Downtown Phoenix’s residents experienced a glimmer of hope in the ongoing homeless crisis last month after a court declared the city to blame. If the city doesn’t appeal the court’s order, it may be the end of the massive encampment known as “The Zone.”
The decision flies in the face of the precedent set by other cities: plans and spending that yield no favorable results, ultimately forcing the residents to learn to live with the crime and squalor. Yet, Phoenix may no longer be resigned to the same fate borne by most other major cities. Downtown property and business owners were vindicated in their belief: city officials’ plans, spending, and promises alone don’t qualify as results.
Requiring results of the city could mean The Zone may cease to exist in the near future — restoring a square mile of the current wasteland of city-sanctioned slums into a healthy business district — but only if the city of Phoenix decides to follow through on the court-ordered action to resolve the homeless crisis. Cleaning up The Zone would mean finding shelter and services for around 800 homeless residing in the area, according to a census conducted by the Human Services Campus late last month.
Homeless sit outside a business in The Zone.
The first bout of legal relief came for The Zone’s residents and business owners after the Maricopa County Superior Court ruled last month that the city of Phoenix was at fault for The Zone. The court ordered the city to show that it’s taking “meaningful steps” toward fixing The Zone. They have until July 10 to do so, with a trial date scheduled for June.
The ruling came days after the city of Phoenix promised to finally meet to fix The Zone, a promise prompted by back-to-back murders in the encampment.
Vice President for Legal Affairs at the Goldwater Institute, Timothy Sandefur, who submitted an amicus brief in the case, told AZ Free News that this ruling was a good first step toward remedying The Zone — but that the city has a ways to go.
“I think this is a first step and a very important one,” said Sandefur.
Sandefur said that the superior court indicated the best next steps for the city would be to build structured campgrounds and establish treatment programs, rather than continue with their current “housing first” approach.
However, notice of a settlement in a separate, federal case issued recently may complicate matters in finally getting the city of Phoenix to fix The Zone.
In the Arizona District Court case, the ACLU and the city held mediation about three weeks ago.
Details of the settlement weren’t made public. The Phoenix City Council plans to convene April 18 in an executive session — a meeting not open to the public — to discuss the terms of the settlement. At some point after, the Phoenix City Council will announce the settlement terms during a public meeting.
Of note, the city attempted to dismiss the superior court case — but not the federal case. The city also spent just shy of $100,000 fighting the superior court case.
Ilan Wurman, another lawyer on the lawsuit against the city, told AZ Free News that the court’s order to fix The Zone was thorough to the point where he imagined it would be difficult for the city to fight it.
“The court’s ruling is such a thorough victory for the business and property owners that it will be very hard for the city to overcome it at a full trial on the merits,” said Wurman. “We hope the city does the right thing and considers a settlement or simply follows through on the court’s instructions — that will save a lot of expense to taxpayers and it will be better for the unsheltered community as well.”
In remarks to the press, the city stresses that it has allocated around $140 million to solve the homeless crisis. However, there’s a difference between commitment and spending. Of the $120 million in COVID-19 relief funds received to address the homeless crisis, the city has only spent about 10 percent.
Of what little the city has spent for the homeless crisis, the Maricopa County Superior Court assessed that none of this spending has actually mitigated the crisis.
Homeless use drugs inside Phoenix’s sprawling encampment known as The Zone.
“With few exceptions, the action items about which city representatives testified centered around the creation of more bureaucracy, additional staff positions, and obtaining additional funding for programs to vaguely address homelessness in general,” stated Judge Scott Blaney. “The Court received very little evidence — if any — that the City intends to take immediate, meaningful action to protect its constituent business owners, their employees, and residents from the lawlessness and chaos in the Zone.”
However, in a recent interview, Mayor Kate Gallego indicated that the city was attempting to follow through on a “housing first” approach, and claimed that the city was “working very hard” to fix the homeless crisis.
As AZ Free News previously reported, “housing first” — also referred to as “permanent supportive” or “affordable” housing — holds the theory that the homeless will choose to seek employment, become financially responsible, and receive mental health care and/or substance abuse treatment if food and housing are provided. The theory also posits that enabling the homeless to choose their housing and support services will make them more likely to remain in that housing and stick with self-improvement initiatives.
Gallego shared that the city was working on launching seven new shelter options in partnership with various organizations, and that the city is hoping to receive additional help from both the state and federal government. She mentioned that she would meet with the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.
Gallego disclosed that she recently spoke with Gov. Katie Hobbs about the homeless crisis — a conversation that had last occurred during Hobbs’ inauguration week in January. The mayor said that Hobbs was looking for additional resources to provide the city.
“Residents should feel confident that they’re going to see changes,” said Gallego. “The message we want to send to the public is that we recognize it’s a problem and we want to solve it.”
When questioned, Gallego didn’t directly deny that the city wouldn’t appeal the superior court’s decision.
In another interview, Gallego claimed that adequate law enforcement was taking place in The Zone. Gallego’s claim conflicted with the various investigative reports and witness accounts that depicted minimal law enforcement in The Zone.
“We treat every member of our community the same when they commit a crime. We want to be consistent and to enforce breaking the law,” said Gallego. “If you commit a crime, it is the same regardless of your housing status.”
However, the “Gaydos and Chad Show” testified to witnessing a myriad of criminal activity during a recent excursion in The Zone — including drug use, public defecation and urination, and prostitution — but not seeing any police presence. In response, Gallego claimed the city’s police were “too aggressive” when handling the homeless. The mayor cited the Arizona District Court case against the city as justification for her claim. However, that lawsuit concerned whether the city could enforce camping and sleeping bans, as well as whether the city had a right to seize or throw away items from homeless encampments as part of cleanup efforts. The lawsuit does not address police response to criminal activity.
Watch: The Zone – Homelessness and Crime Rampant in Phoenix
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
An education-related bill is receiving rare bipartisan support, though Republicans and Democrats still have major differences on a key part of the proposal as it moves through the legislative process.
HB 2456, sponsored by Representative Beverly Pingerelli, “continues the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind (ASDB) for four years.”
According to background provided by the State Senate, “the Arizona Constitution requires the Legislature to provide by law for the education and care of pupils with visual or hearing impairment. Originally established in 1912 within the University of Arizona, the Legislature established ASDB as its own agency in 1929 to provide schools and programs for the education of persons with visual or hearing impairment and serve as an optional resource to school districts, state institutions and approved educational programs.”
Over the past year, the Senate and House Education Committees of Reference held public meetings and “recommended that the Legislature continue ASDB for eight years.”
Pingerelli’s bill, which was originally introduced to continue ASDB for eight years, first sailed through the House Education Committee in January with a unanimous vote of 10-0. In February, it passed the full House chamber with a 60-0 result. It was then transmitted to the Arizona Senate and the Government Committee, where an amendment was adopted to reduce the number of years ASDB was continued from eight to two. The bill passed unanimously out of that committee, 8-0.
The full Senate chamber then amended the bill, led by Senator Ken Bennett, to continue the ASDB for four years. The body then officially considered the legislation and passed it 27-1, with two Democrat members not voting. Democrat Senator Juan Mendez was the only member to vote against the measure.
After the vote, the Arizona Senate Republican Conference tweeted out a statement, writing: “Senate Republicans are fighting to ensure students and families of the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind receive the best education possible. On the other hand, Senate Democrats are pushing for inequities within this community by refusing to support the oversight needed to guarantee these students are being properly served. Absolutely disgusting!”
Senate Republicans are fighting to ensure students and families of the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind receive the best education possible.⁰ On the other hand, Senate Democrats are pushing for inequities within this community by refusing to support the oversight… pic.twitter.com/lnKjX3Pp7N
The Senate Republicans shared a clip of Senator Jake Hoffman on the floor during the Committee of the Whole consideration of the legislation, explaining “why an 8-10 year continuation of these schools without proper oversight would be a big mistake.” In his remarks, Hoffman stated that “the Constitution gives us the authority and responsibility to provide educational services for deaf and blind children. Yet for some reason, we’ve been treating this incredibly important community within our state like we do the paper pushers at ADOA (Arizona Department of Administration)…. Our job, that the Constitution tasks us with, is to provide the best possible education to deaf and blind children in our state.” He championed the Legislature ensuring that oversight was happening more often at ASDB.
Count Arizona Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne in support of the continuation of the ASDB. Superintendent Horne told AZ Free News: “This school provides a unique curriculum that would be difficult to replicate in a traditional school setting. Braille instruction, direct communication in American Sign Language (ASL), and training in Orientation and Mobility are skills that are critical to the growth of sensory-impaired students.”
Although most of their members voted to clear the bill from the chamber, the Arizona Senate Democrats Conference was furious after the vote, tweeting the following response to the Senate Republicans’ statement: “Try talking to the community before you speak on their behalf. You know that the Conference Committee recommended 8yrs., the House passed 8yrs., the community asked for 8yrs. Senator Hoffman is dragging his caucus down with him.”
Try talking to the community before you speak on their behalf.
You know that the Conference Committee recommend 8yrs., the House passed 8yrs., the community asked for 8yrs.
— Arizona Senate Democrats (@AZSenateDems) April 13, 2023
Following the Senate’s amendments and action, the bill was sent back to the House to be reconciled before its final trip to Democrat Katie Hobbs’ office for her signature or veto.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
City of Phoenix officials expressed interest in an idea for establishing $4,500 water fountains at each bus stop and public park. There are 4,038 bus stops within city boundaries according to city data, meaning the low estimated cost for such a project would amount to nearly $18.2 million.
The water fountains would be made with a polycarbonate shell, the same material used for bulletproof glass, and thermoelectric plates to serve as a water coolant system.
Each fountain would come with a motion sensor-activated dispenser sanitized by UV light; a ring of misters around the canopy, with a filter and pump; sprinklers activated by a security camera to reduce vandalism; motion-activated light for nighttime; solar panels; run-off water drains; a concrete bench; an inverter with a battery and condenser; a cold water tank; and a local artist mosaic installation.
The idea was accepted by the Phoenix Office of Innovation during a public challenge hosted earlier this month. 27 participants were divided into five teams to come up with a plan for providing chilled drinking water in public places.
As thanks for the idea, the city awarded the winning group $700 each — $3,500 total. The city also gave the second-place team a total of $1,500.
The first public challenge from @PHXInnovate brought in bright new ideas to deliver free, cool water to residents. Thank you to everyone who participated! https://t.co/esbhQCNJ1f
Chief Innovation Officer Michael Hammett said that the contest outcomes didn’t mean the city would definitely employ the winning idea, but didn’t dismiss the possibility outright.
One aspect that appeared to be missing from the city’s conversation on establishing more public water fountains was the water usage and potential waste. Arizona is experiencing a water crisis currently. One of the state’s primary water supplies, the Colorado River, sits in a Tier One drought status. The Department of the Interior cut back Arizona’s water usage further for this year.
As part of conservation efforts, the city of Phoenix is considering cuts to residents’ water allowance.
As one of only two mayors in the U.S. delegation at the @UN Water Conference this week, I've been proud to share the innovative work we’ve been doing in Phoenix to conserve and secure our water supply. pic.twitter.com/EHiyZ3ZHXo
The city has also looked to alternative water resources to combat water usage limitations; the city finished installation of the Drought Pipeline Project in December.
Today we celebrated the final pipe installation in the Drought Pipeline Project! This project bolsters water security for our North Phoenix residents by reducing dependence on Colorado River supplies. Read more about the project here: https://t.co/NmS1LfuInlpic.twitter.com/Vh9YjjJie1
Gallego and the city council are also planning the development of a water purification plant to recycle around 60 billion gallons of water a day. Arizona residents use an average of 146 gallons of water per day, per the Arizona Department of Water Resources.
Securing our water supply is going to take a team effort. That’s why I’m grateful to have local and federal partners including those I joined today to announce how resources are being put to use to improve infrastructure and conserve water. pic.twitter.com/sHDsyQW9JQ
At the state level, Arizona’s legislative leadership formed the Joint Legislative Study Committee on Water Security last week. The goal of the committee is to come up with more solutions on improving the state’s water security.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Days after an AZ Free News report about Arizona’s largest county possibly taking steps toward compliance with extremely onerous environmental measures from the federal government, Republicans in the State Legislature announced their own move to counter these – and other – actions.
On Friday, the Arizona Senate and House Leadership teams announced the launch of “a study committee to examine recent local efforts attempting compliance with air quality standards set forth by the federal government.”
The committee, entitled the Joint Legislative Ad Hoc Committee on Air Quality and Energy, will meet to “gather information from experts and the public about local recommendations on rulemaking determinations by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on ozone nonattainment.” Per the press release from the Legislature, the committee “will hear testimony and consider evidence on every angle, from sources of ozone and efforts to mitigate such sources, to the impacts of these mandates on Arizona families, workers, industries, consumer products and the economy, as well as the practicality of achieving recommended proposals and a variety of other issues deemed relevant to the investigation.”
Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma will each appoint five members to the committee. Two members have already been selected as the committee’s co-chairs: Senator Sine Kerr and Representative Gail Griffin, who are also chairs of the Senate and House Committees on Natural Resources, Energy and Water.
The two co-chairs of the committee issued comments in conjunction with Friday’s announcement. Senator Kerr stated: “While we strive to be proactive in protecting our environment, we certainly won’t blindly implement air quality policy dictated by the federal government without thorough investigation. We want to make sure the EPA’s requirements are realistic and won’t cause hardships for our residents, for our economy, or infringe on freedoms, as with what has so far transpired in California.”
And Representative Griffin said, “Arizona has natural occurrences of ozone such as from native vegetation and wildfires that we have absolutely no control over. We also receive significant ozone transports from Mexico and other states that need to be accounted for in federal models. We all want clean air, and I am looking forward to working with everyone on solutions.”
As AZ Free News reported on April 6, The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) recently contracted with a California-based consulting firm to “identify and evaluate new and available ozone precursor control measures that could be implemented within the nonattainment area” – which is an “eight-hour ozone boundary for the 2015 ozone standard (2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standard),” following a little-discussed published rule from the EPA in fall 2022, which moved “the region up the severity ladder for ozone pollution, reclassifying the region from ‘marginal’ to ‘moderate’ nonattainment for the ozone pollution standard.”
The consultant’s Final Report this spring suggested “approximately 50% reduction in nonattainment area anthropogenic NOx and VOC emissions” in order to bring the region into compliance with the EPA’s standard by an August 3, 2024, deadline.
To meet this deadline, suggested measures were included to reduce ozone in the Maricopa Nonattainment Area to meet Clean Air Act requirements related to the 2015 ozone standard. Some of the suggested measures include adopting standards similar to California like banning the internal combustion engine, banning gas appliances, and a host of regulations on various business activities.
There is a tight turnaround for approval of these drastic measures to cut emissions in Maricopa County. Before the end of April, the “MAG Regional Council may approve the Draft Suggested List of Measures” after receiving recommendations from the MAG Management Committee. Then, over this summer, “implementing entities provide commitments to implement measures, or reasoned justification for non-implementation, to MAG for inclusion in a nonattainment area state implementation plan submission to EPA.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
“We have more votes than Kris Mayes. It’s up to the courts to decide to count them.” – Abe Hamadeh
Recent analysis of uncounted provisional ballots in November’s attorney general race make a compelling case that Abe Hamadeh received more legal votes than Kris Mayes.
The 2022 faceoff between Hamadeh and Mayes serves as one of the closest races in Arizona’s history. It’s on par with one other historically significant race that was ultimately overturned, even after both the Maricopa County Superior Court and a Democratic Secretary of State had declared a winner: the 1916 gubernatorial election.
However, the year-long contention of that election had to do with the design of the ballots confusing voters on their vote. This time around, just over 100 years later, the issue concerned voters whose votes were denied to them due to government missteps and failures with election administration.
Last Tuesday, the Mohave County Superior Court granted Hamadeh oral arguments in his motion for a new trial challenging the outcome of his election based on hundreds of allegedly disenfranchised voters. That will occur in about a month, on May 16. Hamadeh shared that they have over 250 affidavits from allegedly disenfranchised voters at present. The vote margin difference is 280.
🚨BREAKING🚨
The Mohave County court has ordered Oral Arguments for our Motion for a New Trial on May 16.
My legal team will expose the government’s withholding of evidence that undermined the rule of law.
According to all counties’ data, there are roughly 8,000 provisional ballots outstanding. Hamadeh led on day-of voters statewide, winning an average of 70 percent of the votes. Provisional ballots may heavily favor him, due to the additional fact that day-of votes were generally 2 to 1 Republican.
“All data points suggest that it favors Republicans,” said Hamadeh.
It appears that, due to the mass tabulator failures, there were less voters but more provisional ballots cast this past election year. Rejection rates of these provisional ballots increased sharply across several counties: Santa Cruz County’s rejections increased from one out of the 117 provisional ballots cast to 83 out of the 139 provisional ballots cast. Pima County’s rejection rate doubled.
Despite Pinal County having a comparable number of provisional ballots cast in 2020 and 2022, their rejection rate increased from 59 to 63 percent.
Yavapai County more than doubled its rejection of provisional ballots this past election than in 2020 based on non-registration, despite having a significant decline in voter turnout (over 87 percent versus just over 75 percent).
Further data will be published in full as court proceedings continue. Hamadeh shared that his legal team is awaiting some data from several counties, which he said would bolster their case.
“As more data comes in, it’s getting worse for the government and looking better for us,” said Hamadeh.
Another development that could impact Hamadeh’s case is the divorce between Democrats’ top election lawyer, Marc Elias, and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
Elias is engaged in an ongoing federal lawsuit fighting for the voting rights of those voters whose registration was canceled. Elias is fighting for all provisional ballots to be counted — an outcome that would be favorable for Hamadeh’s case, when it was originally intended to be favorable to Democratic interests.
Hamadeh’s legal and analytics teams estimate that over 1,000 voters had their voter registration erroneously canceled due to government system issues. That’s separate from the 8,000 provisional ballots outstanding.
Hamadeh’s team also discovered 750 high-propensity voters whose registrations were wrongly canceled. Of that number, only 176 showed up on Election Day.
“It’s really a screwed up situation,” said Hamadeh. “If you can imagine, the disenfranchisement is even bigger than what we’re arguing.”
Bureaucratic mismanagement resulting in voter registration failures is nothing new, especially for Maricopa County. In 2020, thousands of voters were nearly disenfranchised by intergovernmental miscommunication.
Hamadeh dismissed the argument from some outlets that high-propensity voters should’ve taken more steps to ensure they were registered, saying that doesn’t excuse the government’s failure.
“If you’re on PEVL [Permanent Early Voting List] and you expect your ballot to come but it doesn’t, you’re disenfranchised,” said Hamadeh.
Hamadeh referenced one case he called “egregious,” where a father paying his college daughter’s vehicle registration unknowingly had his registration transferred to a different county — all because his daughter was going to college in a different county.
“Without any notice by the way, he never got any notice. And we know he never intended to go to Coconino because he doesn’t have a house there or anything,” said Hamadeh.
There was also the case of Howard, a visually-impaired disabled veteran whose voter registration was canceled through bureaucratic error, unbeknownst to him, and left him without his voting power in this last election. Hamadeh insisted that Democrats’ refusal to see Howard as the victim in this case was hypocritical.
“The media and Democrats are trying to say this is voter error. But in every single election incident, just two years ago, they were arguing against these voter registration cancellations,” said Hamadeh.
Meet Howard from Mesa, AZ
He’s a combat veteran who has voted in every election. He showed up to vote on November 8 but was given a provisional ballot.
Howard fought for our country and our rights but Maricopa County told him his vote will NOT count. Watch his story👇 pic.twitter.com/qcGglUi9yh
Then there’s the 269 voters who showed up on election day with their mail-in ballot and checked in — but never had their vote counted. Yet, on the county’s end, those check-ins reflect votes cast. Of those 269 who dropped off mail-in ballots that weren’t counted, 149 were Republicans, 53 were Democrats, and 67 were “other.” Hamadeh reported that many of those voters told his team that their votes weren’t counted.
With a 280 vote margin between Mayes and Hamadeh, any of these contested provisional or mail-in ballots may result in the first race overturned in nearly a century.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Arizona has been one of the nation’s most-ardent pro-life states, but its new Democrat Attorney General is seeking to quickly reverse that standing as she reacts to recent cases in the federal court system.
Last Friday, United States District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, issued an order in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, et al. v U.S. Food and Drug Administration, granting a motion to stay “the effective date of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) September 28, 2000 Approval of mifepristone and all subsequent challenged actions related to that approval – i.e., the 2016 Changes, the 2019 Generic Approval, and the 2021 Actions.”
Yet the same day, United States District Judge Thomas O. Rice, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, issued an order in State of Washington, et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, et al., preliminarily enjoining the FDA and other defendants from “altering the status quo and rights as it relates to the availability of Mifepristone under the current operative January 2023 Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy under 21 U.S.C. 355-1 in Plaintiff States.”
The plaintiffs in Judge Rice’s order were Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia.
Judge Kacsmaryk stayed his own order for seven days “to allow the federal government time to seek emergency relief from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.” Judge Rice’s order went into effect immediately for the plaintiff states.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes previously joined the Washington case in February, stating that the lawsuit “asserts that the FDA exceeded its authority by continuing its unnecessary and extremely burdensome restrictions on mifepristone,” and it “asks the court to find the FDA’s REMS (Risk Evaluation & Mitigation Strategies) restrictions unlawful and to bar the federal agency from enforcing or applying them to mifepristone.”
After Friday’s two judicial orders, Mayes assured her fellow Arizonans “that legal access to the drug (mifepristone) remains available for providers and patients in this state.” She promised that her office would join other states in filing an amicus brief to oppose Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling, which came Monday. The court filing from several attorneys general across the country urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit “to stay pending appeal the district court’s ruling.” Mayes said that “Judge Kacsmaryk’s outrageous and appalling ruling, if allowed to stand, would upend decades of scientific research and established legal principles.”
A three-judge panel quickly considered the appeal and decided that “the statute of limitations bars plaintiffs’ challenges to the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone in 2000.” However, the judges noted that the plaintiffs’ arguments brought before the district court in “2016 and subsequent years” were timely. The FDA’s changes from 2016-on were as follows: “increased gestational age to 70 days (from 50 days); reduced required in-person office visits to one (from three), allowed non-doctors to prescribe and administer mifepristone; and eliminated reporting of non-fatal adverse events.” In 2021, the FDA also announced “’enforcement discretion’ to allow mifepristone to be dispensed through the mail during COVID-19.”
After the decision from the Appeals Court panel, Kristen Waggoner, the CEO and President for Alliance Defending Freedom, tweeted, “Last night’s Fifth Circuit decision is a step forward for the rule of law. Critical safeguards removed by the @US_FDA will be restored and abortion by mail will end. The FDA put politics over science when it unlawfully approved dangerous chemical abortion drugs. It has evaded legal responsibility for years and has jeopardized the health of women and girls. While there is still work to do to hold the FDA accountable for its lawlessness, girls and women are safer today.”
On Thursday, Attorney General Mayes “provided a summary of the legal status of mifepristone in Arizona” – as it stood at the moment. Mayes admitted that “this is a fast-moving situation, and we are likely to see further court orders in the coming days and weeks.” She vowed to “use every tool at our disposal to fight back against rulings from extremist judges seeking to interfere with the rights of individuals to make their own personal medical decisions.” Her release broadcasted that “under Arizona law, patients in other states who need reproductive care can still travel to Arizona to receive care here.”
The case is expected to be expedited to the U.S. Supreme Court based on the conflicting rulings from the District Courts in Texas and Washington, and the updated decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
