by Matthew Holloway | Sep 17, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona House Ethics Chair Lupe Diaz (R-LD19) blasted Democrats Friday for “weaponizing” complaints against Rep. John Gillette (R-LD30). Democrat Reps. Oscar De Los Santos, Nancy Gutierrez, Quanta Crews, and Stacey Travers filed a complaint on September 10, citing an interview from Gillette and social media posts. They called his remarks “offensive” and “unbecoming of an elected official,” noting his criticism of radical Islamists and Sharia law.
In a string of posts to X referred to in the Democrats’ complaint, Rep. Gillette wrote, “Islamophobia is a construct of the Marxist left I reject. I hear them state that they stand with Hamas and Iran, they want to bring Sharia Law to the US. They chant death to US. I have years of direct experience with these savages. [Their] own religion preached convert or die. F**K EM. If they want here to become the s**t hole they left… they can go home. The democrats support them. DEMOCRATS HATE AMERICA!”
Responding to subsequent comments, he clarified his position, stating, “I was critical of their policies. “Shiria(sic) Law and convert or die” are policy positions of Islam. Democrats want to install Socialism as a policy. I criticize both as they are repugnant to the Constitution. My reply is based on experience in the Middle East and Soviet Union. Not some leftist theory cooked up in a liberal college classroom with the same professors and systems that say there are 32 genders.. grow up and see reality…. remember Covid when you were told to wear a face covering, not work. The left forced this on us, not people like me.”
In their complaint, the Democrat lawmakers claimed, “Rep. Gillette referred to Muslims as ‘f***ing savages’ who don’t properly ‘assimilate’ into American culture. By referring to Muslims as ‘savages’ and ‘terrorists,’ Rep. Gillette dehumanized them and demonstrates his bigotry against an entire religious group, which constitutes about 1% of the population in this state.”
In a letter responding to the Democrat representatives, Chairman Diaz wrote that “remarks, statements, or opinions by a member, alone, are not traditionally the subject of an ethics inquiry. Subject to our House Rules regarding debate, members—like any other citizen—have a First Amendment right to the freedom of speech, as well as a right to freely speak under Article 2, Section 6 of the Arizona Constitution.”
Citing the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Diaz added, “Moreover, particularly in light of recent events, it is imperative that government institutions protect the freedom of speech, rather than take actions to silence, punish, or censor speech simply because someone might find it offensive or disagreeable. The inquiry you request this Committee to make would result in no more than an inquiry into the sincerity of Representative Gillette’s beliefs or a debate into the merits of those beliefs— neither for which an Ethics Committee hearing is the proper venue.”
Diaz concluded, “It would be inconsistent with constitutional principles—and unprecedented, based on past practices of previous House Ethics Committee Chairmen presented with similar complaints to undertake any further review or investigation of your complaint. Accordingly, I will not take further action on this matter.”
He further added an admonishment to the Democratic representatives, urging them to review Rep. Gillette’s response to their press release announcing the complaint, entitled “Defending America Against Radical Ideologies and Political Hypocrisy,” and added, “To the extent that you have any lingering concerns about his statements, it would be prudent to engage in civil discourse rather than weaponizing the House Ethics Complaint process.”
In the statement, Gillette explained in part, “Immigrants are welcomed here as guests who can become fellow citizens, and gratitude, respect, and loyalty to our nation are the minimum expectations. Yet too often, what we see instead is a demand that Americans change our culture, our speech, or our religion so as not to ‘offend’ those who chose to come here. That is not assimilation—it is subversion. I will treat every human being with dignity and respect. But I will not, and Americans must not bow to the demands of those who place their foreign ideologies above our Constitution.”
Gillette defined the group he opposes as “radical Islamists,” who seek “the establishment of a worldwide caliphate,” adding, “While some [in] the Muslim world may practice their faith peacefully, many more have weaponized the concept of jihad to justify terrorism, mass murder, and political conquest.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Elizabeth Troutman | Feb 2, 2024 | News
By Elizabeth Troutman |
Rep. Leezah Sun, D-Phoenix, resigned from the House after the Arizona House Ethics Committee found she violated House Rule 1 by exhibiting a pattern of disorderly behavior.
Sun “engaged in a pattern of inappropriate behavior in her official capacity and under the color of her office as a state representative,” the report says.
Four fellow Democrats in the Arizona House filed the ethics complaint against her. Chairman of the Ethics Committee Joseph Chaplik, R-Scottsdale, emphasized the role the committee plays in addressing complaints regarding potential violations of House Rules.
“It is important to clarify that our committee is not intended to emulate a court of law, and our investigation of matters is not conducted as a trial,” he said in a statement. “Rather, the proceedings in which Committee members have engaged in this matter were to receive Representative Sun’s input and gather pertinent facts related to a specific internal House matter—namely, whether Representative Sun engaged in disorderly behavior, contravening House Rule 1.”
Sun was entitled to “judicious consideration” of the allegations brought against her, Chaplik said.
“I’m proud that the Committee strived at all times to satisfy this constitutional guarantee, conducting two hearings to provide a platform for Representative Sun to present her perspective,” he said.
“I am appreciative of the witnesses, members, and staff of the Committee for demonstrating and upholding the integrity of the House and ensuring that our proceedings adhered to the highest standards of professionalism and fairness,” the chairman continued.
Sun tried to use her status as a lawmaker to interfere in a child custody transfer in June, according to the report. Four kids were supposed to go with a parental supervisor for visitation with their dad but wouldn’t get out of the car, so Sun told the supervisor to reschedule and “call it a day.” When the supervisor said she was following court orders, Sun reportedly told her she was “done” and “now you need to move on.”
Additionally, three city of Tolleson employees claimed Sun was aggressive toward them during a meeting in May and wanted to hurt them. She allegedly called the city manager vulgar names.
During a conference in Tucson, Sun allegedly threatened to throw Tolleson Chief Government Affairs Officer Pilar Sinawi off the hotel balcony in August. Sun later countered that her language was “hyperbolic,” but she admitted that she said if Sinawi were at the conference, she would “b**** slap” her, according to the report.
Elizabeth Troutman is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send her news tips using this link.
by Corinne Murdock | May 26, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
State Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton skipped out on the ethics committee hearing concerning her swiping and hiding state capitol Bibles. Stahl Hamilton stands accused of unethical conduct and undignified behavior.
The House Ethics Committee considered the allegations against Stahl Hamilton in a hearing on Thursday. Chairman Joseph Chaplik (R-LD03) revealed in a statement following the hearing that Stahl Hamilton neglected to provide notice to the committee that she wouldn’t be participating in her own ethics hearing.
“Today’s hearing was not a trial, but the Committee made every effort to provide Representative Stahl Hamilton the due process to which she is entitled as a member of the House,” stated Chaplik. “Unfortunately, because of her absence, and the limited information that could be provided by the counsel she sent to represent her, committee members and the public were left with a lot of unanswered questions.”
Amid the fallout concerning her actions, Stahl Hamilton deleted her Twitter account. Reports surfaced in April of Stahl Hamilton caught on security footage taking Bibles from the members lounge and hiding them.
Former state lawmakers Diego Rodriguez and Domingo DeGrazia served as attorneys for Stahl Hamilton during Thursday’s hearing. Rodriguez insisted that, for full context’s sake, the committee be shown the many hours of footage surrounding the incident. The committee rejected that request.
Rodriguez defended Stahl Hamilton’s actions as a valid advocacy for the separation of church and state, as well as a “prank” on fellow members. However, when pressed, neither Rodriguez or DeGrazia could elaborate how the presence of Bibles at the state capitol constituted a violation of the separation of church and state.
“Her intent was the peaceful protest of what she perceived to be for the separation of church and state,” stated Rodriguez. “What today boils down to is that certain folks are just not comfortable with the way certain things happened. And subsequent to that, they’re not comfortable with the way certain things were explained. And unfortunately that’s just part of life.”
State Rep. Travis Grantham (R-LD13), vice chair of the committee and speaker pro tempore, read aloud Stahl Hamilton’s written response to the ethics committee investigation. In her letter, Stahl Hamilton acknowledged that she should have engaged in a discussion about the separation of church and state rather than engaging in the behavior she had.
“I find it a little disingenuous to reference church and state. You’re talking about the separation of church and state, which says no coercion in religious matters, no expectation to support a religious document or religion against one’s will, in that religious liberty encompasses all religions. How is a Bible sitting on a table somehow a violation of church and state?” asked Grantham. “Did Mrs. Stahl Hamilton feel like she was being coerced to follow a certain religion?”
Neither Rodriguez or DeGrazia had an answer for Grantham. The vice chair also asked whether the state motto, “God enriches,” would be considered a violation of the separation of church and state. Rodriguez and DeGrazia smiled but didn’t answer directly.
“It’s not seemingly normal behavior, and there doesn’t seem to be a real good answer with regards to what was written here,” said Grantham.
The 2005 case Van Orden v. Perry dispelled the argument that Christian text on government property violates the separation between church and state. In the case, a citizen claimed that the Texas State Capitol grounds couldn’t contain a monument bearing the Bible’s Ten Commandments. The Supreme Court disagreed in a 5-4 decision.
State Rep. Gail Griffin (R-LD19) said she didn’t view Stahl Hamilton’s actions as a joke.
“I don’t understand why she’s so angry about a Holy Book that many of us feel very close [to] and rule our lives by,” said Griffin.
State Rep. Justin Heap (R-LD10) was one of the members who filed the complaint. Heap testified on Thursday, saying he became aware of Stahl Hamilton’s Bible swiping after it was reported on at the national level.
“What was particularly disturbing to me was not simply that these Bibles were removed, but the photos of where these Bibles were placed: both in a refrigerator and under the cushions of chairs of where I and other members and lobbyists sit,” said Heap. “Now I have to deal with the question of, if at some point while these Bibles were missing, was I sitting on my own sacred text? I don’t appreciate that to have happened. I feel that’s inappropriate for any member to do that to other members, it’s a desecration to their scripture and a disrespect to their beliefs.”
Rodriguez asserted that Heap didn’t personally observe the Bibles in any of the places where they were discovered.
State Rep. Jennifer Longdon (D-LD05) questioned whether Stahl Hamilton should be exonerated since she apologized following discovery of her actions. Heap responded that Stahl Hamilton’s apology didn’t absolve her of wrongdoing.
“The apology came only after her actions had been known; she was informed that this had been caught on video and that this became an issue of national concern. That does put a shadow over the sincerity of her apology,” said Heap. “That question is irrelevant to the question of whether her behavior was appropriate.”
Grantham pointed out that Stahl Hamilton’s apology wasn’t for the act of swiping and hiding the Bibles, but rather for the fact that some members felt offended by her actions.
“To my recollection, and correct me if I’m wrong: she didn’t apologize for the action. She apologized for the offense of anyone who thought that that action was inappropriate,” said Grantham. “I never remembered an actual apology for the action.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
