by Jonathan Eberle | May 4, 2025 | Education, News
By Jonathan Eberle |
The Arizona Department of Education has unveiled a new public webpage identifying which schools in the state are in compliance with the Trump administration’s recent directives targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. The move comes amid national legal battles over DEI in public education.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Education issued guidance requiring schools to sign compliance letters affirming they do not engage in DEI practices that the administration deems discriminatory. Failure to comply could result in the loss of federal funding. In response, Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne announced the launch of a tracking site aimed at promoting transparency around which schools have agreed to follow the guidance.
“I am committed to following the law and will abide by the latest guidance from the U.S. Department of Education to take no action against schools until further notice,” Horne said in a statement.
The federal guidance has sparked legal challenges and confusion across the country, with educators and administrators unsure what qualifies as a DEI program. Two federal judges have already intervened. In one case, U.S. District Judge Landya McCafferty of New Hampshire criticized the vague language in the compliance letters, noting that they fail to clearly define DEI initiatives or how they allegedly violate civil rights laws.
Despite the legal uncertainty, Horne has voiced strong support for the administration’s position. “Federal law and the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution are clear that no person shall be discriminated [against] because of race, skin color or ethnicity, and this guidance aligns completely with my philosophy,” Horne said. “By contrast, the use of DEI programs does just the opposite and promotes racial discrimination.”
Horne said he believes the current DEI restrictions will ultimately be upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court and encouraged Arizona school districts and charter schools to take the issue seriously.
The Arizona Department of Education’s DEI compliance page can be viewed here.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Apr 26, 2025 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Prescott residents are citing concerns over what they believe to be a progressive slant directing the city’s 2025 General Plan.
The latest draft of the general plan was rolled out for last month’s city council meeting. State law requires cities and counties to introduce growth-related plans every decade. These plans must include maps, diagrams, objectives, principles, standards, and plan proposals pertaining to land use, circulation and transportation, open space, growth areas, environmental planning, public services and benefits, and water resources.
Communities with populations over 50,000 persons must also include plans for conservation, recreation, extensive transit, public services, public buildings, housing, rehabilitation and redevelopment, public safety, bicycles, energy, and neighborhood preservation and revitalization.
The plan focuses on five “livability” goals: resiliency and sustainability (fire, environmental planning, water resources, climate, and energy); community connection (circulation or transportation, open space, wildlife corridors, and digital connectivity); great places and neighborhoods (land use and growth areas, historic preservation, recreation, dark skies, tree city USA, and bike and pedestrian paths); economic competitiveness and prosperity (economic development, tourism, growth and cost of development, housing, and the Prescott Regional Airport); and community quality (police, education assets, library, community center, healthcare assets, childcare and youth programs, and arts and culture).
Certain strategies of concern (out of over 300 proposed) outlined in the plan include developing and funding a transit system, changing wood burning stove and fireplace standards, redeveloping stormwater infrastructure to be “green” and more sustainable, changing new development ordinances, eliminating emissions in city-owned buildings, establishing electric vehicle infrastructure, redesigning local streets for lower speeds and multimodal use, and establishing a “Dark Sky” lighting code.
Some of these strategies hinged on the initial or continued reliance on local and federal funding.
A group of concerned, longtime citizens, “Prescott Pulse,” say the general plan would not only adopt California-esque policies, but jeopardize millions in housing, transit, airport, and water federal funding due to likely conflicts with the Trump administration’s prohibitions on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
Specifically, the group cited concerns over the inclusion of language expanding discrimination or harassment protections to sexual orientation and gender expression or identity.
The group also cited concerns over the plan’s extensive focus on enacting climate change policy, as well as the costs for proposed “Vision Zero” speed humps and cameras, lighting retrofits, bike lanes, tree mandates, and the additional property taxes connected with environmental reforms.
“We’ve watched as skewed narratives and incomplete information leave most residents unaware of what’s truly happening in our city council until decisions hit home and it’s too late to act,” said the group in a statement. “Today, our city stands at a crossroads. The divide between low-growth advocates and those who see the need for strategic expansion has never been clearer.”
Prescott Pulse also claims the proposed general plan goes beyond its intended scope of planning land use decisions (land, roads, water, and city growth) by introducing new property rights regulations and taxpayer burdens.
The general plan will appear on the November 4 ballot this year. The city council is scheduled to make a decision on the general plan during their meeting on May 27.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
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.
