Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA), an activist organization that’s pushed for a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, sued Arizona over the latest election integrity law passed, HB2492, which requires proof of citizenship in order to vote. LUCHA describes itself as a nonpartisan social justice nonprofit.
The nonprofit’s complaint alleged that applicants would have the county election officials using “outdated” citizenship data from “unreliable” sources. Therefore, LUCHA claimed, the government would only succeed in intimidating individuals born outside of the country that are citizens, not preventing any non-citizens from voting.
LUCHA also claimed that millions of Americans lack ready access to documents that prove their citizenship status. They stretched their argument to frame the new law as having a greater burden and therefore discrimination on the elderly, the poor, and black Americans.
LUCHA made headlines last fall for its members following and filming Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) while in an Arizona State University (ASU) bathroom. The activists were upset with Sinema’s lack of support for President Joe Biden’s reconciliation bill.
As AZ Free Newsreported earlier this week, another social justice organization, Mi Familia Vota, also sued Arizona officials over the new law. The organization received help from the lawyer behind the Russiagate hoax, Marc Elias.
Attorney General candidate Andrew Gould opined that the lawsuits were unsubstantiated. Gould asserted that the bill was a “neutral, reasonable, non-discriminatory restriction” affecting non-citizens.
“The current lawsuits appear to assume that it is unconstitutional to disenfranchise non-citizens. Of course, non-citizens have never had a right to vote under the Constitution, and so it is absurd to argue that HB2492 takes away a legal, constitutional right to vote from anyone,” wrote Gould. “[I]n these lawsuits, the parties appear to argue that ANY restriction whatsoever on registering to vote is unconstitutional. They are wrong on the facts and the law.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
With the help of Hillary Clinton’s Russiagate hoax lawyer Marc Elias, the Phoenix-based Latino activist organization Mi Familia Vota filed a lawsuit Thursday to challenge Arizona’s newly-enacted law requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration. Republican legislators and Governor Doug Ducey have reiterated that the legislation, HB2492, doesn’t apply retroactively to Arizonans who registered to vote without providing proof of citizenship before 2004, meaning those individuals won’t have to re-register to vote. There’s contention to that provision in question: opponents of the law argue that the new definition of a qualified voter requires all registered voters to have submitted proof of citizenship.
The complaint filed by Elias on behalf of Mi Familia Vota alleged that HB2492 was “confusing, discriminatory, and unconstitutional,” as well as “voter suppression,” claiming it would prevent those already registered without proof of citizenship from voting. The complaint also claimed that HB2492 shared the same faults as Proposition 200, a voter-approved initiative in 2004 that required county recorders to reject any application for registration that didn’t include satisfactory evidence of U.S. citizenship.
The Supreme Court (SCOTUS) struck down Proposition 200, ruling that it was a violation of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) which doesn’t require proof of citizenship when registering to vote. However, as Arizona Free Enterprise Deputy Director Greg Blackie explained during the State Senate hearing of the bill, this law was designed to fall within the bounds of SCOTUS precedent because the NVRA doesn’t prohibit states from denying registration if there’s proof that the applicant isn’t a citizen.
Mi Familia Vota’s complaint further insisted that the new law would undermine early mail-in voting, due to the fact that it would negate the ease of voting provided by that method. The complaint also claimed that around 200,000 registered voters would have to locate and present proof of citizenship in order to vote. For that claim, the complaint cited an opinion piece in the Arizona Republic, which didn’t make a definitive claim that those voters would be scrutinized.
“If you registered to vote in Arizona before 2004 and never provided proof that you’re a U.S. citizen — a number that includes close to 200,000 voters who got their driver’s licenses before October 1, 1996, in the days before proof of citizenship was required — you, too, could be suspect. In the eyes of the GOP-run Arizona legislature, that is,” stated the article. [emphasis added]
Setting aside the potential difficulties presented to voters, the complaint argued that Arizona had no compelling interest to justify requiring proof of citizenship of its voters. It claimed that the lack of proof of non-citizens who’d voted proved that point.
In terms of requested relief, the complaint asked the court to find the new law to be in violation of the rights to vote and due process as outlined in the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Arizona’s school counselors will soon be joining other school counselors nationwide to be trained in social-emotional learning (SEL) and other social justice topics for their 25th annual National School Social Work Conference. The conference takes place next week in Chicago, Illinois.
As AZ Free News has reported previously, SEL incorporates a wide swath of controversial theories and ideologies, such as comprehensive sex education (CSE), critical race theory (CRT), and culturally responsive education (CRE).
Nearly all of the topics at hand focus on handling and integrating various social justice issues in K-12 schools.
Keynote session topics are titled as follows: “Leveraging Transformative Social and Emotional Learning… From Imagining to Actualizing an Educational System Rooted in Love and Justice,” focusing on SEL implementation; “Building Authentic Alliances Through Critical Conversations,” focusing on intersectionality, a driving concept behind CRT; and “What is Safety from the Lens of Teens,” focusing on systematic and institutional racism.
Pre-conference forums will include discussions on racial and social equity. Breakout sessions will include discussions on integrating restorative justice mimicking progressive criminal justice reforms, SEL, equity, CRE, mental health therapies, inclusion, sexuality, gender identity, mass-shootings, interventions, racism, adultism, ableism, and social justice activism.
The training that Arizona’s school counselors will receive on SEL falls in line with standards set forth by the Arizona Department of Education (ADE). Last December, the department encouraged educators to expand on their SEL implementation.
#ICYMI: ADE's Social Wellness Committee recently shared a new resource for educators, school leaders, and administrators – our monthly social and emotional learning (SEL) newsletter! Read the first newsletter now to gain internal and external resources: https://t.co/7N35jpCOGT. pic.twitter.com/ONnSeHK25Z
— Arizona Department of Education (@azedschools) March 23, 2022
Governor Doug Ducey appears to support SEL as well. In August, $1.6 million of the $65 million for learning programs went to fund SEL. Additionally, over $6.3 million was allocated for SEL programs as part of the AZCares: Flexibility and Funding For Schools and Families in 2020.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
A bill prohibiting the state from discriminating against those with religious beliefs engaging or working within the adoption and foster care systems passed the State House on Thursday. The legislation now heads to Governor Doug Ducey’s desk.
SB1399 offers protections for potential adoptive or foster parents, as well as individuals who advertise, provide, or facilitate adoption or foster care services. The House passed the bill along party lines, just as the Senate did at the beginning of March.
Honored to sponsor SB1399 putting the needs of children first & protecting religious freedom of faith-based foster care & adoption agencies❤ https://t.co/TmUebGDyda
Senate Democrats in opposition to the bill claimed it fixed a nonexistent problem. They warned that the legislation would only serve to create problems, such as the government meddling with religious beliefs.
That stance echoed the arguments presented by progressive organizations such as the Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a nonprofit that pushes for total eradication of any vestiges of religion from government. The nonprofit has intervened in a number of famous cases, such as that of the Christian baker who refused to make a cake for a gay couple’s wedding: Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. A little over a decade ago, the nonprofit intervened in a case challenging whether taxpayers should be allowed to direct part of their tax payments to religious organizations supporting religious school students: Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn.
This afternoon, the AZ House will debate SB1399, which would allow taxpayer-funded foster care agencies to discriminate in the name of religion. This is not in the best interest of Arizona children. And religious freedom is NOT a right to discriminate. #azleg
The Arizona chapter of the American Defense League (ADL) also opposed the bill.
We are proud to stand with our community partners to OPPOSE Arizona’s proposed SB1399. Call your AZ Representative and ask them to put children first and vote NO on #SB1399. https://t.co/BVAex5Gjuq
Under the bill, the only potential situation for the government to discriminate against an individual’s religious beliefs when determining placement of a child would be when determining whether the individual shares the same religious beliefs as the child. Otherwise, the legislation prohibits the government from discriminating against individuals offering adoption or foster care services or attempting to adopt or foster a child on the basis of their religion.
The legislation defines “discriminatory action” as altering an individual’s tax treatment, such as assessing penalties and refusing tax exemptions; disallowing or denying tax deductions for charitable donations; withholding, reducing, excluding, terminating, or materially altering the terms or conditions of benefits such as a state grant, contract, subcontract, cooperative agreement, guarantee, loan, or scholarship; withholding, reducing, excluding, terminating, or adversely altering the terms or conditions of or denying any entitlement or benefit under a state benefit program, or a license, certification, accreditation, custody award or agreement, diploma, grade, recognition, or other similar benefit, position, or status; imposing, levying, or assessing a monetary fine, fee, penalty, damages, or an injunction; and refusing to hire or promote, force to resign, fire, demote, sanction, discipline, adversely alter the terms or conditions of employment, retaliate or take other adverse employment action against a person employed or commissioned by the state government.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
One Phoenix family is fighting for their daughters’ lives: not only against the odds of the fatal genetic disease they both suffer from, but against the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) regulations that prohibit access to a potential cure. The life-saving treatment, a gene therapy, is only available in Milan, Italy — thousands of miles away at the cost of anywhere between $1,000 to $2,000 per round trip flight ticket.
The two of three daughters in the Riley family, Keira and Olivia, were born with metachromatic leukodystrophy, a sudden-onset, fatal disease that causes a buildup of lipids on critical nerves in the brain and spinal cord, which in turn damages the myelin sheath that protects nerve cells. Medical journals identify this occurrence as a result of a deficiency in sulfatide enzymes, which break down lipids. The Riley family had to raise tens of thousands of dollars at the height of the pandemic in 2020 to relocate to Italy for five months so they could save Keira.
Olivia didn’t qualify for the experimental gene therapy because she was already symptomatic. Within 90 days of showing her symptoms, Olivia lost the ability to walk and talk.
“How do you even deal with that as a parent? Imagining two out of your three kids will soon be gone?” said their mother, Kendra.
Due to cases like that of the Riley family, the Arizona legislature is considering a new law to expand on current laws enabling terminally ill patients to try treatments not yet approved by the FDA: SB1163, or the “Right to Try for Individualized Treatments.”
The Goldwater Institute pioneered the original Right to Try law that began in Arizona and eventually was approved by Congress under President Donald Trump, guaranteeing patients with life-threatening illnesses that exhausted all other options to participate in clinical trials of the treatments of their choosing.
Christina Sandefur, Goldwater Institute Executive Vice President, dubbed SB1163 the “Right to Try 2.0” — an expanded upgrade to the original law tailored for more individualized needs. The State Senate passed the bill last month, and it’s awaiting a final vote before the House.
“It is unconscionable that an American patient has to travel to another country to Europe in order to be able to get access to a treatment that could save their lives,” said Sandefur.
For the Riley family, it appears that the experimental gene therapy worked — since January 2021, Keira hasn’t exhibited any symptoms and has developed normally. In mid-January, the FDA granted the same treatment Keira received in Italy. The treatment was given approval, in part, because of results from the Milan, Italy trials.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
After more than two years, Arizona is finally out from under the COVID-19 Declaration of Emergency ordered by Gov. Doug Ducey on March 11, 2020.
“Today I am terminating the state’s COVID-19 State of Emergency. Thanks to the hard work of many — health care workers, businesses, public and private sector employees — COVID-19 is no longer an emergency in Arizona,” Ducey said Wednesday of his action which takes effect immediately.
The Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) reports that suspected COVID-19 cases now represent less than 1.5 percent of emergency room visits and hospital admissions. Ducey noted that while COVID-19 is not gone, the availability of the vaccine and other measures has allowed Arizonans to be better positioned to manage and mitigate it.
“COVID-19 challenged us in ways we never could’ve imagined. No corner of our state – no corner of our country or the world – was spared,” he said. “But we met that challenge head on by prioritizing lives, livelihoods and individual liberties. The time is right to move forward.”
ADHS’s website shows 29,268 death in Arizona attributed to COVID-19 since the pandemic started in 2020. Less than 400 COVID deaths were reported across the state in the last week.
Dr. Richard Carmona, who is serving as Ducey’s special advisor for public health preparedness, expressed confidence Wednesday that Arizona is prepared to address an expected future increase in cases due to virus mutations.
“We now have the experience and tools in place to address what may be to come while public health continues doing what we do best: infectious disease surveillance, prevention, and control,” Carmona said.
The termination of the public health state of emergency does not mean the end to various tracking of COVID-19 cases. According to ADHS, information about immunizations, deaths, hospitalizations, and lab results will continue to be gathered.
Ducey’s announcement allows each of the state’s 15 counties to continue any emergency declarations they currently have in place. The same is true for any cities and towns.
In response, the chairman of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors formally ended the county’s own emergency declaration from March 2020. That won’t stop the county from expending millions of dollars of American Rescue Plan Act funds to address the ongoing economic impact COVID-19 has had on Maricopa County residents, businesses, and schools.
