by Daniel Stefanski | Dec 2, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Arizona’s chief law enforcement officer announced a legal action over the 2022 election, angering some of the state’s legislative Republicans.
On Wednesday, Attorney General Kris Mayes revealed that “the State Grand Jury has returned an indictment charging Peggy Suzanne Judd and Terry Thomas ‘Tom’ Crosby with the felony offenses of Interference with an Election Officer and Conspiracy.”
In a statement issued in conjunction with the announcement, Mayes said, “The repeated attempts to undermine our democracy are unacceptable. I took an oath to uphold the rule of law, and my office will continue to enforce Arizona’s elections laws and support our election officials as they carry the duties and responsibilities of their offices.”
According to the indictment, Judd and Crosby are alleged to have “conspired to delay the canvass of votes cast in Cochise County in the November 2022 General Election,” and to have “knowingly interfered with the Arizona Secretary of State’s ability to complete the statewide canvass for the 2022 General Election.”
Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs cheered on the indictments, posting, “To give Arizonans the free & fair elections they deserve, we must hold those who seek to undermine our democracy accountable. Thank you, AG Mayes, for protecting our democracy & enforcing the law without fear or favor.”
Republican lawmakers were not as complimentary toward Mayes. Arizona State Senator Jake Hoffman issued a lengthy statement, attacking the decision and the process for these indictments, calling it “a disgusting weaponization of the AZ Attorney General’s office.” Hoffman said that “this is ELECTION INTERFERERNCE by an extremist AG who wants to chill any future efforts by local election officials to challenge potentially inaccurate elections.” He predicted that these indictments would set a precedent that would be used against other local officials and encouraged Arizona County Supervisors to “leverage every tool you have at your disposal to make it clear to the entire AG’s office that weaponizing Arizona’s government has harsh consequences.”
Both Senator Anthony Kern and Representative Jacqueline Parker threatened Mayes with impeachment for these indictments.
Parker also broached the idea of indicting other County Supervisors around the state to ensure “equal treatment under the law in AZ.”
On the other side of the aisle, Democrat Representative Oscar De Los Santos praised the action, writing, “A grand jury of everyday Arizonans has indicted two MAGA politicians for conspiring to prevent the certification of a free and fair election. Criminals who conspire to undermine our democratic republic and the rule of law must be prosecuted to the fullest extent.”
These Cochise County indictments from the State Grand Jury may be the start of Mayes’ actions against Republicans on the election front. The Democrat Attorney General is believed to be progressing in her investigation over the presidential alternate electors from the Arizona Republican Party in 2020. Not much is known about this investigation or the timeline for any possible indictments, but legal action over this matter would undoubtedly create an exponentially greater firestorm with Republicans than the expressed outrage over the Cochise County indictments.
The growing dispute between the Republican-led legislature and Attorney General’s Office could have major implications for the state’s budget negotiations in 2024. Earlier this year, Attorney General Mayes expressed disappointment over the lack of resources appropriated to her office in the compromise between legislative Republicans and Governor Hobbs. At the time, Mayes said, “Today, we see a budget proposal moving forward that appears to be politically expedient for a few, but wholly inadequate for the majority of people in our state.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Oct 1, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A long-awaited elections challenge from the 2022 political cycle has finally been filed.
On Tuesday, 2022 Republican nominee for Arizona Attorney General, Abraham Hamadeh, filed an Appeal and Motion to Expedite in the Arizona Court of Appeals.
In a statement Tuesday night, Hamadeh said, “My legal team has just filed our Appeal on our election challenge and Motion to Expedite. Arizonans deserve to have their lawfully elected Attorney General to hold that office, and our state constitution demands it. With the numerous irregularities in the election, the initial trial, and numerous delays at the trial court, it’s long overdue that the judiciary expedite and take our claims seriously that thousands of lawful votes remain uncounted in the closest election in Arizona with the biggest recount discrepancy in history.”
The Arizona Attorney General’s race was decided late in 2022 – and long after the November General Election – with Democrat Kris Mayes over Hamadeh by 280 votes, triggering the Republican’s election challenges.
Hamadeh’s efforts to bring transparency to his razor-thin election result have continued long after his Democrat opponent, Kris Mayes, took office in January. Mayes has continued to show little public interest in the case, allowing her attorneys to handle matters in the courtroom while she continues to revamp the Arizona Attorney General’s Office from the policies of her predecessor, Republican Mark Brnovich.
The comments from Hamadeh also touched on his thoughts regarding the state of election integrity across Arizona and the country – especially how this issue pertained to his specific case. He shared, “Our democracy demands honesty, transparency, and accountability in order to rebuild the trust that so many Arizonans have lost in our elections. Our case seeks to enfranchise over 9,000 voters who voted on Election Day and did their part to have a say in their government. Their constitutional right to vote matters and their votes deserve to be counted.”
The Republican challenger promised a continued fight in court “to ensure that the will of the people is honored, and that our laws are upheld.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Corinne Murdock | Sep 16, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Attorney General Kris Mayes tapped the leaders of progressive groups representing psychologists and pediatricians to address social media’s adverse effects on teen mental health.
The Arizona Association of School Psychologists (AASP) represented by its president, Matthew Moix; the Arizona chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) represented by its immediate past president, Jason Vargas; and social media expert Louie Bischoff were featured guests for Mayes’ town hall on Tuesday to discuss the effects of social media on teen mental health. (In her press release, Mayes referred to AASP as the Arizona School Psychologists Association [ASPA]).
The attorney general hosted the town hall meeting at Gateway Community College. During the event, Mayes entertained the potential for bringing legal action against certain social media companies.
“This is an issue that I think more and more parents are grappling with, more and more families are concerned by and are having to deal with, but it’s something I also think is appropriate for [attorney generals] to address from a legal standpoint,” said Mayes.
The AASP is the state affiliate of the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP); both have issued guidance running counter to long-held understandings on mental disorders established by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of Mental Disorders. Mental health care professionals have relied on the DSM since the early 1950s for diagnostic and treatment purposes.
As early as 2016, AASP issued a guideline on “Supporting Transgender and Gender Diverse Students at School.” AASP based their guidance on a joint letter by the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division and the Department of Education (ED) Office for Civil Rights guidance on the civil rights protections of transgender students, issued in the waning months of the Obama administration.
AASP and NASP declared that “neither having a transgender identity nor being perceived as gender diverse is a disorder.” It further declared that resistance to a child’s gender identity would result in lasting adverse mental health outcomes.
Following George Floyd’s death and amid the racial riots in 2020, AASP issued guidance on “Social Justice, Prejudice, and Discrimination” encouraging school psychologists to ensure diversity among personnel, incorporate social justice throughout their schools, and overhaul policies that “may passively support” negative outcomes for certain groups of students.
The AASP also has a resource page specifically for social justice matters.
Similarly, AAP opposes any bans on gender transition procedures for minors, which it referred to as “gender-affirming care.”
“Any discrimination based on gender identity or expression is damaging to the socioemotional health of children and families as evidenced by increased risk of suicide in this population,” stated the AAP.
Last month, AAP members voted to make lobbying for federal protections for minors to obtain gender transition procedures as the top priority. Other top priorities included lobbying for state constitutional ballot amendments protecting abortion rights, opposing legislation banning DEI offices and restricting DEI education in state medical schools, and banning youth-oriented gun advertising.
AAP has also supported other controversial health guidance for children.
AAP long advocated for the continued administration of COVID-19 vaccines and booster shots, despite acknowledging findings of adverse effects from the vaccination. For years, AAP also advocated for the safety and efficacy of masking as necessary for schoolchildren.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | May 5, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Attorney General Kris Mayes has issued another challenge to keep accessibility of the controversial abortion drug mifepristone.
In a press release issued Tuesday, Mayes announced that she’d joined an amicus brief against the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruling blocking the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of mifepristone. Mayes accused Texas federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of being an “extremist” opposing medical consensus.
“We cannot allow anti-abortion activists and an extremist judge to undo over two decades of medical consensus. Mifepristone is safe and effective and has been used by millions of Americans over the past two decades,” said Mayes.
READ MAYES’ AMICUS BRIEF HERE
The efficacy and safety of mifepristone remains dubious. In the ruling challenged by Mayes, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, Kacsmaryk noted the hundreds of known cases of infections and deaths arising from the drug’s usage. Kacsmaryk cited a 2006 hearing and report by the U.S. House Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources, which noted at least 8 women’s deaths, 9 life-threatening illnesses, 232 hospitalizations, 116 blood transfusions, and 88 cases of infection; overall, over 950 adverse event cases from the drug out of 575,000 prescriptions.
Kacsmaryk also noted that the FDA took nearly 14 years to reject a petition from multiple medical professional coalitions challenging their approval of the drug. The judge further noted that, on the same day of their rejection of the petition, the FDA expanded allowed usage for the abortion drug, changed the dosage, reduced the number of required in-person office visits, allowed non-doctors to prescribe and administer the drug, and eliminated the requirement for prescribers to report non-fatal adverse events from the drug.
In the ruling, Kacsmaryk shared that there are likely far more than the known 4,200 adverse events from chemical abortion drugs due to the FDA’s rule change eliminating non-fatal adverse reporting requirements and emergency rooms miscoding over 60 percent of women’s emergency room visits for adverse abortion drug reactions as miscarriages.
What’s more, Kacsmaryk rejected the main justification for the FDA’s approval of the abortion drug: reclassifying pregnancy as a “serious or life-threatening illness” and therefore justifying mifepristone as a “meaningful therapeutic benefit.”
“Pregnancy is a normal physiological state most women experience one or more times during their childbearing years — a natural process essential to perpetuating life,” stated Kacsmaryk. “Nothing in the [FDA] Final Rule supports the interpretation that pregnancy is a serious or life-threatening illness.”
Kacsmaryk also pointed out that the FDA had neglected to apply its logic to expedited treatments for other, less politicized ailments.
“[C]ategorizing complications or negative psychological experiences arising from pregnancy as ‘illnesses’ is materially different than classifying pregnancy itself as a serious or life-threatening illness,” stated Kascmaryk. “Tellingly, [the] FDA never explains how or why a ‘condition’ would not qualify as a ‘serious or life-threatening illness.’ Suppose that a woman experiences depression because of lower back pain that inhibits her mobility. Under FDA’s reading, a new drug used to treat lower back pain — which can cause depression, just like unplanned pregnancy — could obtain accelerated approval [per the FDA’s rationale].”
The FDA approval took place during the Clinton administration. Similar to Kacsmaryk, the Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) noted in 2008 that medical professionals critical of the abortion drug’s approval questioned the reclassification of the abortion drug as warranted.
“Critics have argued that unwanted pregnancy should not be considered a serious or life-threatening illness.”
The Texas federal court ruling doesn’t impact Arizona at present; it may later on, based on pending future rulings in higher courts.
SCOTUS agreed to an application for a stay by the FDA of the Texas district court ruling, filed early last month. SCOTUS issued the stay late last month, allowing mifepristone to be made widely available while the appeals process plays out in the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Joining Mayes in the amicus brief are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Aug 1, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Last week, a Pinal County man pleaded guilty to falsely attesting to his felon status when registering to vote. It’s the latest case investigated and prosecuted by the attorney general office’s Election Integrity Unit (EIU).
35-year-old San Tan Valley resident Roberto Garcia voted in the 2020 general election, despite having six previous felony convictions. Garcia was indicted in the Pinal County Superior Court in March.
Garcia faces a minimum of six months and a maximum of 2.5 years. He will receive his sentencing on August 22 by Judge Jason Holmberg. Probation wasn’t made available.
Public court records reveal that one of Garcia’s previous felony convictions concerned theft in 2006.
Another EIU case was convicted last month. As AZ Free News reported, a Scottsdale woman voted for her dead mother in the 2020 election. The court revoked the voter registration of that woman, 56-year-old Krista Michelle Conner of Cochise County. Conner’s fraudulent ballot wasn’t counted, according to Cochise County Recorder David Stevens.
Prior to that, another Scottsdale woman that also cast a ballot in her dead mother’s name in the 2020 election — 64-year-old Tracey Kay McKee — was sentenced to two years’ probation.
Other recent convictions of voter fraud concerned several elections over the past decade. Those were 70-year-old Marcia Johnson of Lake Havasu City, who cast a ballot in her dead father’s name in 2018, and 62-year-old Joseph John Marak of Surprise, who voted as a felon six times since 2016.
The EIU was formed in 2019 and launched its online complaint form in the summer of 2020.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
