board’s dual language model without waivers is legal error.”
The court filing from the Arizona Department of Education fulfills a promise made by Horne earlier this summer to take this issue to the judiciary. The scuttle between Horne, Mayes, and Democrat legislators began on June 19, when the Superintendent announced that “public schools that are not teaching English Language Learners in English as required by state law risk losing funds for this legal violation.” Horne said at the time, “Proposition 203, the voter protected initiative passed in 2000, specified that classes for English Language Learners must be taught in English: ‘all children in Arizona public schools shall be taught English by being taught in English and all children shall be placed in English language classrooms.’”
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes issued an opinion to answer the question of “which state entity has statutory authority to eliminate a model of structured English immersion approved by the State Board of Education.” Mayes sent her findings to Democrat Representatives Jennifer Pawlik, Laura Terech, Nancy Gutierrez, and Judy Schwiebert.
In her opinion, Mayes wrote, “Arizona law is clear that the Board has the sole authority to eliminate or modify an approved SEI model. The Board also has the sole authority to determine whether a school district or charter school has failed to comply with Arizona law governing English language learners. Only those school districts and charter schools found by the Board to be noncompliant are barred from receiving monies from the English language learner fund.”
The Attorney General declined to answer the Representatives’ question of “whether the Dual Language Immersion SEI Model approved by the Board is consistent with Arizona law.”
The battle over the Structured English Immersion law is the second significant conflict between the Attorney General and Superintendent this year. Horne and Mayes have been locked in escalating public disputes over the state’s universal school choice program.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
