by Matthew Holloway | Jan 14, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen (R–LD14) said he believes the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to uphold state laws that protect girls’ and women’s sports, following oral arguments in a closely watched case on whether biological males may compete in female athletic competitions.
Petersen attended oral arguments in West Virginia v. B.P.J. in Washington, D.C., where the Court heard challenges to state-level laws restricting participation in girls’ sports based on biological sex.
“It was an incredible experience to be in the Supreme Court with the justices in the room hearing their arguments,” Petersen said in an interview with AZ Free News following the hearing. “If I’m reading the room, I think we win this six to three.”
Petersen explained that much of the questioning from the Justices centered on the definition of sex under the law, rather than transgender status itself. “What it’s really boiling down to is the definition of sex,” he said. “They’ve conceded that it’s about sex. They’re not even arguing that it’s about transgender status.”
He described a moment during questioning in which Justice Alito pressed attorneys defending the challenge to the laws on how to define the term “woman,” calling the exchange revealing.
Petersen and House Speaker Steve Montenegro (R-LD29) joined the case through an amicus brief in September 2025 after Arizona Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes declined to defend the Save Women’s Sports Act. Under Arizona statute, that authority shifted to legislative leadership.
“Unfortunately, you have an attorney general who’s not willing to defend our laws,” Petersen said. “But fortunately, the statute gives the Senate President and the Speaker standing. We were able to intervene and defend the law, and we’ve taken it all the way here.”
Petersen characterized the law as “common sense” and said lawmakers felt compelled to see it defended at the highest level.
“This is the same Women’s Sports Act to protect our girls and make sure they have these opportunities,” he said. “This law needed to be defended.”
Beyond athletics, Petersen said the case raises broader questions about state authority and federal overreach. “If they get this wrong, it would be devastating,” he said. “It would mean that your daughters, your granddaughters, your sisters—their chances to compete in sports and be champions—those dreams are shot.”
Petersen noted that while most states have enacted protections for girls’ sports, a Supreme Court ruling striking those laws down nationwide would leave states with no recourse. “At least if they leave it to the states, there would be some safe harbors,” he said. “If they ruled against everybody, there would be nowhere girls could go.”
Critics of the laws argue that they discriminate against transgender individuals. Petersen rejected that framing, saying the laws preserve opportunities while maintaining fairness.
“They still have opportunities,” he said. “They can be part of a co-ed team; they can play with people of the same biological sex or even create their own leagues. What they can’t do is play in biological girls’ sports.”
He added that the issue is necessary and unavoidable, pointing to female athletes who have lost titles and opportunities under policies that allow biological males to compete in girls’ categories.
If the Supreme Court upholds the laws, Petersen said no new legislation would be required in Arizona. “We already have the law,” he said. “We just want the law that we passed to be upheld.”
If the Court issues a narrow or adverse ruling, Petersen said lawmakers may be forced to explore alternative legislative approaches, though he cautioned that a sweeping loss could take years—or longer—to undo.
“That’s why it’s so critical they get it right,” he said. “If they get it wrong, it’s no different than Roe v. Wade. It could be decades, if ever, until it gets fixed.”
The Court is expected to issue its ruling as late as June this year, according to Petersen.
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 Ethan Faverino | Jan 12, 2026 | Education, News
By Ethan Faverino |
Arizona State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne hailed a unanimous decision by the Arizona Court of Appeals that reinstates a lawsuit against the Mesa Unified School District (MPS), reinforcing parental rights in cases involving children’s gender identity.
The ruling allows parents to pursue legal action against public schools that withhold critical information about a child’s intent to identify as a gender different from their biological sex.
“Schools are not substitutes for parents, and they have zero right to withhold information that parents are entitled to know,” said Horne. “Arizona law is very clear on the right of parents, and they should be informed when a child expresses a desire to be identified as a sex other than the one to which they were born. The Court of Appeals was unanimous in their decision allowing a lawsuit filed against the Mesa school district by a parent to proceed. I am very pleased that the Court made the correct ruling to defend parental rights and remind schools they should follow the law or risk legal action.”
The case is of a parent whose daughter, referred to as “Megan” (a pseudonym), was a student at an MPS junior high school during the 2022-23 school year. According to court documents, MPS had implemented “Guidelines for Support of Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students” since at least 2015. These guidelines included procedures for school staff to support students asserting a gender identity different from their sex assigned at birth, such as updating their name or pronouns in internal systems without necessarily notifying parents.
In “Megan’s” situation, school personnel allowed her to use the male name “Michael” among teachers and students, while deliberately avoiding updates to the district’s electronic system to prevent automatic parental alerts.
The guidelines instructed staff not to disclose a student’s transgender status or gender nonconforming presentation without the student’s consent, even to parents.
This included options for students to specify whether their identity could be shared with school leadership, teachers, or peers—but parental notification was not mandated unless a change was requested in the school’s internal system.
“Megan’s” parents discovered the name change in October 2022 and confronted the school officials. In a December 2022 meeting with the principal, they learned that the school had intentionally bypassed the notification system to keep the matter secret.
The principal admitted that even if the parents had requested updates on name changes, pronouns, or gender-related issues, MPS policy prohibited informing parents.
The parents demanded that all staff cease using “Michael” and revert to Megan’s given name, but at a February 2023 meeting with teachers, all but one continued using the preferred name.
The parents further claimed that the school’s actions encouraged Megan to lie to her parents, straining the family relationship and delaying necessary mental health support.
Once her parents were fully informed, Megan was able to speak openly with them and a mental health counselor. Within a month, her issues were resolved, and she became comfortable presenting herself as female and using her given name. The lawsuit, joined by MPS board member Rachel Walden, alleges violations of Arizona’s Parents’ Bill of Rights, which protects parents’ authority over their children’s upbringing, education, health care, and mental health. It also cites prohibitions against public employees compelling children to withhold information from parents, requirements for advance notification on sexuality-related instruction, and bans on mental health screening without consent.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Oct 13, 2025 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
As enrollment dips and two schools are considered for repurposing, Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) is promoting a biking event for “girls, nonbinary youth, and gender-expansive” children in family-facing communications.
In an October 9th post to X, parental rights organization Scottsdale Unites for Educational Integrity (SUEI) wrote: “Parents confirmed @ScottsdaleUSD is using their district-wide communication system to promote an event for ‘nonbinary youth’ and ‘gender expansive’ children. Girls in Gear (and apparently boys, too) claims that these lessons are Social Emotional Learning. Email: GovBRD@SUSD.org.”
The “Girls in Gear” program, which focuses on cycling skills and social-emotional learning, includes participants who identify outside traditional gender norms, according to a district email sent to families. A post on X by SUEI shared the event flyer, which lists the inclusive criteria.
According to the Girls in Gear website, the event “is open to any rider who identifies as a girl. If a rider identifies as a girl, then the rider is welcome to participate in Girls in Gear.”
In a reply to the SUEI post, Arizona Women of Action drew attention to the contradiction that SUSD is continuing to focus on gender ideology despite reduced enrollment, school closures under discussion, and at-risk federal funding.
Arizona Women of Action wrote in its reply:
“1. Identifying as a gender that is not innate (boy or girl) is often the first step of the ‘trans’ path. By Scottsdale Unified recognizing these identities (non-binary, gender expansive) the district can contribute to a child’s ‘trans’ path. Change in pronouns and presentation are next, irreversible puberty blockers and hormones follow.
2. This is no longer a girls’ event if non binary or gender expansive youth can participate.
3. SUSD is closing schools. This kind of choice could be a contributing factor to low enrollment.
4. Isn’t there an EO about this? Yes. And schools can lose federal funding.”
The organization also called up on followers to call “the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at 1-800-421-3481 to report non-compliance.”
District reporting in February revealed that under SUSD Superintendent Dr. Scott Menzel, enrollment has consistently dropped. As of February 2025, enrollment stood at 19,367, a decrease of 390 students from 2024, down 355 from the previous year. Over the past seven years, enrollment has dropped precipitously by 13%, from 22,608.
In response to the enrollment trends, the SUSD governing board voted 3-2 on October 7th to advance a proposal to repurpose Echo Canyon K-8 School and Pima Elementary School for the 2026-27 school year, according to AZ Family. Menzel addressed the looming closures with families in a September message and cited under-enrollment at both schools.
The promotion of the program also comes amid federal policies addressing gender-related content in schools. President Trump’s Executive Order 14190, issued January 29, 2025, directs the withholding of federal funds from K-12 programs that promote gender ideology or other specified materials, and reestablishes the 1776 Commission for patriotic education. Additionally, a Department of Health and Human Services directive on August 26, 2025, requires states to certify that sex education programs do not reference transgender youth or gender ideology to receive funding, affecting 46 states and territories, including Arizona. Several Democratic-led states have filed lawsuits challenging the directive. Despite pending legal action, the Executive Order and HHS Directive both remain in effect at present.
SUSD has previously addressed transgender-related policies, including student transition plans and LGBTQ curriculum, and run afoul of the Arizona Department of Education and parents alike. In prior incidents, the district faced questions over notifications to parents and the use of school spaces for related activities, such as a “sexuality-safe-space” at Mohave Middle School, as reported by the Arizona Daily Independent.
Last month, a BrainPOP lesson on LGBTQ topics prompted review under state DEI restrictions, with Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne citing potential violations.
Other community responses in the thread include comments from users expressing concern over the event’s inclusivity and district priorities.
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 | Oct 11, 2025 | Opinion
By Tiffany Benson |
After publishing this Substack, I came across this video of a young woman’s “detransition” story. I also learned that Texas Christian University canceled an event featuring Chloe Cole, another “detransitioner” who travels the nation sharing her testimony. The fight to protect the next generation from the evils of “transgenderism” is far from over.
This quote is from the young woman who lived as a “male” for eight years but now regrets having a double mastectomy, full hysterectomy, and genital reconstruction surgery:
“I’m so angry…and so sad. It’s like a virus, or something, that infected me. And it happened so quickly…I can’t have kids. I’ll never lose my virginity. It’s like I’m left to just accept the scraps of the life that I could have had…I don’t know how to be okay with that. I hate when people [say], ‘Everything happens for a reason.’ No, this didn’t happen for a reason. It’s just a tragedy. Call it what it is.”
In the video, you can see what appears to be mutilation scars on her left forearm. Skin grafts are typically taken from this area to construct “a penis, urethra, scrotum, and the obliteration of the vaginal cavity with closure,” an operation known as phalloplasty (or “bottom surgery”). While it is possible to correct genital deformities, the damage to her body is irreversible, and the trajectory of her future is permanently altered. She can recover some femininity, but her womanhood is gone forever.
This is the expected end of social “transitioning,” cross-dressing, and using alternative names and pronouns—all of which can be concealed by false interpretations of student privacy laws. Also, when K-12 district representatives and employees implement DEI policies, host rainbow celebrations, and defend “gender identity,” they are advocating for all of the above. No one is born in the wrong body, and anyone who supports sterilizing and castrating minors should not be trusted around children.
I always bring the “transgender” agenda back to government education because it’s an area where many parents are still asleep at the wheel. Public schools (and increasingly some private schools) are the battlefield as board members, administrators, teachers, and counselors position themselves as the enemy of parental rights. Thankfully, parents are winning in the courts, and thousands of children will never undergo “transgender” medical malpractice. Still, parents must remain vigilant in the ongoing war to assert moral authority over their children.
It’s also important to bring attention to another group that’s not doing enough to tackle the “transgender” problem. Sadly, many Christians are aiding and abetting the spread of LGBTQ ideologies and practices. Keep in mind that “Christian” is a relative term associated with thousands of denominations and cults, and can be interpreted to mean a “good person.”
On February 25, 2025, Pew Research published survey results showing that “57% [up from 54% in 2014] of U.S. Christians say homosexuality should be accepted by society; 55% [up from 44% in 2014] say same-sex marriage should be legal.” The report also reveals 29% of Christians believe greater acceptance of “transgender” individuals is “a change for the better.” The latter is a baseline number, as researchers did not ask this question in previous case studies.
Oddly enough, Barna’s 2025 study shows Millennials and Gen Z have increased their church attendance. The report says, “The typical Gen Z churchgoer now attends 1.9 weekends per month, while Millennial churchgoers average 1.8 times—a steady upward shift since the lows seen during the pandemic. These are easily the highest rates of church attendance among young Christians since they first hit Barna’s tracking.”
Before we celebrate, let’s consider that in 2004, 51% of American pastors held a biblical worldview. By 2022, just 37% of pastors had sustained a biblical worldview, while 62% held syncretistic beliefs (that is, blending Christianity with other religions). In 2023, only 36% of pastors were “very effective” in helping Christians grow their faith over time. A mere 10% were “very effective” in “growing new converts into mature Christians,” while 12% encouraged believers to share their faith, and a measly 6% reached out to non-Christians.
These are sobering statistics, and, according to Barna, the increase among Gen Z still equates to attending church “less than half the time” of older generations. So, while young people are seeking truth, many will join ministries led by compromised leaders. Gen Z’s faith might grow over time, but they won’t share it outside the church, and what they learn may not have a lasting effect. In short, the American Church produces converts without conviction and consumers without consecration, who master religious transactions without transformation.
My fellow believers, none of this is a sign of “revival.”
I have lost count of how many times we canceled Netflix, rebooked Disney vacations, and chose Walmart over Target. Jumping on a trend is not good enough. We can’t be so preoccupied with our regularly scheduled programming that we fail to address the spirit of the age that’s consuming present generations.
Are we too holy to associate with LGBTQ people because their sin looks different than ours? Are we so loving that we can’t confront sin at all? Have we settled for inviting the lost to hear watered-down preaching because we’re too biblically illiterate to usher them into the Kingdom directly? If we’re honest, most Christians wouldn’t know how to minister to that broken woman in the video. We would say, “Jesus loves you,” and hand her a flyer for the next church event.
I agreed when the woman said destroying her body didn’t happen for a reason, and she called it a tragedy. The expression, “Everything happens for a reason,” is typically what believers (and nonbelievers) say when they lack the capacity to produce genuine empathy. It’s on par with “God works in mysterious ways,” a favorite among those who cannot discern the difference between coincidence and divine appointment. Neither of these phrases is found in Scripture.
The truth is, everything does not happen for a reason. Some things—and I would argue, living in a fallen world, that most things—happen as a consequence. Our beliefs influence our actions, and actions dictate outcomes. We can only help the next generation by imitating the Berean Christians (Acts 17:11), speaking the truth in love (Eph. 4:15), and investing time in young people beyond religious activities. Some sinners will never darken the doorway of your church, but they shouldn’t have to wait until Sunday to hear the gospel.
I challenge Christians to befriend an LGBTQ person, learn their story, and, when their heart is ready, preach the full gospel to them. Don’t stop at “Jesus loves you” and a church invitation. Tell them why He was crucified. Explain that He is not only our Friend—He is also our Judge. He extends mercy to those who repent and wrath to those who reject Him. Jesus came as a lamb, but He will return as a lion. Faith in His work on the cross is the only way to life, both now and for eternity.
Never separate love from truth.
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 her on socials @realtiffanyb.
by Ethan Faverino | Sep 24, 2025 | Education, News
By Ethan Faverino |
A new Arizona Public Opinion Pulse (AZPOP) survey from Noble Predictive Insights (NPI) reveals that Arizona voters favor greater parental control over education and support restrictions on classroom discussions about race, gender, and sexuality.
However, the data reveals a striking trend: political affiliation, rather than parenting status, is the primary driver of these education policy preferences.
NPI conducted the survey from August 11-18, 2025, polling 948 registered Arizona voters with a margin of error of ±3.18%.
The survey found strong support for increased parental involvement in education, with 48% of voters believing parents should have more control over educational content, 30% saying current levels are appropriate, and 13% favoring less parental influence.
Parents with children under 18 (51%) and those with adult children (50%) show slightly higher support for increased control compared to non-parents (46%).
Political affiliation, however, reveals evident divides: 67% of Republicans advocate for more parental control, compared to just 30% of Democrats and 45% of Independents.
NPI Founder and CEO, Mike Noble, commented on these results, saying, “This data exposes a counterintuitive reality where partisan identity outweighs personal family circumstances in shaping education policy views.”
On the issue of limiting classroom discussions about race, gender, and sexuality, 50% of Arizona voters support restrictions, while 38% oppose them. Parents with children under 18 show stronger support (58%) compared to those with adult children (50%) or non-parents (45%), indicating a greater concern among parents with school-age children about exposure to sensitive topics in the classroom.
Political affiliation again proves to be the dominant factor. A striking 71% of Republicans favor restrictions compared to only 34% of Democrats. Independents are nearly split, with 43% supporting restrictions and 45% opposing them, reflecting broader ideological tensions.
The survey challenges the assumption that parenting status primarily shapes education policy views. Instead, partisan identity drives preferences, with Republicans prioritizing parental rights and limits on sensitive topics, viewing schools as potential sources of ideological influence.
Democrats, conversely, emphasize professional educator judgment and oppose restrictions they see as censorship. Independents remain divided, grappling with balancing parental authority and educational freedom.
“Arizona’s education debates have become a perfect storm of cultural anxiety and political division,” said Noble. “While parents naturally want influence over their children’s education, we’re seeing partisan identity increasingly drive policy preferences more than actual family experience.”
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
