by Daniel Stefanski | Feb 16, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A controversial border proposal is making its way through the Arizona Legislature.
On Monday, the Arizona House Military and Public Safety Committee (MAPS) gave a green light to HB 2748, which “establishes penalties and enforcement against illegal border crossings,” according to the overview provided by the State House of Representatives. The proposal, which mirrors recent legislation out of Texas, has garnered the support of every Republican in the chamber, ensuring its likely passage out of the House – and possibly the Senate.
Arizona State Representative Joseph Chaplik, the sponsor of the bill, said, “Under the Biden administration, the consistent refusal to enforce our nation’s federal immigration laws has led to an unprecedented surge of illegal immigration across our southern border, constituting a historic invasion. Despite the legislature’s repeated calls for action, President Biden and Congress has failed to address this crisis. This dereliction of duty has allowed open-border policies to prevail, undermining the rule of law.”
According to the press release from the Arizona House of Representatives Republican Caucus, HB 2748 would do the following:
- Establish a class 1 misdemeanor (or a class 6 felony for subsequent offenses) for individuals entering Arizona from a foreign country as aliens, except through legal ports of entry.
- Impose a class 1 misdemeanor for aliens re-entering the U.S. through Arizona if they were previously deported, excluded, or left while a deportation or exclusion order was pending.
- Elevate the offense to a class 3 felony if the alien was removed due to multiple drug misdemeanors, federal inadmissibility, terrorism involvement, or removal following a nonviolent crime.
- Elevate the offense to a class 2 felony if the alien was removed after committing a felony.
- Provide for an order of return for aliens violating the law, with failure to comply constituting a class 2 felony.
- Grant immunity from civil liability for local and state government officials, employees, and contractors enforcing the law, with indemnification for civil actions under federal law.
- Mandate the Arizona Attorney General to pursue all available remedies to recover federal reimbursements for state costs incurred due to illegal immigration.”
When HB 2748 passed the MAPS Committee, all eight Republicans voted in favor of the bill, and all seven Democrats voted against. Democrat State Representative Marcelino Quiñonez attacked the legislation, saying, “We know this bill is unconstitutional, but we are going through this exercise for talking points.”
On the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak system, a representative for Heritage Action for America signed in support of HB 2748; while representatives from the American Civil Liberties of Arizona, CHISPA Arizona, Living United for Change in Arizona, AZ National Organization for Women, and State Conference NAACP noted their opposition to the legislation.
Though Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs has ramped up her rhetoric against the border crisis in recent months, she is almost certain to veto HB 2748 should it clear both legislative chambers and reach her desk on the Ninth Floor of the Arizona Executive Tower. Hobbs and Republican lawmakers have been unable to come to any accord on border security proposals since the state entered a time of divided government in January 2023.
Despite this bill having no chance of becoming law in 2024 – or over the next two years, Representative Chaplik is pressing ahead with his efforts due to the dire state of the crisis at the border. Chaplik said, “The consequences are dire: an uncontrolled border presents both security and humanitarian crises. The surge in violence, coupled with the rampant smuggling of illegal drugs, weapons, and human beings, poses an imminent threat to our communities, our state, and the safety of innocent Americans. It is imperative that we act swiftly to secure our borders and restore order, safeguarding the integrity of our nation and protecting our citizens. Just as the State of Texas is defending itself, this bill will allow the State of Arizona to defend itself at the border.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Sep 9, 2023 | Education, News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Football season has reserved the attention of many of Arizona’s Republican and Democrat legislators.
Late last month, a bipartisan coalition of 35 lawmakers sent a letter to the President of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), urging the NCAA to “revisit its decision to deny a transfer waiver for football player Jake Smith.” The communication was led by Republican Representative Joseph Chaplik.
The release explains that “Jake Smith, an accomplished football player and former wide receiver at Notre Dame Prep in Scottsdale, has faced a series of challenges that have hindered his playing opportunities” – specifically during “his abbreviated 2020 season at UT Austin due to injuries and subsequent surgeries.” The release adds, “After receiving medical clearance to play football by UT, Smith transferred to USC in 2022 to be closer to home, only to be told his foot was not healed and ruled a medical non-transfer by the USC institution. He then transferred to ASU in January 2023 in hopes of continuing his college football career.”
Smith appealed to the NCAA in hopes of receiving a waiver to become immediately eligible during the 2023 season for the Arizona State University Sun Devils, yet was denied his request earlier in August.
Representative Chaplik issued the following statement in conjunction with the release of his letter: “Jake’s situation is a prime example of the challenges student athletes have faced, exacerbated by the pandemic. The NCAA’s decision not only affects his career but also sets a precedent that we believe undermines its commitment to the well-being of student athletes. The transfer portal does need to be restricted, but it also needs to have exceptions for unique situations such as Jake’s.”
After news of the NCAA’s decision broke, new football head coach Kenny Dillingham told reporters, “Jake’s battled and battled and been through so much in his football career and to have something that means so much to him taken away – after all the work you put in – you know, it’s not the right thing to do for the kid. Everything we should do in college athletics should be about the kids – not the adults.”
In their letter, the group of Arizona legislators wrote: “…It goes without saying that many student athletes’ careers have been derailed by the COVID-19 pandemic. It is imperative that the NCAA take this into account and carefully consider the circumstances of each athlete to ensure a consistent and fair application of the NCAA’s rules. The NCAA should determine whether a student athlete has a legitimate reason to seek a transfer waiver and whether colleges are being honest with their athletes when they make medical decisions that have a direct impact on those students’ athletic success and future. Being a student athlete brings great responsibility to the student, but more importantly, the NCAA should be empowered to help students in these unique situations.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Sep 3, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Days after an Arizona Republican Senator noted the increasing return of COVID-19 restrictions, another state legislator is doing the same for his constituents.
On Wednesday, Republican Representative Joseph Chaplik released an in-depth statement about the perceived rise in COVID-19 fears and restrictions as the fall season approaches. Chaplik attributed this to “recent media headlines panicking over the latest COVID variant, case numbers, and calls by some for the return of mask mandates.”
Chaplik assured constituents that Arizona laws afforded them more freedom than other states that might be on the verge of bringing back COVID-19 restrictions, writing, “While some states may go in that direction, the good news is that mandates won’t be happening here in Arizona. That’s due in large part to our state adopting common-sense laws to protect against government-imposed mask mandates on private businesses and requirements that children wear masks in public schools.”
The lawmaker pointed to two bills that he previously sponsored – both of which were signed into law by former Governor Doug Ducey over the past couple of years. The first was HB 2770, which empowered “businesses with the freedom to decide whether or not to observe and enforce any mask mandate imposed by government politicians from the state, county, city/town or other jurisdiction in Arizona.” The second was HB 2616, which prohibited “school districts and local governments from requiring minors to wear a mask or face covering without parental consent.” Chaplik called this enacted policy “a victory for parents’ rights and our children’s health.”
HB 2770 was signed into law in April 2021, while HB 2616 received Governor Ducey’s signature in April 2022.
In December 2021, Governor Ducey pointed to HB 2770 to counter reports that the Pima County Board of Supervisors were considering an implementation of a county-wide indoor mask mandate. Ducey tweeted, “Arizona law clearly states businesses are NOT REQUIRED to enforce mask mandates that any city, town, county or other jurisdiction in this state established. Rest assured, this law will not change. It took effect in September, following the signing of House Bill 2770 which echoed an Executive Order.”
Representative Chaplik ended his statement, adding, “Masking mandates imposed on the public didn’t work and certainly weren’t effective at preventing the spread of COVID. Mandates were especially unnecessary for children, the least at-risk population. If an individual chooses to wear a mask, that remains their personal choice, but it should never be mandated by the government. And, thankfully, the public won’t need to contend with new mandates in Arizona because of the action we’ve taken at the state capitol.”
Last week, freshman Senator Janae Shamp sent out a press release, “reminding Arizonans of the safeguards put in place by Republicans at the Legislature to protect against future outrageous overreach and scientifically baseless restrictions.” Shamp referenced both of Chaplik’s aforementioned bills – in addition to two other laws enacted in 2022: A.R.S. 36-681 and A.R.S. 26-303.
Reports have surged about an increase in COVID-19 cases with the spread of the EG.5 (“Eris”), FL.1.5.1 (“Fornax”), and BA.2.86 (“Pirola”). These developments have led to the return of some masking requirements around the nation. In Atlanta, Morris Brown College sent an email to its faculty, staff, and students, announcing the reinstatement of its COVID-19 mask mandate because of “reports of positive cases among students in the Atlanta University Center.” The college also reimposed physical distancing and gathering restrictions on campus.
The movie studio Lionsgate in Los Angeles also brought back its mask mandate for the office, as did Kaiser Permanente for its Santa Rosa (California) hospital and medical offices.
Author and one-time New York Times reporter, Alex Berenson, has also noted the increased attention for the newest wave of COVID-19 cases across the country, pointing to a headline in his former paper about the predictions for rising hospitalizations. Berenson said, “OMG this is the lead headline on the NYT right now. They really are not going to let it go ever ever EVER. I do not understand the game here, truly.”
Another Republican freshman representative at the Legislature, Austin Smith, has also been focused on the potential return of COVID-19 restrictions. Earlier this week, Smith tweeted, “We are not doing the mask thing again. Refuse.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Jun 13, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Another Arizona Legislative disciplinary issue may be reaching its conclusion.
Last week, the Arizona House of Representatives Committee on Ethics transmitted its report on the complaint filed the previous month against Democrat Representative Stephanie Stahl Hamilton. The May 1 complaint was levied by three Republican Representatives: Justin Heap, David Marshall and Lupe Diaz.
The ethics complaint alleged “that on three separate occasions in March and April 2023, Representative Stahl Hamilton moved two Holy Bibles from their locations in the Members’ Lounge and hid them under the Lounge’s couch cushions and in a refrigerator in the shared Coffee Bar.”
After a response by Representative Stahl Hamilton and an Evidentiary Hearing held on May 25, the Arizona House Ethics Committee found that “Representative Stahl Hamilton purposely removed the Bibles from their locations within the Members’ Lounge on three separate occasions;” that “Representative Stahl Hamilton purposely concealed the Bibles in a manner that was disrespectful to other Members;” that “Representative Stahl Hamilton did not fully apologize for her conduct;” and that “Representative Stahl Hamilton’s repeated actions offended some Members of the House, violated the inherent obligation to protect the integrity of the House, and caused the House to expend resources.”
Representative Stahl Hamilton did not appear at her hearing – as noted by the report: “Given the fact-intensive allegations in the Complaint, the Committee would have preferred to hear testimony from Representative Stahl Hamilton. Indeed, the Committee had prepared questions for Representative Stahl Hamilton relevant to this investigation.”
The five-Member committee (comprised of Representatives Joseph Chaplik, Travis Grantham, Gail Griffin, Christopher Mathis, and Jennifer Longdon) found “that the evidence sufficiently supports a conclusion that Representative Stahl Hamilton’s repeated behavior, taken as a whole, constitutes disorderly behavior in violation of Rule 1 of the Arizona House of Representatives.” The Committee did not stipulate a specific punishment to accompany its findings, but left that decision up to the entire chamber, stating, “Based on this finding, and because Representative Stahl Hamilton’s violation of Rule 1 involves House property and took place on House property, the Committee deems it appropriate for the House as a whole to decide what disciplinary measures, if any, should be taken.”
The finding by the Committee, “that Representative Stahl Hamilton did violate Rule 1,” was unanimous.
It will now be up to House Speaker Ben Toma and the entire chamber to decide which appropriate consequence, if any, fits Representative Stahl Hamilton’s actions.
This process involving Representative Stahl Hamilton is the second of the legislative session for the Arizona House. The first occurred with former Representative Liz Harris, a Republican, who was expelled by a vote of the full chamber after the conclusion of the Ethics Committee’s deliberations.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him 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.
