Arizona Women Continue Defense Of Girls’ Sports

Arizona Women Continue Defense Of Girls’ Sports

By Daniel Stefanski |

Concerned Arizonans continue to take action to defend the future of women’s sports in their state.

Last month, the Arizona Women of Action filed an amicus brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Doe v. Horne. This case concerns a challenge to the Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act, which was passed by the state legislature in 2022 and signed into law by former Governor Doug Ducey.

Kim Miller, the Founder and Director of Arizona Women of Action, said, “On behalf of Arizona parents and their student-athlete daughters, Arizona Women of Action strongly supports the Save Women’s Sports Act to ensure the safety and level playing field of female athletics. The facts and statistics don’t lie – the differences between males and females are real, even before puberty, and AZWOA stands with Superintendent Tom Horne and the Arizona Legislators to protect women’s sports here in Arizona.”

In their brief, the Arizona Women of Action make three arguments for the west coast appeals court to consider. First, that “the Arizona Legislature’s findings were thorough and based on sound evidence.” Second, that “the Arizona Legislature enacted the Save Women’s Sports Act for a legitimate purpose and to address a real problem.” And finally, that “the District Court improperly ignored the harm to biological females when biological males participate in girls’ sports.”

Earlier this summer, District Court Judge Jennifer Zipps granted a preliminary injunction against SB 1165, the Save Women’s Sports Act, which blocked the law from going into effect. At that time, Arizona’s Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tom Horne, the defendant in the case, promised to appeal the ruling, saying, “This will ultimately be decided by the United States Supreme Court, and they will rule in our favor. The Plaintiffs in this case claimed that this only involves pre-pubescent boys, but we presented peer-reviewed studies that show pre-pubescent boys have an advantage over girls in sports. The only expert presented by the Plaintiffs was a medical doctor who makes his money doing sex transition treatments on children and who has exactly zero peer-reviewed studies to support his opinion.”

Joining Horne as defendants in the case are Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma, who have actively filed motions throughout the proceedings at both the District and Appeals Court levels. In a recent motion to the Ninth Circuit, the Republican legislative leaders wrote, “Under the district court’s preliminary injunction order, ‘the [Save Women’s Sports] Act shall not prevent Plaintiffs from participating in girls’ sports’ and ‘Plaintiffs shall be allowed to play girls’ sports at their respective schools.’ Any success by Plaintiffs in try-outs and meets will displace biological girls from making a team, getting playing time, and succeeding in final results. Biological girls will be irreparably harmed if they are displaced by, forced to compete against, or risk injury from Plaintiffs.”

According to Arizona Women of Action, “the district court still has not ruled on (their) Motion to Intervene,” which was filed in June. The amicus brief before the Ninth Circuit lists three parent representatives – Anna Van Hoek, Lisa Fink, and Amber Zenczak. All three ladies have daughters who play sports, which, per the legal filing, means that they are “directly affected by the presence of biological males on girls’ sports teams.” Fink and her daughter shared their belief “that a biological male on their team would have an unfair advantage to be able to get a starting position on the team and achieve similar benefits and advantages. This would create an environment on the team of disunity and corrosive rivalry. Furthermore, if biological males were allowed to play on competing teams, those teams would have an unfair advantage. It would create a strong sense that the competition was not on a level playing field.”

The group’s bio outlines its purpose, which “is to revive the American dream of strong families, safe cities, and thriving kids, with a focus on citizen action in the areas of education, community, life, anti-trafficking and prayer.”

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Group Warns Legislature About “Data Mining Of Children”

Group Warns Legislature About “Data Mining Of Children”

By Daniel Stefanski |

A conservative grassroots group is warning the Arizona legislature about the westward expansion of a provider of digital mental health solutions.

On Tuesday, the Arizona Women of Action shared information about Kooth’s pending partnership with the State of California and its interest in working with the Arizona Legislature, tweeting, “the data mining of children & increase in mental health services with a decrease in parental involvement is of grave concern.”

On its website, Kooth describes its company as “pioneering innovators of digital behavioral health care, giving a range clinically proven, research evidenced therapies for dealing with stress, anxiety, depression, or what every (people) may be going through.” Kooth asserts that its services cover “over 15 million people internationally.”

In March, the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) revealed that “it will launch the Behavioral Health Virtual Services Platform, a new technology-enabled services solution for all children, youth, and families in California, in January 2024. The platform is part of Governor Newsom’s Master Plan for Kids’ Mental Health and the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative (CYBHI), a $4.7 billion investment in youth behavioral health.”

Governor Newsom rolled out this plan in August 2022 “to ensure all California kids, parents and communities have increased access to mental health and substance use services.” At the time, Newsom stated, “Mental and behavioral health is one of the greatest challenges of our time. As other states take away resources to support kids’ mental health, California is doubling down with the most significant overhaul of our mental health systems in state history.”

The announcement from DHCS added that it had “selected Kooth to support the delivery of equitable, appropriate, and timely behavioral health services to youth and young adults (ages 13-25).” DHCS noted, “Kooth will also integrate with other partners to provide a seamless user experience, including providing services and supports to children (ages 0-12) and their parents/caregivers.”

Kooth’s CEO, Tim Barker, said, “We’re excited to partner with DHCS and the State of California to help transform access to digital behavioral health support for youth across the state. Working together, we believe this represents a step-change in providing early and responsive access to behavioral health care to help address the growing youth mental health crisis.”

California’s selection of Kooth follows the launch of a pilot program in late 2022 in Pennsylvania, which had bipartisan support from state lawmakers. In a news article on November 2, State Senator Lisa Baker said, “This pilot project has the potential to fill some crucial gaps. I am pleased to see that several school districts in northeastern Pennsylvania will be participating. Our constituents will be encouraged to see constructive action on problem-solving that has bipartisan support.”

The piece in the Times Leader added context from Senator Baker, including that “the web-based counseling program by Kooth US was awarded a grant through the Department of Human services that enables school districts to opt into the services without cost to students, parents or the district;” and that “the grant was funded in the FY 2022-23 state budget in acknowledgement of the mental health crisis currently being faced by young people.”

Earlier this year, the Pennsylvania Capital Star reported that a bipartisan coalition of legislators would be traveling to Arizona to “highlight their work with the Pennsylvania Health Department’s contract with Kooth US.” Kevin Winters, the General Manager for Kooth US stated, “The model that we are using now in Pennsylvania has the potential to break down the barrier of access to mental health, and we’re grateful for the advocacy of these legislators in funding this program for students. We’re anxious to expand the model to other states, and honored to present it to such an important audience in Arizona.”

One of the Pennsylvania legislators who came to Arizona in February, Representative Ryan Bizzarro, shared pictures of the event on his Instagram, writing, “Increasing access to mental health services for Pennsylvania students isn’t a partisan issue. In fact, Pennsylvania is the only state that was able to put partisan politics aside and work on modernizing mental health services by creating a space for digital mental health care – all while increasing access for everyone. And now, we’re helping the Arizona state legislature do the same! I’m happy to be part of this bipartisan / bicameral group of Pennsylvania legislators working to change the future of mental health care not only in our commonwealth, but across the U.S.”

While Arizona welcomed this delegation from Pennsylvania, the state legislature was also considering a bill to address the state’s mental health issues among teenagers. Republican Representative Travis Grantham sponsored HB 2635, which would have “authorized a school district governing board to develop or purchase a digital application to assist with threat assessments.” In February, the proposal passed both the House Education and Rules Committee without a single vote in opposition, yet it was held from final passage in the chamber because, in part, of concerns from grassroots groups like Arizona Women of Action.

The critique of Grantham’s bill caused him to introduce a floor amendment to his original proposal, changing the focus of the digital application to assistance with “suicide prevention and substance misuse.” The amendment also removed “the requirement that the digital application allow students to report safety issues and receive anonymous clinical support,” and it required “the digital application to provide suicide prevention and substance misuse resources to parents and, subject to parental consent, students.”

Representative Grantham explained that his amendment “put guard rails on the current bill,” and told AZ Free News that “many of his colleagues were concerned that the legislation was too broad and could invite mental health counseling that became even more damaging than the problem itself.” That bill remains on hold.

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Horne Continues Fight To Protect Girls’ Sports In Court

Horne Continues Fight To Protect Girls’ Sports In Court

By Daniel Stefanski |

The State’s Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction continues to fight on behalf of an Arizona law.

Last week, the Arizona Department of Education sent a media advisory to note that “State schools chief Tom Horne is at U.S. District Court in Tucson to stand up for the state’s law prohibiting biological boys from participating in girls’ sports.” The communication announced that “a federal judge is hearing arguments whether to temporarily block the ban that was signed into law last year.”

That law was SB 1165, which was signed by former Arizona Governor Doug Ducey on March 30, 2022. The law prohibits biological males from competing in women’s and girls’ athletic events at state public schools, colleges, and universities.

The Department later posted a tweet on the issue, which stated, “Superintendent Horne is defending Arizona state law which bans biological boys from competing in girl’s sports. Title IX was created for equal opportunities for female athletes, and allowing males to compete in women’s sports undermines everything these athletes have fought for.”

AZ Free News reached out to Superintendent Horne about his thoughts on the legal hearing and the case in general. Horne replied, “It’s partly about safety but it’s mostly about fairness and the fact that there have been many news articles about girls who focused very strongly on sports, worked really hard, hoped to excel, maybe get a college scholarship or be in the Olympics or whatever, and then all of a sudden have to compete against biological males. They have no chance to compete successfully against them and they’re devastated by it. Now they have found what they believe to be sympathetic plaintiffs because they’re 11-year-olds who are using puberty blockers, so they say they lose the advantage of males. But we have presented numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies to the court showing that even before puberty, males still have an advantage. Our evidence is overwhelming compared to theirs.”

The Arizona Women of Action applauded the latest action from the Department, writing, “We greatly appreciate Tom Horne for upholding the Save Girl’s Sports Act. AZ Women of Action stands with Tom Horne in this endeavor by joining the lawsuit & representing Arizona families who want to save girls’ sports.”

At least some Democrats saw Horne’s defense of the law in a different light. The Yavapai County Democrats tweeted, “Sup. Horne seen here wasting time on a manufactured crisis. Protect public schools. Do something useful for education. Horne is a disgrace.”

Horne isn’t the only Arizona official who has weighed in on this court case. Earlier this year, both Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma filed a Motion to Intervene in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Tucson Division. The Senate Republican’s press release highlighted that “on April 17, 2023, plaintiffs represented by a radical organization filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to stop the law from being enforced in Arizona,” and “Attorney General Kris Mayes is not defending the constitutionality of the law.”

At the time, Petersen said, “In the absence of the Attorney General defending Arizona’s law, we’re looking forward to fighting for the rights of female athletes across Arizona, as well as for the Court making it clear Arizona’s law protecting women and girls should be enforced.”

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Why I Switched—To Democrat, Then Back to Republican

Why I Switched—To Democrat, Then Back to Republican

By Sarah B. |

Even though I was raised in a loving, conservative home, and first registered to vote as a Republican, I switched to Democrat. Why? Partly out of pressure (basically bullied by my husband), but also, like many others, I had heard liberals were the compassionate ones, concerned about protecting the rights of others.

I justified that my husband was one of those liberals, and I could help the Party by sharing my conservative ideas. But he turned out to be a Leftist—insisting that we were “entitled to state benefits,” always angry about supposed racism (but without evidence), and always in fear of COVID or global warming. This was not the compassion I expected from liberals but instead a lot of ‘righteous’ anger. Eventually I woke up tired and worn out from the anger of the Far Left. I still have dear liberal friends, but I had to escape the mindset that took away my sanity and hope. Here’s what I learned.

1 – Democrats are no longer “the compassionate ones.” They’re either old school liberals (like John F. Kennedy or even Bill Clinton) OR they’re Leftists. The true liberals still care, but they don’t realize that their party has been taken over by socialists, and it’s demolishing what they believe in—what our forefathers created in our Constitutional Republic. The Democrat platform no longer cares about the rights and freedoms of the people; only about taking control.

2 – The Democrat media is NOT fact-based. When I registered as a Democrat, I noticed the videos posted to my Facebook made AOC look like the American Joan of Arc, standing up to Big Pharma and Big Tech. Nowhere was I shown the full sound bites where she makes no sense: ‘the Green New deal is going to save us from certain death in a decade!’ They use terms like fossil fuels, but have no idea what it really means. They say renewable energy is a great innovation that will keep improving, but it’s nowhere close to beating petroleum or nuclear power—both of which help most people in poorer countries.

3 – Democrat activists are kind of shady. Whenever someone found out that I was a registered Democrat, and they were too, the conversation turned SUPER secretive. They lowered their voice and looked around making sure no one else was listening, like we were part of a spy network. No joke. Every time! Once I was part of an activist group talking about staging a protest in front of a local GOP office—again it felt shady, rather than doing good work…. Eventually, I thought to myself: if what the Republicans (my family) are standing for is so bad, why is there a need to always be looking behind your shoulder? Why is everything in the Democrat party secretive?

After four years of living like this, I was obese, SUPER in debt, angry, and impatient with people: things I never wanted to be or have my son see. It hit me one day that my parents’ “normal” life was healthy. It had schedules, hard work, gratitude, and hope. Conservative values actually made happiness possible.

Leftist thinking had derailed my life. I had to make some tough choices, but now I’m free! Today, with my family’s support, I’ve lost and kept off over 20 pounds, paid off debts, been at peace with who I am, and become strong in my faith. Now, I have the ability to be fully present for my son. (He goes to the gym with me, and we even go to Republican meetings together!) Honestly, I can say it’s when I embraced conservative thinking that we started getting healthy.

Now I’m part of Chandler/Gilbert Republican Women, I’ve worked on campaigns, and contribute research and admin support for Arizona Women of Action. I’m excited to be an activist for freedom! I hope my story encourages others to think about their beliefs, and remember WHY we’re fighting—for a healthy, happy country.

Sarah is a part of the Chandler/Gilbert Republican Women and contributes research and administrative support for Arizona Women of Action.