by Matthew Holloway | Apr 19, 2025 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
An interjection by Arizona’s Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes has led to the AG and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne trading rhetorical fire after Phoenix’s Kyrene School District voted to adopt a “Staff Social Emotional Wellness Policy.” That policy appears to run afoul of guidance from the U.S. Department of Education, risking the withholding of $1.5 million in federal funding.
In a statement reported by The Center Square, Mayes said that Horne has no legal basis for what she described as him threatening the districts.
“Rather than do his job and ensure that funds appropriated by Congress and the Legislature reach Arizona schools — as the law requires — Superintendent Horne is choosing to engage in ideological nonsense at the expense of students and teachers,” she said.
She added that the districts should, “ignore baseless, politicized threats from the State Superintendent’s office, which has no legitimate role whatsoever in blocking the distribution of these federal funds.”
In a post to X, Horne stated: “On DEI, AG Mayes is wrong and risks $770 million Ignoring federal guidance is not optional.”
In a stern response to Mayes, Horne issued a statement, “I spent four years as Attorney General, and I follow the law strictly. The Arizona Department of Education has been responsible for distributing both federal and state education dollars to the schools for many decades and we must do so in accordance with the law. The U.S. Department of Education has issued guidance that requires my department to certify that all public districts and charters that take federal money use those funds according to that guidance, and that cannot be ignored. If I did, we would risk losing nearly $770 million in total federal funding to all public schools. That is obviously unacceptable, but the Attorney General is either unconcerned or unaware of that catastrophic scenario.”
The Arizona Department of Education (AZED) said in a press release, “Attorney General Kris Mayes is wrong in claiming that the Arizona Department of Education has no legal authority to withhold federal funds to districts and charters that fail to comply with new guidance regarding Diversity Equity and Inclusion programs, according to Superintendent Tom Horne.”
The department added that on April 3rd and again on April 9th, AZED through its Grants Management System, issued notice to all public districts and charters in Arizona on the guidance from the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) and an attestation that the guidance will be followed.
“Under the guidance, districts and charters have until April 24th to certify compliance. Failure to do so will require the state – as the fiscal agent – to put a hold on federal dollars. To date, approximately 350 districts and charters out of 658 have certified compliance.”
The guidance from the DOE is as follows:
“Given the text of Title VI and the assurances you have already given, any violation of Title VI—including the use of Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (“DEI”) programs to advantage one’s race over another—is impermissible. The use of certain DEI practices can violate federal law. The continued use of illegal DEI practices may subject the individual or entity using such practices to serious consequences, including:
- l . The use of the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 2000d-l to seek the ‘termination of or refusal to grant or to continue assistance under such program,’ eliminating federal funding for any SEA, LEA, or educational institution that engages in such conduct. [1]”
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 Matthew Holloway | Apr 15, 2025 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne issued a stern warning to Arizona school districts late last week. The warning came after Phoenix’s Kyrene School District voted to adopt a policy that further embeds Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) into the district’s day-to-day operations in defiance of policy guidance issued by President Donald Trump.
Horne warned, “Kyrene and any district or charter that is not taking the federal DEI guidance will lose their federal dollars. The U.S. Department of Education has been abundantly clear with its most recent guidance against the use of DEI language in schools. Federal law and the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution are clear that no person shall be discriminated because of race, skin color or ethnicity, and this guidance aligns completely with my philosophy. By contrast, the use of DEI programs does just the opposite and promotes racial discrimination. Schools ignore the federal guidance at their own peril. This is not an empty threat, and districts and charter schools need to treat it seriously.”
In its meeting on April 8th, the Kyrene School District voted unanimously to defy policy guidance from both the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) and the Arizona Department of Education (AZDOE). The move will cause the district to lose access to over $1.5 million in federal funding in favor of its “Staff Social Emotional Wellness Policy” in which it purports to “provide welcoming, inclusive learning environments in which every student is honored, valued, and feels a strong sense of belonging and purpose.”
Guidance from the DOE issued in February explicitly states that, “Institutions that fail to comply with federal civil rights law may, consistent with applicable law, face potential loss of federal funding.” It noted that “DEI programs, for example, frequently preference certain racial groups and teach students that certain racial groups bear unique moral burdens that others do not. Such programs stigmatize students who belong to particular racial groups based on crude racial stereotypes. Consequently, they deny students the ability to participate fully in the life of a school.”
The federal policy explains, “Although some programs may appear neutral on their face, a closer look reveals that they are, in fact, motivated by racial considerations. And race-based decision-making, no matter the form, remains impermissible.” The DOE also cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which ruled that “[c]lassifying and assigning students based on their race” is an unlawful practice unless it satisfies a firm legal standard of ‘strict scrutiny,’ under two narrowly tailored instances:
(1) remediating specific, identified instances of past discrimination that violated the Constitution or a statute;
(2) avoiding imminent and serious risks to human safety in prisons, such as a race riot.”
The high court added, “An individual’s race may never be used against him” and “may not operate as a stereotype,” used to justify government polices.
In his remarks, Horne concluded, “The most interesting philosophical divide in our country right now is between those like me who believe in individual merit, and those who want to substitute racial entitlement. DEI is all about racial entitlement. The problem with racial entitlement is that it does nothing to promote hard work, conscientiousness, or creativity. If those advocating for it succeed in having it replace individual merit, we will become a mediocre, third world country. China will become the dominant power.”
Earlier this month, Horne signed an attestation letter to the DOE stating that “Arizona will not have anything to do with race-based programs, DEI, etc.”
Horne shared a handwritten missive to Secretary McMahon from the margins of the letter that AZDOE called “uplifting” which stated, “Sec. McMahon- Thank you for fighting for our Constitution and laws!”
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 Tiffany Benson | Apr 1, 2025 | Opinion
By Tiffany Benson |
Many Americans believe the Supreme Court rulings on Engel v. Vitale (1962) and Abington School District v. Schempp (1963)—landmark cases banning prayer and Bible reading from public schools—effectively removed all forms of religious activity during educational hours.
As a result of these decisions, and the incessant drumming of “separation of church and state,” mainstream society now considers it unconstitutional to read Scripture or bow one’s head on government property. Every generation since 1963 has gone along with this diabolical rhetoric that blatantly violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:
“Congress shall MAKE NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, or PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF; or abridging the freedom of speech…”
Truly, the progressive left succeeded in its efforts to (morally) overthrow the United States.
At issue, in 1962, was a nondenominational prayer recited alongside the Pledge of Allegiance in K-12 schools:
“Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country.”
These 22 words pose no threat to anyone’s sincerely held beliefs. Although prayer was a standard part of every school day before 1962, students and staff members were not mandated to participate in the invocation. Nevertheless, anti-God activists have always deemed public prayer—that is, calling upon a higher power than government—an act that goes against the First Amendment. So, under the guise of nondiscrimination, several state laws were amended to abolish religious activities in public schools and bar educators from sharing their faith.
Don’t misunderstand what’s really at play. The false “church and state” narrative as well as the prohibition of Scripture and prayer are all aimed at one religion: Christianity. The progressive left wasn’t hellbent on expelling every god from mainstream society—they specifically intended to eliminate the God of the Bible (namely Jesus Christ) and silence His followers. Once God and Christianity were declared unlawful on school grounds, an alternative moral/religious code came into effect.
In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watson—just one year before God and prayer were banned from public education—the Supreme Court asserted that “secular humanism” (a form of atheism) was a religion fully protected by the First Amendment. If you will, the religion of unbelief is now considered to be legally and morally on par with Christianity. Yet only the former is allowed in public schools.
Of course, parents don’t recognize that their children are absorbing secular humanism because the doctrine is masked by minimal education requirements. Secular humanism is bright red lipstick on a filthy pig. If your child’s K-12 school requires a class or an assignment in the following subject areas, they’ve likely been indoctrinated with secular humanist dogma:
- Evolutionary Theory—secular Creation Story
- Social Studies—secular civil code (falsely teaches America is a democracy instead of a Constitutional Republic founded on Judeo-Christian principles)
- Ethnic Studies—secular race relations (includes Critical Race Theory)
- Diversity, Equity, Inclusion—secular ethics
- LGBTQ—secular human sexuality
- Social Emotional Learning—secular moral code (falsely teaches restorative justice)
God may not be permitted on school grounds, but the religion of secular humanism is alive and well.
In his 2007 book “Separation of Church and State: What the Founders Meant,” David Barton wrote:
“[F]ollowing the 1962-1963 court-ordered removal of religious principles from students, teenage pregnancies immediately soared over 700 percent, with the United States recording the highest teen pregnancy rates in the industrialized world. Similarly, sexual activity among fifteen year olds skyrocketed, and sexually transmitted diseases among students ascended to previously unrecorded levels. In fact, virtually every moral measurement kept by federal cabinet-level agencies reflects the same statistical pattern: the removal of religious principles from the public sphere was accompanied by a corresponding decline in public morality.
Furthermore, consider the fact that suicide is one of the top five leading causes of death among children aged 12 to 19. Homicide among 15 to 29 year olds makes up 40% of the total number of homicides worldwide each year. There’s not enough time to discuss the increase in school mass shooting incidents over the last two decades.
Every case of teen violence and sexual deviance may not be directly linked to secular humanistic education. However, after nearly 18 years of being told you evolved from nothing, you’re a “clump of cells” with no inherent worth or purpose beyond the present moment—what reaction should we realistically expect other than rage and rebellion?
Parents choose public schools for a number of reasons, ranging from convenience to affordability to sports. And while there’s no shame in keeping certain traditions, it’s clear that America’s public education system is on the verge of total moral collapse. The emergence of “trans” activists coupled with the lack of basic social/survival skills among youths is evident. Ignorance is willful at this point.
According to Proverbs 22:6, God holds parents primarily responsible for educating their children. If we don’t want them indoctrinated with a secular humanistic worldview—one that says gender is fluid, America is systemically racist, and God is dead—then it’s time to abandon public education. This is one sure way to conserve family values, strengthen our nation’s moral foundation, and secure the freedom of future generations.
Tiffany Benson is the Founder of Restore Parental Rights in Education. Her commentaries on education, politics, and Christian faith can be viewed at Parentspayattention.com and Bigviewsmallwindow.com. Follow on Facebook and Instagram.
by Monica Yelin | Mar 25, 2025 | Opinion
By Monica Yelin |
Is DEI a good thing? Is being Hispanic an accomplishment? We must challenge these prevailing narratives and advocate for a more empowering discourse.
In today’s America, the conversation around racism has been hijacked, not by those who genuinely seek equality, but by a group that benefits from keeping minorities in a constant state of victimhood. As a proud Hispanic, I’ve seen how this narrative has been weaponized, not to uplift us but to keep us boxed into stereotypes that do more harm than good. These narratives harm us and undermine the progress toward a truly equal society.
We hear it constantly: “Speak up; you are a victim!” But have we ever stopped to ask who is looking down on us? Who is genuinely being racist? It’s not the hardworking Americans who see us as equals.
The Danger of the Victimhood Mentality
For too long, certain groups have pushed the idea that minorities, especially Hispanics, are perpetual victims who need special protection. This is evident in how some media outlets portray us, in the rhetoric of specific political figures, and in the policies that are supposed to help us but often end up reinforcing this narrative. But here’s the truth: this narrative doesn’t empower us; it chains us and, quite frankly, is abusive. When we accept the label of victim, we surrender our power. We allow others to dictate our worth instead of defining it through our achievements.
This is precisely what they want to control. They want minorities to feel oppressed so they can appear as “saviors or heroes” and expand government power under the premise of helping us. But we don’t need them; they perpetuate issues with no solutions. We don’t need pity. We need equal opportunity, which doesn’t divide us but unites us in a more inclusive America.
DEI policies could unintentionally perpetuate the victimhood narrative. These policies appear to be designed under the pretense of helping minorities, but they could end up hurting us the most. Take affirmative action and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, for example. These policies don’t level the playing field; they manipulate it. They make it seem like our success is only possible through handouts rather than hard work. They make companies prioritize skin color over competence.
And let’s not forget the devastating impact of government policies that fail to address fundamental issues affecting our community, like crime, border security, and drug trafficking. The very same people who cry about protecting minorities are the ones who have allowed cartels to flood our neighborhoods with drugs, endangering our youth. Policies that weaken law enforcement or ignore the crisis at our border don’t help Hispanics; they harm us.
When the real, actual cases of racism are reported, those are not taken seriously because of this abuse of making everything racist.
A dangerous byproduct of this divisive ideology is the rise of reverse racism. For years, we were told that discrimination is wrong, yet now, some openly advocate for hostility toward white Americans. They justify it by saying it’s “retribution” for past injustices. But racism, no matter who the target is, remains wrong.
How can we ever expect to move forward as a united nation if we keep fueling resentment and division? Instead of blaming one group for the struggles of another, we should recognize that success comes from hard work, responsibility, and perseverance, values that transcend race.
We must have a path forward for Hispanics not to feel like victims. We are entrepreneurs, professionals, veterans, business owners, and leaders. Our value doesn’t come from DEI policies, handouts, or political talking points; it comes from our contributions to this country. It’s time we reject the labels imposed on us and demand recognition for who we are: Americans who have earned our place through merit, not privilege.
Let’s stop allowing politicians and activists to define our identity for us. Let’s stand up against the dangerous rhetoric that keeps minorities trapped in victimhood. And most importantly, let’s ensure that future generations of Hispanics grow up knowing that their potential is limitless, not because of government assistance, but because of their hard work and determination. It’s time to change the narrative.
Monica Yelin is the Executive Director of the Hispanic Liberty Alliance.
by Jonathan Eberle | Mar 23, 2025 | Education, News
By Jonathan Eberle |
The Arizona Legislature is considering a constitutional amendment that would restrict preferential treatment and discrimination based on race or ethnicity in public education, government spending, and hiring practices.
House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 2042, sponsored by Rep. Steve Montenegro (R-LD 29), would reinforce existing constitutional protections by prohibiting state agencies, schools, and employers from favoring or disadvantaging individuals based on race or ethnicity. If approved by the Legislature, the measure will be placed on the next general election ballot for voter approval.
HCR 2042 expands Arizona’s existing anti-discrimination policies by banning the use of race or ethnicity as a factor in hiring, promotions, admissions, or contracting decisions in public institutions. It also would prevent state-funded institutions from compelling employees, students, or contractors to support race-based policies as a condition of employment or academic advancement.
In addition, HCR 2042 would prohibit public funding for university offices (like DEI offices) or initiatives that promote preferential treatment based on race or ethnicity, restrict diversity training that endorses race-based privilege, intersectionality, or the idea that neutral policies perpetuate racial injustice, and ensure that disciplinary policies in public schools and workplaces do not treat individuals differently based on race or ethnicity.
The bill allows exemptions for academic research, student organizations, legal compliance, and mental or physical health services provided by licensed professionals.
Proponents of the bill say that preferential treatment—whether through race-based hiring, admissions, or funding allocations—undermines fairness and meritocracy. Equal treatment under the law is a fundamental principle that should apply to all individuals, regardless of background, and race-based policies can create resentment and devalue achievements by making qualifications appear tied to identity rather than merit.
Supporters of the legislation also argue that neutral, colorblind policies are the best way to ensure fairness in education, employment, and government programs. They say that government should not fund initiatives that favor one racial or ethnic group over another, as this can lead to unintended discrimination.
HCR 2042 was approved by the House Government Committee in a 4-3 vote and now awaits further legislative debate. If passed, Arizona voters will decide on the measure in the next statewide election.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
