by Staff Reporter | Aug 15, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has ended its lawsuit about a month after it filed to challenge the constitutionality of Proposition 314 — at least, for the time being.
The ACLU filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with the Arizona District Court on Wednesday. It made that filing a day after the preliminary injunction hearing was initially scheduled to occur, but which had been vacated the Friday prior.
Prop 314, passed by Arizona voters in 2024, gave law enforcement the authority to enforce federal immigration laws. An ACLU attorney representing Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project (Florence Project), the plaintiff challenging the proposition, says their team can find no evidence of law enforcement exercising this new authority.
Prop 314 made illegal immigration a state crime. That means state and local police may arrest illegal aliens and state judges may order deportations of illegal aliens. The proposition also required immigration verification for financial aid and public welfare, and made it a Class 6 felony to submit false information or documents for purposes of employment or public benefits.
The proposition went into effect in mid-July.
ACLU attorney John Mitchell said their team would wait for evidence that law enforcement or state judges had acted upon Prop 314 before relaunching their challenge.
“The trajectory of this litigation has always depended on when and how the state chooses to enforce Section 5,” said ACLU attorney John Mitchell. “In the first month that Section 5 has become fully enforceable, we’ve just seen none. So, from a litigation standpoint, it means our best strategy is to hold off until we get evidence of that enforcement.”
Mitchell’s take appeared to be the ACLU heeding arguments made by Attorney General Kris Mayes, who was named as a defendant in the lawsuit. Mayes’ team warned in a filed response that the lawsuit was premature since no law enforcement or courts had exercised Prop 314 authority.
“Because Section 5 has barely gone into effect, Florence Project has not shown and likely cannot show that anyone has been subject to arrest, detention, or prosecution for violating the illegal entry provision,” stated the attorney general’s office. “Likewise, no one has been subject to an order to depart the country under [the law], because such orders are tied to a charge or conviction for violating the illegal entry provision.”
The Florence Project, with the support of the ACLU and the ACLU of Arizona, filed its lawsuit in early July, claiming Prop 314 violated the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. The organizations stated that only the federal government may regulate immigration.
“Immigration is a quintessentially federal authority. Congress has created a carefully calibrated immigration system, with detailed procedures that determine whether a person may remain in the United States, when to pursue criminal entry charges in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion, and what protections people receive to ensure that they do not face persecution or torture upon removal,” stated their complaint. “Congress placed all relevant authority in the hands of federal officials — in keeping with the federal government’s exclusive immigration powers and the sensitive foreign policy implications of these powers.”
The Arizona District Court denied the organization’s motion for a temporary restraining order about two weeks ago.
Living United For Change, another progressive group, lost their lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Prop 314 last year.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Mar 28, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Protests against President Donald Trump over his mass deportation policies are scheduled to take over the streets across dozens of Arizona cities this weekend.
The protests were coordinated through the national “No Kings” organization. “No Kings” refers to the belief that Trump has overreached in his powers, much like a monarchy, based on the drastic increase in federal immigration enforcement actions. The organization coordinated protests last spring, summer, and fall.
Over 7 million activists attended over 2,700 protests across the nation during the latest designated No Kings protest day last October.
Last year’s No Kings protests presented problems as some devolved into looting and rioting.
Some who hit the streets under the pretense of protest committed crimes that targeted law enforcement and local businesses.
Activists on the lookout for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents have targeted local law enforcement under suspicion of their affiliation with the federal agency. Officers conducting operations and arrests for crimes other than immigration have faced off against violent rioters attempting to disrupt what they believe to be deportation proceedings.
Such was the case in one incident last summer when anti-ICE activists assaulted a Peoria police officer participating in a narcotics raid.
Saturday’s No Kings protests are scheduled to occur in Ajo, Anthem, Apache Junction, Arivaca, Bisbee, Bullhead City, Casas Adobes, Casa Grande, Chandler, Cottonwood, Douglas, Flagstaff, Florence, Fountain Hills, Gilbert, Glendale, Globe, Goodyear, Green Valley, Kingman, Lake Havasu City, Marana, Maricopa, Mesa, Nogales, Oro Valley, Patagonia, Payson, Phoenix, Prescott, Quartzsite, Queen Creek, Safford, Sahuarita, Scottsdale, Sedona, Show Low, Sierra Vista, Sun City, Sun City West, Superior, Surprise, Tempe, Tubac, Tucson, Tucson Estates, Vail, Willcox, Winslow, and Yuma.
The No Kings coalition has over 200 partners backing it, including: Accountable.Us, American Federation of Teachers, American Federation of Government Employees, ACLU, Bernie Sanders campaign, College Democrats of America, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Greenpeace, Human Rights Campaign, Indivisible, NextGen America, Planned Parenthood, and Sierra Club.
The primary coordinators behind the initial formation of No Kings were the organizations Indivisible and 50501.
The 50501 movement has a chapter in Arizona, which has a private Facebook group containing over 6,500 members. This chapter’s online administrators include Tucson resident Scott Jackson; Erica Connell, a Phoenix drag performer who goes by the name “Weird Violet”; and Gilbert resident Kristin Clement.
Activists aligned with the 50501 movement attempted to breach the Arizona Capitol last February.
Other local activist organizations have played a role in organizing No Kings protests as well. Among these are the Party for Socialism and Liberation in Phoenix, East Valley Unite AZ, Gilbert Good Trouble, Mesa Valley Indivisible, Rural Arizona Action, Instituto Power, Progress Arizona, LUCHA Arizona, AZ Resistance Front, and United Campus Workers of Arizona.
Earlier this month, anti-ICE activists disrupted proceedings in the Arizona legislature to protest deportations.
In addition to educating illegal aliens on avoiding immigration enforcement, these organizations have encouraged the use of hotlines to report and track the whereabouts of federal agents. One hotline, “Migra Watch,” has dedicated caller hotlines for Phoenix, Flagstaff, Tucson, and rural areas, and a text hotline as well.
Financial data revealed tens of millions of federal dollars flowing into the organizations throwing their support behind No Kings protests.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Mar 25, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Maricopa County leaders say it’s time to bring federal monitoring to an end for a judgment made nearly 15 years ago.
President Barack Obama’s Department of Justice (DOJ) and the ACLU alleged racial profiling in a lawsuit against the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) under former Sheriff Joe Arpaio. A federal court found MCSO to be guilty in 2011, and placed the department under a federal monitor to achieve reforms.
Last December, Maricopa County filed a motion to end that federal oversight. Then, last month, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Vice Chair Debbie Lesko followed up on that termination request before a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee. Joining Lesko were MCSO Community Advisory Board member Felix Garcia and Goldwater Institute’s vice president for litigation and general counsel Jon Riches.
The trio emphasized in their individual testimonies how county spending has gone on “indefinitely” to meet the “moving goalposts” of federal oversight.
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05), gubernatorial candidate, led the subcommittee hearing, “The Monitoring Racket: The Grift That Keeps on Giving.”
This month, another Maricopa County leader spoke up to advocate once again for an end to federal oversight. Supervisor Mark Stewart published a Substack article criticizing the federal government’s lack of interest in removing the federal monitor.
Stewart and county leaders say the oversight has cost the county nearly $350 million (though proponents of the oversight such as the ACLU argue that county inflated this total with unrelated costs and the real total is far less: around $60 million).
“Notably, over the past five years, there has not been a single sustained claim of racial profiling. Yet federal oversight remains in place, costing Maricopa County taxpayers nearly $350 million,” stated Stewart. “Even as compliance has been achieved and maintained, Maricopa County residents continue to bear the financial burden of prolonged oversight. Hindering resources that could otherwise be invested directly into public safety, training, hiring, and community engagement.”
The county’s millions spent in compliance efforts over the years have yielded reforms to include the implementation of body-worn cameras, structured constitutional policing curriculum, and data-driven accountability policies.
About ten percent of the $350 million estimate given by the county for compliance payments, over $30 million, was given to the court monitor Robert Warshaw.
Warshaw has faced allegations of capitalizing on a financial incentive to continue his federal oversight, not only in Arizona but in municipalities within other states. He has earned tens of millions over his years as a federal monitor.
Elected officials say MCSO has met and exceeded criteria for resolving the issues found by the court, yet the monitoring activities have not only continued but in recent years gone beyond the initial scope of the court findings.
The ACLU and the district judge in the case, G. Murray Snow, acknowledged last October that MCSO reached Phase One compliance with the 2011 court order.
“Courts are often called upon to correct past failures. They are also uniquely positioned to recognize when those corrections have taken hold,” said Stewart. “Maricopa County has reached that point. The progress is undeniable, leadership is strong, and the time has come to move forward.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Feb 23, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Republican-led Senate is poised to vote on multiple bills that would impose greater restrictions on gender transition procedures in Arizona.
The Senate Health and Human Services Committee passed four bills targeting different aspects of gender transition procedures: Senate Bills 1014, 1177, 1094, and 1095. All with the exception of SB 1095 were heard in committee last week. All were passed without the support of Democratic lawmakers.
Progressive activists lined up to testify against the bills during the several committee hearings.
SB1095, which would ban gender transition procedures for minors, provoked testimony from several activist adults who identify as transgender.
Former Liberty Elementary School District governing board member, Paul Bixler, said SB1095 would harm, not help, children. Bixler, a man, identifies as a transgender woman.
Ruth Carter, an attorney, said SB1095 amounted to discrimination. Carter, a woman, identifies as a nonbinary individual.
Marilyn Rodriguez, Creosote Partners founder and lobbyist representing the ACLU, said SB1095 was impermissibly broad as written.
Sen. Lauren Kuby (D-LD8) called the bill discriminatory, and argued that lawmakers shouldn’t ban gender transition procedures since certain healthcare experts support those procedures as treatments for gender dysphoria.
“These are private, personal decisions, healthcare decisions, we shouldn’t be discriminating against transgendered youth or those who have gender dysphoria as is described,” said Kuby.
Sen. Analise Ortiz (D-LD24) said the legislature would be better focusing on making healthcare more affordable. Ortiz said the legislation was not only discriminatory but violative of parental rights laws.
“It bans healthcare for a specific group of people solely based on gender identity; that is discrimination no matter how you want to paint it,” said Ortiz.
Sen. Mark Finchem (R-LD1), the bill sponsor, disputed the narratives of his Democratic colleagues that healthcare experts were to be trusted fully and that gender transition procedures were appropriate for minors.
“To those who worship the grounds that doctors walk on: they also said cigarettes were good for you,” said Finchem. “[Permanently altering treatments like mastectomies] are decisions that kids are being talked into, in some cases. I didn’t just dream this bill up myself. This came from kids and parents. More kids than parents.”
Majority Leader John Kavanagh (R-LD3) questioned the logic of his Democratic colleagues that parents had a right to submit children to irreversible medical treatments, but not the right to decide whether their children should be called by certain pronouns or alternative names in school.
SB 1014 would require health insurers to offer coverage for detransition procedures should those insurers provide coverage for gender transition procedures. It would also issue reporting requirements on insurance claims for gender detransitions.
“Detransitioners are people too; they deserve the same care as those who are manipulated into believing they have gender dysphoria, which leads them to undergo gender transition surgery that they later regret,” said the bill sponsor, Sen. Janae Shamp (R-LD29), in a press release. “This legislative package puts their long-term well-being above politics and ideology.”
Jeanne Woodbury, a lobbyist for the ACLU, argued the reporting requirements within the bill would result in discriminatory outcomes.
Bixler, the transgender-identifying former school board member, claimed the bill would result in providers refusing to provide gender transition procedures.
SB 1177 would ban public funding for gender transition procedures.
Sen. Wendy Rogers (R-LD7), the bill sponsor, explained during Wednesday’s HHS hearing that she discovered taxpayers were funding gender transition treatments for prisoners. Rogers also discovered that individuals were being arrested on purpose in order to receive free gender transition treatments.
“Taxpayer dollars should never be used to bankroll irreversible procedures on children,” said Rogers in a later press release. “This legislation draws a hard line and makes clear that public funds will not subsidize experimental or life-altering interventions on minors.”
Ashton Allen expressed support on behalf of Center for Arizona Policy. Allen said subsidies should be tied to valid medical treatments, which he said gender transition procedures weren’t.
Woodbury, the transgender-identifying ACLU lobbyist, argued against Rogers’ claims and said the treatments were affordable. Woodbury also said an end to subsidization would lead to excessive medical risks associated with forced detransitions.
Minority Whip Rosanna Gabaldon (D-LD21) said ending subsidies was “extreme and punitive,” as well as “unfair and dangerous.”
Sen. Sally Ann Gonzales (D-LD20) accused Rogers of faking a story that individuals were getting themselves arrested in order to receive free gender transition treatments. Gonzales called the bill discriminatory.
Sen. Shamp questioned why drugs historically considered to be dangerous were suddenly ethical in the context of gender reassignment.
“Lupron was deemed cruel and unusual punishment being utilized in the prison system for sex offenders, rapists. But now we want Arizona taxpayers to pay for that drug to be utilized for gender reassignment? How the heck did we get here?” said Shamp.
SB 1094 would allow individuals to seek damages in court against physicians who performed gender reassignment surgeries on them as minors. Kavanagh sponsored the bill.
“When permanent procedures are performed on minors who suffer harm, there must be consequences,” said Kavanagh in a press release. “These reforms restore transparency and provide a pathway to just compensation for those harmed.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Lisa Everett | Jul 24, 2025 | Opinion
By Lisa Everett |
On Wednesday, July 16th, I attended the quarterly public meeting held by the federal monitor overseeing the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, alongside Sheriff Jerry Sheridan. These meetings are intended to gather community input regarding the continued federal oversight. Historically, these sessions have been dominated by voices calling for the oversight to continue — but not anymore.
The people of Maricopa County are fed up. We’re tired of the federal government wasting taxpayer dollars, constantly shifting the goalposts, and interfering with our local law enforcement. Last week, hundreds of concerned citizens showed up to support Sheriff Sheridan and his dedicated team. And we’re not done. We will continue to make our voices heard every quarter until Judge Snow hears us loud and clear: enough is enough.
Out of thirteen mandated benchmarks from Judge Snow, the Sheriff’s Office has met twelve. The only remaining issue? Hispanic individuals, on average, experience encounters that are 17 seconds longer than individuals of other races. Seventeen seconds. That is the justification being used to prolong this multimillion-dollar oversight?
As someone who has worked in customer service, I can tell you that when a language barrier is involved, conversations naturally take longer. It’s not discrimination — it’s respect. It’s a commitment to ensuring clarity, understanding, and fairness. I would often take several minutes longer, not just seconds, to ensure someone understood important documents or procedures. That’s called good service — not racism.
Yet the ACLU and federal monitors insist this slight timing difference is grounds for continued federal control. They are actively seeking racism in places where it does not exist, undermining the professionalism and integrity of our Sheriff’s Office.
It’s time to end this charade. The citizens of Maricopa County demand the immediate termination of this federal monitoring. Let our sheriff do his job without unnecessary interference and outrageous costs.
Stop the federal monitoring of our Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.
Lisa Everett serves as the Legislative District 29 Chair. You can follow her on X here.
