Andrew Costanzo, a Republican candidate for the 7th legislative district, still believes public education is key to Arizona’s future. But Costanzo says Arizona has serious need for reform — and that’s why public schools continue to decline.
Costanzo has proposed remedying low student proficiency rates by increasing school choice competition, mirroring Mississippi law, and implementing merit-based bonuses for educators.
He has also proposed growing the state’s universal school choice program by allowing property taxes to follow the child rather than according to the geographical predeterminations that fund school districts.
Costanzo is also very much against the proposed ballot initiative to end universal school choice. He said opportunity for educational freedom should be afforded to all, regardless of economic status. He also said educators would benefit from greater competition because they would be marketable on merit.
“How will these children reach their full potential as adults if they can’t read? We’re causing them a lifetime of pain,” said Costanzo in an interview last month. “The schools need something that benefits all businesses, and that’s competition.”
Costanzo also proposed enacting legislation similar to Mississippi’s Literacy-Based Promotion Act in Arizona, which policy experts have credited with a dramatic turnaround in student outcomes.
The lifelong Republican, who operates a family business near Payson, views freedom as the result of individuals taking on personal responsibilities and risks.
“Security, which is typically imagined, requires minimal personal responsibility and risk,” stated Costanzo’s website. “The alleged security is always provided at the loss of freedom.”
Beyond those philosophical takes on political matters, Costanzo presented a platform heavy on reducing government regulations through serious bureaucratic downsizing and greater deference to local governments, while increasing election security measures, resisting increased gun restrictions and abortion freedoms, retaining protections for law enforcement, and rolling back renewable energies.
Costanzo said in an interview last month that the legislature must “economically strangle” cartels and further scrutinize state agencies to recover what he says are sizable amounts of taxpayer funds being lost.
“It is so evident that there is waste, fraud, and abuse [in Arizona],” said Costanzo.
Costanzo’s platform also addressed at length the ongoing consequences of mass illegal immigration.
He described opposition to the present government handling of the illegal immigration crisis. According to Costanzo, the status quo victimizes both the illegal aliens and Americans. Illegal aliens face exploitation due to their vulnerable status as noncitizens, while Americans face the burdens of increased crime and strained public resources.
“Illegal aliens are often exploited financially, physically, or sexually. These people become part of an underclass of humans, a new form of slavery,” said Costanzo. “Whomever the victim, law enforcement resources must be implemented, the legal system is burdened, and incarcerations are applied. All paid for by the American taxpayer. […] [And t]he children of illegal aliens only put more pressure on an already failing [public school] system. Children who do not speak English must receive additional attention and resources, depriving the same from American students.”
Costanzo has been involved with the Arizona Republican Party, Gila County Republican Committee, Maricopa County Republican Committee, and Arizona Law Enforcement Emerald Society. He served as a precinct committeeman as well as a chairman, first vice chairman, and secretary for his legislative district.
This year marks Costanzo’s second time running for this office. He failed to secure the nomination in the 2024 Republican primary, which proved to be more crowded than this year’s primary: six candidates fought for two seats.
The 7th legislative district has fewer contenders in the Republican primary this time around.
State Rep. Walt Blackman is running to retain his seat, the other vacated by the April resignation of former lawmaker David Marshall. Three candidates are fighting for that spot vacated by a would-be incumbent: Costanzo and fellow 2024 primary candidate, Barby Ingle, and former state representative David Cook.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
An attorney with America First Legal (AFL), the nonprofit created by President Donald Trump’s policy chief Stephen Miller, is running for a seat in the Arizona House.
AFL senior counsel James Rogers is gunning to represent LD10. For the past five years he has been in court challenging faulty election processes and other red-meat Republican issues. With that history heavily promoted, Rogers campaigns as one with the potential to be the foremost election integrity expert in the legislature.
Rogers’ platform also focuses on what he calls “straightforward” conservative issues: affordability to encourage family growth, election integrity, purging gender ideology from schools, protecting the unborn, stopping illegal immigration, and defending gun ownership rights.
Since Republican State Rep. Ralph Heap won’t be returning to represent LD10 — he’s running for the Arizona Corporation Commission — Rogers and State Rep. Justin Olson are running together as a slate.
There’s a third Republican candidate in the mix: Ciara Anderson, who moved to Arizona in 2021 from Washington state. Anderson has served as a Republican precinct committeeman and LD10 executive board member, and founded a mothers-focused coalition through Turning Point Action.
Two are running on the Democratic side: Brian Calaway and Helen Hunter. The No Labels party has one candidate: David Scott.
Rogers, a sixth-generation Arizonan, takes credit for drafting key Republican-led legislation like Proposition 314, the Secure the Border Act approved by voters in the 2024 election. The law criminalized illegal migration into the state and gave the state authority to act on immigration matters: state and local law enforcement may arrest illegal aliens, and state judges may order deportations.
A similar law in Texas, Senate Bill 4, has been challenged in federal court and would determine the fate of Arizona’s law. So far, Texas’s law has withstood legal challenges.
Rogers was senior litigation counsel at the solicitor general’s office for former Attorney General Mark Brnovich during the COVID-19 pandemic, 2021 to 2022. In that time, Rogers led on lawsuits against former President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandates and border policies.
Prior to serving under Brnovich, Rogers was a foreign service officer with the State Department from 2015 to 2021. According to his April 2025 testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on Oversight and Intelligence, Rogers endured retaliation for whistleblowing.
Rogers alleged that State Department leadership ignored Trump on policy to more thoroughly vet visa applicants during his first term, but that he complied and was punished for it through a denial of tenure. Rogers also reported that his rate of problematic visa issuances, such as overstays, was more than 50% lower than his colleagues’ while following the directive of Trump rather than his supervisors.
Rogers estimated that the number of visa overstays was two to four times higher than it would have been had State Department leadership complied with Trump’s orders.
“[T]he malfeasance of State Department consular managers during that time likely caused 900,000 to 1.4 million extra overstays that were easily avoidable. Most foreigners who overstay their visas do so with the intent of illegally immigrating and remaining in the United States long-term,” said Rogers. “To put that in perspective, ten U.S. states have populations of 1.4 million or less. In other words, consular managers working to subvert President Trump’s policies managed to add an entire state population’s worth of illegal aliens in just four years.”
Since joining AFL in 2022, Rogers has led on cases challenging the Biden administration, such as the alleged diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) discrimination that occurred within the federal government.
Rogers also testified before the House Judiciary Committee last March to discuss court-ordered immigration policy made through the landmark Supreme Court case Plyler v. Doe (1982), which determined that states must permit children of illegal aliens to attend public school. Rogers argued that the decision was wrong, and that the legal framework used by the Supreme Court to overrule Roe v. Wade through Dobbs v. Jackson could be applied to overrule Plyler v. Doe.
“The Court’s role is to interpret the Constitution, not to serve as a policymaking body filling in the gaps left by legislative inaction,” said Rogers. “Where the Constitution’s text, history, and precedent all point in the same direction — and where the Court’s own analytical concessions compel application of a standard under which the challenged law would clearly survive — the Court must follow the law, not its own policy preferences.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A Maricopa County teacher’s aide allegedly impregnated by a middle school student received assistance in obtaining an abortion by the boy’s godmother, according to a police report.
The godmother or “nina” — identified as Adriana Eloisa Andazola — corresponded with the victim, a 15-year-old boy in the eighth grade, about his sexual encounters with his teacher’s aide, Jessenia “Nia” Rodriguez, 22, of Tolleson.
Rodriguez was a teacher’s aide at the boy’s school. Rodriguez supervised recess at the Avondale location of Sun Valley Academy, a charter school.
The police report alleged that Andazola knew about the illicit relationship between Rodriguez and her godson but didn’t report it to authorities. The report also disclosed that Rodriguez contacted Andazola to schedule an abortion.
“Nina promised to not tell anyone and [Rodriguez and Andazola] agreed to have Nina transport Nia to an abortion clinic,” stated the report. “Nina and [the victim] discussed blocking Nia and joked about having a level five klinger [sic].”
The child’s stepmother told police that Andazola “planned” for the boy to lie about going on a lunch date with her while they went to get an abortion. It was the stepmother who contacted school officials and police.
Sun Valley Academy’s principal, James Capriotti, told police that he observed a text message conversation between Rodriguez and the victim in which Rodriguez said she’d received and taken pills for an abortion and was “not feeling well.” Later in the report, police described text messages in which Rodriguez told the victim that she went to a Banner hospital due to adverse effects from abortion pills.
“I’ve been taking the abortion pills and inserting the ones I’m supposed to put inside me since Friday,” texted Rodriguez. “I inserted the last pills yesterday. The pharmacist did tell me that [I’m going to] get bad cramps and should bleed like if I’m on my period but it’s so much worse.”
Rodriguez allegedly targeted the child during one recess when asked for the victim’s phone number. The two began texting and video calling on Facetime. Rodriguez exposed herself to the boy on camera on multiple occasions.
This led to Rodriguez allegedly having sex with the victim on at least three separate occasions, twice at his home. After the first time, the victim told police that he went to a nearby pharmacy store and purchased a plan B pill for Rodriguez. The report didn’t disclose whether Rodriguez took that pill.
Two weeks after Rodriguez first molested the victim, Rodriguez claimed to be pregnant with his child. Records reflect Rodriguez texted pictures of three positive pregnancy tests to the victim.
The victim also alleged that Rodriguez threatened on more than one occasion to keep the baby.
Police confirmed that the investigation into the alleged pregnancy is ongoing.
Sun Valley Academy Avondale clarified in a press release that the molestation did not occur on campus. The campus principal, James Capriotti, advised that they reported the allegation about Rodriguez to the Avondale Police Department immediately upon receiving it.
Police were contacted at the end of March about the allegations against Rodriguez.
Rodriguez faces charges related to luring a minor for sexual exploitation, a class four felony, and four counts of sexual conduct with a minor.
Rodgriuez has at least one child of her own, per court documents: the student reported seeing Rodriguez’s child in one of their FaceTime calls.
During a police interview, Rodriguez said she wanted to create a family with the boy once he turned 18 years old, and admitted to knowing her actions were wrong.
A search of Arizona State Board of Education records does not yield any other incidents of sexual misconduct by staff or educators at Sun Valley Academy Avondale or other locations.
The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office announced last month that Rodriguez was indicted on six counts of sexual conduct with a minor, a class two felony, and one count of luring a minor for sexual exploitation, a class three felony. Rodriguez has a trial det set for late August.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona’s legislative leaders issued a statement of support for a federal action establishing a new level of parental rights to access their children’s medical records.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced earlier this month further protections for parental rights in healthcare. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., cited an incident in which a Midwestern school allegedly ignored a religious exemption and vaccinated a child without parental consent.
That school remains under investigation by the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR) for potential violation of the Vaccines for Children Program (VFC), which requires providers of vaccines received federally to comply with state laws on religious and other exemptions.
In addition to Kennedy’s announcement, the Health Resources and Service Administration (HRSA) issued an advisement to its health center grant recipients of their required compliance with federal and state laws on parental rights. OCR also issued a letter to healthcare providers advising of their duty to provide parental access to children’s medical records.
“If a provider is standing between you and your child, HHS is going to step in,” said Kennedy in an announcement video.
House Majority Whip Julie Willoughby (R-LD13) published a statement expressing gratitude for the HHS action to assist parents in Arizona and nationwide.
“Arizona parents know this problem because they’ve lived it. Families have been locked out of online medical portals and forced to fight for access to records needed to schedule appointments, refill prescriptions, and communicate with doctors,” said Willoughby. “Parents should not need a lawyer or a lawsuit to see their child’s medical records. This problem was identified years ago. It’s time for the state to stand with parents.”
Republican lawmakers attempted to offer a similar remedy last year (House Bill 2183) and this year (House Bill 2126), but Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed both.
Both bills would have required health care entities to provide parents with access to any electronic portal and delivery platform of their child’s medical records, even in cases where the medical treatment given didn’t require parental consent.
Hobbs cited health, safety, and privacy rights as reasons for vetoing the bills.
“The measure as written could put the health and safety of vulnerable Arizonans at risk,” said Hobbs in her House Bill 2183 denial letter.
“Patient privacy is a longstanding tenet of American healthcare and this bill would create legal ambiguity for healthcare providers who have existing obligations to patient privacy,” said Hobbs in her House Bill 2126 denial letter.
The only community member to speak on the latest vetoed bill during its House committee hearing was a representative of the ACLU of Arizona and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona, Marilyn Rodriguez with Creosote Partners.
The two activist organizations argued the existence of a distinct class of children — “mature minors” — which should be exempt from parental oversight in their medical care. Rodriguez claimed the bill would be “impacting mature minors’ confidentiality when accessing critical care.”
There is no statutory language that distinguishes “mature minors.” Rodriguez further argued that medical providers should decide whether a minor qualifies as a “mature minor,” not the legislature.
On behalf of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona specifically, Rodriguez argued that minors should have the ability to access abortions without their parents knowing or consenting.
Again, during the Senate committee hearing on the bill, only a representative of Planned Parenthood was present to speak against the bill. Aven Kelley, a policy analyst with Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona, argued that minors should have autonomy and privacy when it comes to obtaining abortions.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona GOP leaders are in court defending three abortion restrictions they say protect women and deter coercion after Attorney General Kris Mayes declined to defend the state laws. The Plaintiffs, supported by the Center for Reproductive Rights, argue that the statutes defy the 2024 constitutional amendment legalizing abortion up to fetal viability.
The lawsuit, Isaacson v. Arizona, was filed in May 2025 by Phoenix obstetrician-gynecologist Dr. Paul Isaacson, a Proposition 139 supporter. Isaacson was joined by Dr. William Richardson and the Arizona Medical Association in the lawsuit, which challenges:
A “reason ban” barring abortions based solely on fetal abnormalities (non-lethal or otherwise), gender, or race.
A “two-visit requirement” requiring a second clinic visit and 24-hour delay after viewing an ultrasound.
A telehealth ban prohibiting diagnosis, prescription, or mailing of abortion medication via phone or video.
Isaacson dropped a related federal case in April 2025 to advance this state challenge and was joined by the Arizona Medical Association and two other OB-GYNs.
Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Steve Montenegro intervened to defend the laws, represented by attorney Emily Gould of Holtzman Vogel, after AG Kris Mayes declined to defend them, according to KJZZ. In June 2023, Governor Hobbs signed an executive order centralizing abortion-related prosecutions in the Attorney General’s office, a move Mayes said underscores their shared commitment to “fight … to protect the rights of Arizonans to make their own private medical decisions without interference.”
The case is before Judge Greg Como in Maricopa County Superior Court, who denied a motion for dismissal from Petersen and Montenegro, and ordered a three-day evidentiary hearing to explore the laws’ impact on abortion in Arizona.
Defendants’ witness, Phoenix OB-GYN Dr. Steven Nelson—who manages miscarriage care but has not performed abortions—backed the telehealth ban, stressing in-person exams detect coercion via nonverbal cues like facial expressions in trafficking scenarios. Gould, representing Petersen and Montenegro, cited American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists data and argued that at least 10% of abortion patients later report coercion. Nelson urged limiting telehealth to emergencies, as it “prohibits all of this,” and said he would provide such services only in the most dire cases.
Plaintiffs’ Wednesday witnesses—including Isaacson and experts from the Center for Reproductive Rights and ACLU—argued the laws burden low-income and rural patients with over two-hour drives and confidentiality risks in abusive settings. They argued that pre-abortion ultrasounds are unnecessary for early dating with reliable menstrual tracking. Experts clashed on the 24-hour delay’s health value, with one testifying that it undermines women’s autonomy and timely care.
Isaacson claimed the restrictions “create unnecessary barriers to essential reproductive health care,” echoing concerns from the Arizona Medical Association about access for vulnerable groups.
On ultrasounds, Nelson countered these arguments and described them as “essential to dating” pregnancies, estimating 60% of patients misjudge gestational age due to implantation bleeding. He noted ultrasounds pinpoint asymptomatic ectopic pregnancies, often undetected until seven weeks, requiring specific interventions. Nelson suggested local physicians could handle initial visits to ease rural travel burdens.
On day two of the hearing on Thursday, Judge Como indicated he may treat the record as sufficient for a permanent injunction, with closing arguments pending, according to Courthouse News. The hearing was set to continue on Friday, but as of Monday, no additional information was publicly available regarding the case.
