by Corinne Murdock | May 28, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
The pro-life group Center for Arizona Policy (CAP) has asked the Arizona Supreme Court to reverse a lower court ruling nullifying the state’s total abortion ban.
The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled in December that, because the state legislature hadn’t attempted to eliminate elective abortions following and in spite of the Roe v. Wade ruling, the state legislature wouldn’t currently support the long-dormant ban.
CAP submitted their amicus brief in the case Planned Parenthood Arizona v. Mayes on Monday. In the brief, CAP pointed out that the decades-old injunction preventing the enforcement of the state’s abortion ban was contingent on the authority of Roe as law of the land. CAP also noted that most states with abortion bans following the Roe ruling repealed their bans, yet Arizona didn’t over the last 50 years.
“Recall that the legislature had two choices under Roe: allow the abortion free-for-all that Roe created or seek to limit abortion,” wrote CAP. “Eliminating elective abortion was not an option; Arizona’s law doing precisely that was already enjoined.”
CAP argued that the legislature had expressed legislative intent to protect unborn children at all stages of gestation on multiple occasions. The organization noted that Arizona had also attempted in 2012, unsuccessfully, to prohibit most abortions after 20 weeks gestation. CAP also noted that the state legislature enacted a statute in 2021 to direct all provisions of Arizona law to “be interpreted to acknowledge the equal rights of the unborn.”
CAP pointed to the language of the bill enacted last year allowing abortions to occur up to 15 weeks’ gestation, SB1164.
“[W]ith the potential overturning of Roe on the horizon, the legislature sought to avoid any doubt that it desired § 13-3603 [the abortion ban] to become fully enforceable again,” stated CAP. “Thus, S.B. 1164 went beyond simply saying that it was not repealing any ‘applicable state law regulating or restricting abortion.’ 2022 Ariz. Sess. Laws ch. 105, § 2 (2d Reg. Sess.). Its statement of non-repeal also referenced one law specifically—§ 13-3603.”
CAP estimated that about 13,000 unborn children were killed through abortion due to the lower court’s ruling, which upheld SB1164.
“Put simply, both the legislature and various abortion supporters believed that if Roe were overturned, § 13-3603 would prohibit physicians from performing elective abortions from conception. If the legislature did not desire that outcome, it would have acted to prevent it,” said CAP. “It did not. To the contrary, the legislature declared its intent to preserve § 13-3603 even after being told that it would prohibit all elective abortions if Roe were overturned. That intent must be given effect.”
In a press release, CAP argued further that the overturning of Roe should’ve restored the state’s dormant abortion ban. CAP said the lower court ruling “wrongly assumed” that post-Roe state lawmakers that passed limitations on abortion in accordance with the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) precedent didn’t intend to protect the pre-Roe ban.
“State lawmakers passed dozens of laws protecting life while Roe forbade them from going further; they kept the pre-Roe law on the books, even as they made other adjustments to the law; they passed a requirement that Arizona laws be interpreted to value all human life, at every stage of development; and they wrote into the latest abortion law a recommitment to protect life by specifically stating that they were not repealing the pre-Roe law by passing a 15-week limitation just months before Roe was overturned,” stated CAP.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Daniel Stefanski | May 28, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Days after an Arizona legislative attempt to prohibit photo radar was sent to her desk, Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed the proposal.
On Friday, Governor Hobbs sent a letter to Senate President Warren Petersen, informing the legislature of her veto of SB 1234, which was sponsored by Senator Wendy Rogers.
In her letter to the Legislature, Hobbs wrote, “I’ve heard from local leaders and the law enforcement officers across the state about the impact this bill will have on the safety of Arizonans. Research indicates that photo radar cameras demonstrate effectiveness in changing driver behavior and decreasing fatal accidents, especially in vulnerable areas like school zones. This bill’s ban of photo radar would eliminate an important tool for law enforcement that allows for a more efficient allocation of limited police resources.”
Hobbs expressed a desire to find solutions for safety issues on the streets, stating that she looks “forward to continuing the work with the Arizona legislature, law enforcement, and local municipalities to solve traffic issues and enhance public safety.”
Rogers, the bill’s champion, was deeply disappointed by Hobbs’ action on the bill. In a statement released after the news of the veto, Rogers responded: “Cities and towns use the photo radar scheme to collect millions of dollars from unwitting statewide drivers, each year. This traffic citation scam enables third-party companies to exploit Arizona drivers, a scheme never contemplated under state law. These surveillance systems ignore the root causes of safety concerns on our roads. They do little to eliminate immediate threats like drunk drivers, reckless drivers or speeders. Instead, photo radar cameras provide quick cash for the coffers of unelected municipal bureaucrats.”
She went on to say, “Furthermore, photo radar incentivizes politicians to penalize our citizens with unfair fines because 10% of each citation goes directly to fund campaigns through the AZ Clean Elections program. To add insult to injury, every single motor vehicle driver who passes by a camera, whether they’ve violated the law or not, are being photographed and documented. This is an egregious invasion of our privacy. Hobbs’ veto fails Arizonans. She will ultimately answer to our fleeced drivers who don’t support this years-long cash grab cloaked in the name of ‘traffic enforcement.'”
Arizona Representative Joseph Chaplik also weighed in on Twitter about the legislation’s demise, posting, “Disappointed but not surprised that Katie Hobbs vetoed the ban on photo radar and red light cameras. It is a money making scheme and corrupts law enforcement. I will continue fighting with Wendy Rogers until it’s finally gone from our streets.”
Stopping photo radar has long been a focus of Senator Rogers, who forecasted her plans to introduce this legislation last summer. In a statement before this legislative session, Rogers said, “The photo radar industry made its home base in Arizona. And that ends next year. We’re no longer going to allow government to spy on Arizonans for profit and trample due process rights.”
Last week, the Arizona House of Representatives passed the bill with a vote of 32-26 (with one member not voting and one seat vacant). Before passing the House last this month, this legislation had languished in the legislative process. The House Military Affairs & Public Safety Committee had considered the bill back on March 6, passing it with an 8-7 vote. Earlier in the session, the Senate Government Committee had cleared the measure with a 5-3 vote; and then the full Senate giving the green light with a 16-13 tally (with one member not voting).
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | May 27, 2023 | Education, News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Arizona Republican legislators have finally had enough of Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes’ continuing assault on the state’s historic Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESA) program.
On Thursday, a bicameral group of Republican lawmakers, led by Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma, transmitted a letter to Mayes, demanding that she “publicly retract (her) patently false statements attacking ESAs and impugning the motives of thousands of parents that use ESAs to provide the best education for their children.”
The accusations and demands in the letter stem from a recent television interview Mayes gave where she “claimed that ‘there are no controls’ on the ESA program, ‘no accountability,’ that ‘they’ (presumably parents) are ‘spending hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money,’ that this ‘needs to be looked at,’ and that it’s (her) ‘responsibility to do that’ as Arizona’s ‘top law enforcement officer.’”
The coalition of eight legislators (Senators T.J. Shope, Sonny Borrelli, and Sine Kerr, and Representatives Travis Grantham, Leo Biasiucci, and Teresa Martinez – along with Petersen and Toma) share their alarm “that the state’s chief legal officer would make such outlandish claims that are refuted by Arizona law.” They write that “Numerous statutory provisions in the ESA laws expressly require accountability, oversight, and investigations when appropriate. See, e.g., A.R.S. § 15-2403 (requiring, among other things, the Arizona Department of Education to conduct or contract for ‘random, quarterly and annual audits’ of ESAs ‘as needed to ensure compliance’, authorizing the Department to remove parents or qualified students if they fail to comply with the contract or applicable laws, rules or orders, and enabling the State Board of Education to refer cases ‘of substantial misuse of monies’ and suspected cases of fraud to the Attorney General).”
Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne’s administration has been amenable to referring such cases of fraud or misuse of monies to the Attorney General as directed under law. In a tweet on March 1, the Arizona Department of Education responded to an account alleging misuse and / or fraud of ESA funds (in a post that has since been deleted), saying, “Please provide your relatives name, and we would like to refer her to Attorney General Kris Mayes. ESA dollars should only be spent on education.”
The Republicans warn Mayes that her rhetoric and threats are way beyond the statutory scope of her office, writing, “You have not cited a shred of evidence to suggest that either the Arizona Department of Education or the State Board of Education—both of whom you represent—have failed to comply with their statutory obligations, and there is no basis to believe that these agencies will disregard or refuse to follow the law in the future. And while you have a statutory responsibility to investigate matters that are referred to you, the Legislature did not authorize and does not condone the selective targeting or roving investigations of ESA parents.”
They also raise the issue of “ethics” that will be sure to catch the attention of the intended audience at Central Avenue and just north of McDowell. Over the past few years, then-Secretary of State Katie Hobbs weaponized the Arizona State Bar and ethics rules against then-Attorney General Mark Brnovich, her political rival at the time, giving a very low standard of precedent for a reprisal against the state’s newest prosecutor. Hobbs didn’t just file bar complaints against Brnovich; she leveled the charges at several attorneys in his office over political disagreements between the two. In their letter to Mayes, the legislators write: “Of course, Arizona’s Ethical Rules do not tolerate the initiation of criminal proceedings absent probable cause to believe that any parent has committed a crime. See Arizona Ethical Rule 3.8 (listing the special ethical responsibilities of a prosecutor). Further, it would raise ethical questions if a government attorney were to publicly insinuate that a current client is engaging in misconduct with no factual basis. See, e.g., Arizona Ethical Rule 1.7 (imposing a duty of loyalty to a current client).”
The lawmakers end their letter with an appeal for Mayes to conform with the expectations and values of their shared constituents across the state, stating, “Arizonans expect the state’s chief legal officer to refrain from engaging in politically-motivated pursuits, threats, or lawsuits, and to make public statements that align with Arizona law and the duties of your office.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Corinne Murdock | May 27, 2023 | Economy, News
By Corinne Murdock |
Uber has teamed up with artificial intelligence (AI) ridership service Waymo, indicating a transition away from the use of drivers whose income relies on the ride-hailing service.
On Tuesday, the commuter and delivery service giant announced that this transformational partnership would begin in Phoenix. Both Waymo and Uber were founded in 2009.
Uber partnered with Waymo last summer for the commercial vehicles making up their freight transport fleet. Waymo’s vehicles are electric.
Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi predicted that driverless cars would be the new normal for travel.
“Uber provides access to a global and reliable marketplace across mobility, delivery, and freight,” said Khosrowshahi. “Fully autonomous driving is quickly becoming part of everyday life, and we’re excited to bring Waymo’s incredible technology to the Uber platform.”
Waymo co-CEO Tekedra Mawakana said the partnership would improve travel safety for ride-hailing customers.
We’re excited to offer another way for people to experience the enjoyable and life-saving benefits of full autonomy,” said Mawakana. “Uber has long been a leader in human-operated ridesharing, and the pairing of our pioneering technology and all-electric fleet with their customer network provides Waymo with an opportunity to reach even more people.”
While driverless cars have negated the possibility of human error, they have presented unique issues in terms of road safety. In a viral video last year, a Waymo vehicle stalled in a Chandler intersection, blocked three lanes of traffic, and attempted to escape company handlers. The AI technology driving the car became confused by construction cones closing off access to a turn lane it needed to use. At one point, the car began to back up into oncoming traffic.
The passenger behind the viral video also attested that he’d been stranded on multiple occasions by similar driverless cars.
Unaddressed in either companies’ press releases on their partnership was the profit boost that Uber stands to gain from eliminating its drivers from the equation. The elimination of drivers would recoup the 75 percent of the fare fee afforded to drivers.
Uber gross bookings totaled $115 billion last year.
Uber and other similar companies, like Lyft, posed a unique challenge to the traditional ride-hailing and delivery services — namely, taxis. Uber upended the taxi industry, allowing individuals to offer their driving services on a flexible basis, with drivers generally supplementing their income rather than working endless hours to barely make ends meet, and giving riders more options for ride type at a cheaper cost.
Less than a decade after its industry shakeup, it looks like Uber will shake things up again with its embrace of AI over human drivers.
Waymo rolled out its driverless vehicles in downtown Phoenix last August.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Daniel Stefanski | May 26, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Arizona’s Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs experienced yet another high-profile staff exit with a negative headline that couldn’t even wait for a Friday afternoon news dump.
On Thursday, the Arizona political world received shocking news that the governor’s Chief of Staff, Allie Bones, had resigned.
Hobbs issued the following statement in conjunction with the news: “Allie Bones exemplifies the true meaning of a public servant, and I am incredibly grateful for her leadership throughout the transition and this first legislative session of my Administration. Her goal was to build a team that could work across the aisle to navigate divided government, and she accomplished that. With a successful bipartisan budget behind us, she’s ready for her next endeavor, and I wish her nothing but the best.”
The statement released by the Governor’s Office noted that Bones’ resignation was “effective immediately.”
AZ Free News reached out to Senator T.J. Shope, who relayed his reaction upon hearing the news about the major shakeup in Hobbs’ administration, stating, “I can’t say how Allie performed on the 9th Floor, but I appreciated her service to the state and feel that her exit speaks more about the working environment that the Governor allows to exist than anything else. As Harry Truman said, ‘the buck stops here…’ and we’ve seen considerable turnover on the 9th Floor.”
Dennis Welch, a veteran Phoenix journalist shared a perspective of how long the last three Arizona governors employed their chiefs of staff, highlighting that Bones checked out of the Ninth Floor of the Executive Tower considerably sooner than did the chiefs for Republicans Ducey and Brewer.
The Republican runner-up to Hobbs in the November General Election, Kari Lake, also tweeted her thoughts about the news, writing, “Everyone close to Katie Hobbs is fleeing as fast as they can. Hobbs is a disaster. She’s a sinking ship. I just hope she doesn’t take our state down with her.”
Other Republican lawmakers also opined after the news broke about Bones’ departure. Freshman Representative Austin Smith posted, “I’d quit too after that humiliating 1st session as the 9th floor COS.”
And Senator Anthony Kern wrote, “Just way too many vetoes for anyone to handle….”
Bones’ surprising exit comes after weeks of unfavorable headlines and a perpetual loss of political capital for the first-year governor. Hobbs garnered a significant amount of criticism from members of her own party and the Arizona media after she vetoed a wildly bipartisan “Tamale Bill.” She then proceeded to alienate many in her own party (and acquire several more negative headlines) after the Republican-led Legislature achieved most of their priorities in the latest budget for the state, leaving Democrats with countless gripes against the governor’s handling of the negotiations. The budget negotiation process also exposed a growing divide between Hobbs and her other same-party counterparts in state government: Attorney General Kris Mayes and Secretary of State Adrian Fontes.
Hobbs’ short tenure as Arizona’s Chief Executive has been marred by questionable decisions of political judgment that lead many around the state to wonder if she or others around her are mostly to blame. Shortly after taking office, Hobbs supported Steve Gallardo for Chair of the Arizona Democrat Party – even though Gallardo’s opponent, Yolanda Bejarano, received endorsements from U.S. Senator Mark Kelly, Mayes, Fontes, and many other notable officials. Bejarano received 70.2% of the vote in that contest, handing Hobbs an embarrassing loss to commence her time as governor. Less than three months after the transfer of power, the governor’s press secretary, who had already created online controversy before taking the job with Hobbs, resigned after tweeting a GIF showing a woman with two firearms and the caption: “Us when we see transphobes.”
Though she promised to be a transparent governor, Hobbs’ administration has proven to be anything but “open.” Earlier in the year, Hobbs refused to give answers about her Inauguration Fund, giving Republican lawmakers legitimate opportunities to honestly undermine her credibility. The Governor’s Office also slow-walked nominees to the Arizona Senate to begin the confirmation process, allowing a further erosion of the public’s perception of her willingness to follow the Constitution in a divided government. Toward the start of the budget negotiation debate, Hobbs and her administration conceded the high ground to Republican legislators by permitting them to repeatedly highlight her ”closed door” when they desired good-faith conversations. Just weeks ago, too, Hobbs didn’t help matters by running away from reporters who were attempting to obtain long-awaited answers to many outstanding questions.
Hobbs and members of her administration haven’t made it easy on themselves in the first six months of operations, but the fallout chasing the governor hasn’t solely been created by internal missteps. Arizona Democrats have run up against a very disciplined and unified Republican caucus at the Legislature, led by Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma (and their generals, Josh Kredit and Michael Hunter). These Republicans have been resolved to remain consistent in their messaging and united against Hobbs’ policies, constraining her and her allies’ pursuit of a more progressive agenda.
Righting the ship and setting a more stable course will be the monumental task in front of the next Chief of Staff for Arizona’s Governor. In the release announcing Bones’ resignation, the Governor’s Office promised that a new chief of staff would be named by next week.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Corinne Murdock | May 26, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
State Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton skipped out on the ethics committee hearing concerning her swiping and hiding state capitol Bibles. Stahl Hamilton stands accused of unethical conduct and undignified behavior.
The House Ethics Committee considered the allegations against Stahl Hamilton in a hearing on Thursday. Chairman Joseph Chaplik (R-LD03) revealed in a statement following the hearing that Stahl Hamilton neglected to provide notice to the committee that she wouldn’t be participating in her own ethics hearing.
“Today’s hearing was not a trial, but the Committee made every effort to provide Representative Stahl Hamilton the due process to which she is entitled as a member of the House,” stated Chaplik. “Unfortunately, because of her absence, and the limited information that could be provided by the counsel she sent to represent her, committee members and the public were left with a lot of unanswered questions.”
Amid the fallout concerning her actions, Stahl Hamilton deleted her Twitter account. Reports surfaced in April of Stahl Hamilton caught on security footage taking Bibles from the members lounge and hiding them.
Former state lawmakers Diego Rodriguez and Domingo DeGrazia served as attorneys for Stahl Hamilton during Thursday’s hearing. Rodriguez insisted that, for full context’s sake, the committee be shown the many hours of footage surrounding the incident. The committee rejected that request.
Rodriguez defended Stahl Hamilton’s actions as a valid advocacy for the separation of church and state, as well as a “prank” on fellow members. However, when pressed, neither Rodriguez or DeGrazia could elaborate how the presence of Bibles at the state capitol constituted a violation of the separation of church and state.
“Her intent was the peaceful protest of what she perceived to be for the separation of church and state,” stated Rodriguez. “What today boils down to is that certain folks are just not comfortable with the way certain things happened. And subsequent to that, they’re not comfortable with the way certain things were explained. And unfortunately that’s just part of life.”
State Rep. Travis Grantham (R-LD13), vice chair of the committee and speaker pro tempore, read aloud Stahl Hamilton’s written response to the ethics committee investigation. In her letter, Stahl Hamilton acknowledged that she should have engaged in a discussion about the separation of church and state rather than engaging in the behavior she had.
“I find it a little disingenuous to reference church and state. You’re talking about the separation of church and state, which says no coercion in religious matters, no expectation to support a religious document or religion against one’s will, in that religious liberty encompasses all religions. How is a Bible sitting on a table somehow a violation of church and state?” asked Grantham. “Did Mrs. Stahl Hamilton feel like she was being coerced to follow a certain religion?”
Neither Rodriguez or DeGrazia had an answer for Grantham. The vice chair also asked whether the state motto, “God enriches,” would be considered a violation of the separation of church and state. Rodriguez and DeGrazia smiled but didn’t answer directly.
“It’s not seemingly normal behavior, and there doesn’t seem to be a real good answer with regards to what was written here,” said Grantham.
The 2005 case Van Orden v. Perry dispelled the argument that Christian text on government property violates the separation between church and state. In the case, a citizen claimed that the Texas State Capitol grounds couldn’t contain a monument bearing the Bible’s Ten Commandments. The Supreme Court disagreed in a 5-4 decision.
State Rep. Gail Griffin (R-LD19) said she didn’t view Stahl Hamilton’s actions as a joke.
“I don’t understand why she’s so angry about a Holy Book that many of us feel very close [to] and rule our lives by,” said Griffin.
State Rep. Justin Heap (R-LD10) was one of the members who filed the complaint. Heap testified on Thursday, saying he became aware of Stahl Hamilton’s Bible swiping after it was reported on at the national level.
“What was particularly disturbing to me was not simply that these Bibles were removed, but the photos of where these Bibles were placed: both in a refrigerator and under the cushions of chairs of where I and other members and lobbyists sit,” said Heap. “Now I have to deal with the question of, if at some point while these Bibles were missing, was I sitting on my own sacred text? I don’t appreciate that to have happened. I feel that’s inappropriate for any member to do that to other members, it’s a desecration to their scripture and a disrespect to their beliefs.”
Rodriguez asserted that Heap didn’t personally observe the Bibles in any of the places where they were discovered.
State Rep. Jennifer Longdon (D-LD05) questioned whether Stahl Hamilton should be exonerated since she apologized following discovery of her actions. Heap responded that Stahl Hamilton’s apology didn’t absolve her of wrongdoing.
“The apology came only after her actions had been known; she was informed that this had been caught on video and that this became an issue of national concern. That does put a shadow over the sincerity of her apology,” said Heap. “That question is irrelevant to the question of whether her behavior was appropriate.”
Grantham pointed out that Stahl Hamilton’s apology wasn’t for the act of swiping and hiding the Bibles, but rather for the fact that some members felt offended by her actions.
“To my recollection, and correct me if I’m wrong: she didn’t apologize for the action. She apologized for the offense of anyone who thought that that action was inappropriate,” said Grantham. “I never remembered an actual apology for the action.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
