A ballot initiative to end the state’s universal school choice program is facing a new challenge to the validity of its signatures.
The Goldwater Institute filed the challenge in court on Monday.
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) also announced that it joined Goldwater’s legal challenge, with AZFEC Vice President of Policy Greg Blackie serving as a plaintiff in the case. According to AZFEC, it worked alongside Goldwater and other school choice advocates to review petition sheets, identify alleged irregularities, and help ensure Arizona’s ballot qualification laws are enforced.
The Goldwater Institute said “a large amount” of the more than 415,000 signatures submitted appeared to be “fallacious.” The initiative needs about 256,000 signatures to qualify for the November ballot. The complaint raised more than 73,300 objections; the complaint asserted that, with all signatures removed as a result of the objections, the ballot initiative would be left with fewer than 256,000 valid signatures.
The 900-page complaint filed in the Maricopa County Superior Court stated that the signatures weren’t properly registered with the secretary of state’s office as required by law.
Specifically, the complaint raised objections including paid but unregistered circulators, signatures gathered prior to circulator registration, false residential addresses, permanent address contradictions, bad telephone numbers or email addresses, false identities, bad service addresses, and ineligible, missing, or mismatched IDs.
Additionally, the Goldwater Institute claimed that certain circulators were ineligible to collect signatures because they had been convicted of a criminal offense involving fraud, forgery, or identity theft; convicted of another felony offense in which their civil rights haven’t been restored; or adjudicated an incapacitated person.
Individuals named as ineligible circulators were convicted of felonies and other crimes related to drugs, human trafficking, manslaughter, sexual abuse of a minor, assault, kidnapping, weapons misconduct, forgery, false reporting, and credit card forgery.
Finally, the complaint claimed that certain circulators failed to write their full and correct assigned circulator identification number on multiple petition sheets.
Arizona Free Enterprise Club President Scot Mussi said the allegations raised questions about the campaign’s vetting and oversight of paid petition circulators.
“Save Our Schools and the teachers unions have spent years accusing ESA families of fraud and demanding greater scrutiny of parents. Now, their own campaign is facing serious questions about the people they hired to gather signatures,” said Mussi. “Arizona’s election laws must be fully enforced. If this campaign failed to collect enough lawful and valid signatures, it must not qualify for the ballot.”
Goldwater Institute CEO and President Victor Riches criticized the initiative for its heavy sourcing of out-of-state special interest funding.
“This is a shameless attack on Arizona’s parents, funded by an out-of-state union,” said Riches. “They’re trying to game the system by turning in tens of thousands of invalid signatures in an effort to destroy the most successful school choice program in the country. This won’t happen on our watch.”
The Goldwater Institute also stated in a press release that the original title of the initiative was misleading.
If enough signatures are validated and voters approve the measure, the Protect Education Act would impose an income eligibility cap on the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program.
Doug Ducey, former Arizona governor, was quoted in the Goldwater Institute press release saying the entire effort to dismantle the ESA program proved the true intentions of teachers’ unions. Ducey signed the bill into law that made the ESA program open to all students.
“Once again, we are reminded how little these out of state unions care about Arizona students and their parents,” said Ducey. “This measure would strip tens of thousands of Arizona families of educational choices they have made for their children, forcing students out of the schools that are serving them well and back into schools they chose to leave. That is unacceptable, and we will vigorously challenge this measure at every possible step.”
In response to the submission of the ballot initiative signatures earlier this month, Ducey launched a political action committee to secure school choice accessibility for military families.
Protect Education, Accountability Now (PEAN), the organization behind the ballot initiative, filed a challenge last week to the competing legislature-referred ballot initiative that would negate their proposed ballot initiative.
Arizona Public Service (APS) is seeking to raise electricity rates by 14% starting in 2026 — a move the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) argues would unfairly burden Arizona families while subsidizing costly “green energy” initiatives and the early closure of a key coal plant.
According to filings with the Arizona Corporation Commission, APS attributes the proposed rate increase largely to battery storage projects and the early retirement of the Cholla Power Plant. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club filed an official response criticizing APS for attempting to block the organization’s intervention in the case, while allowing environmental groups such as the Sierra Club to participate. “APS has no issue letting radical groups like the Sierra Club into their hearings, but they’re trying to block the one organization fighting for Arizona families,” said AZFEC President Scot Mussi.
BREAKING: Arizona Public Service (APS) wants to raise your electricity rates by 14% starting in 2026.
Why? To pay for expensive battery projects and the early closure of the Cholla Power Plant: a plant President Trump directed Energy Secretary Chris Wright to keep online.
Mussi contends APS’s “carbon free” and “carbon neutral” commitments over the past five years have shaped their energy plans — including their Integrated Resource Plans and large-scale renewable energy projects — resulting in higher costs for consumers. “For years, their voluntary commitments have very likely increased costs for Arizona ratepayers,” the organization said in its filing.
Two days after filing its response, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club announced it had been officially granted intervention in the APS case. This designation allows AZFEC to participate directly in proceedings, making it the only organization representing ratepayers who oppose the rate hike.
BREAKING: The Arizona Free Enterprise Club has been granted intervention in APS’s proposed rate hike case!
That means we’re officially in the room, as the only organization standing up for Arizona ratepayers and fighting back against the radical “Green New Scam.”
In the ruling, the Administrative Law Judge overseeing the case described the Club as “the lone proponent” of an energy approach emphasizing reliability, affordability, and independence — priorities the group says align with President Trump’s “American Energy Dominance” agenda.
“While others are lobbying to shut down Arizona’s coal plants and pour billions into unreliable Green New Scam projects, we’re standing up for the ratepayers who will be left to foot the bill,” Mussi said. “We’re proud to be the only organization in this case fighting to keep Arizona’s energy secure, affordable, and free from political interference.”
The Club’s participation ensures that Arizona ratepayers have a voice during the proceedings, according to Mussi and AZFEC Deputy Policy Director Greg Blackie. “This isn’t about politics — it’s about protecting Arizona families and ensuring that our state doesn’t fall victim to the same radical energy policies destroying affordability across the country,” said Blackie. “We intend to shine a light on the real costs, the real numbers, and the real consequences of this so-called green transition.”
The case before the Arizona Corporation Commission will determine whether APS can move forward with its proposed rate hike. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club says it plans to continue pressing for “transparency, accountability, and energy freedom,” ensuring that “ratepayers are not forced to fund reckless green energy policies.”
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The Legislative District 10 Republican Committee in East Mesa has unanimously censured Councilwoman Julie Spilsbury for using her non-partisan office to campaign for Democrats in 2024. The censure also condemned her for voting in favor of allowing men to use women-only facilities.
Spilsbury, who is facing a recall challenge this year, became embroiled in a scandal after making public endorsements of Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 Presidential Election, in addition to endorsing Arizona Democrats Congressman Greg Stanton, Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, and Senator Ruben Gallego. The recall campaign, supported by Turning Point Action, submitted the 5,000 required voter signatures in May. Spilsbury is facing a challenge for her seat from conservative Dorean Taylor.
The censure from the LD10 Republicans lays out a case against Spilsbury for her endorsements of Harris, Stanton, Fontes, and Gallego despite her membership in the Republican Party, as well as her vote for “a non-discrimination order that allows men in women’s private spaces, and potentially penalizes business owners, forcing them to disregard or contradict their religious convictions and compromise their religious freedom and rights or be fined due to the ordinance,” according to a statement from the Committee.
The Committee also alleges that Spilsbury, “has benefited from her endorsements and publicly announced the offer of support and assistance in the current recall election, including Democrat Senator Ruben Gallego, the Democrat CD4 Representative, Greg Stanton, and the Democrat Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes.”
Spilsbury told Axios in July that the three Arizona Democrats have reached out to her to offer their support in her recall. She openly acknowledged the likely outcome of her endorsement of Harris in the 2024 Presidential election, telling the outlet, “I did what I did with my eyes wide open. I knew it wasn’t going to be popular.”
In the text of the censure, the committee resolved, “The Republican Committee of Legislative District 10 calls on Republican voters in Mesa to heed this vote of no confidence, cease recognition of Recalled Councilwoman Spilsbury as a Republican in good standing and cease support for Julie Spilsbury in any elected or appointed capacity, or future election for any prospective office.”
Arizona Freedom Club PAC ENDORSES Dorean Taylor in Mesa Recall Election
The Arizona Freedom Club PAC proudly endorses Dorean Taylor in the recall election against incumbent Julie Spilsbury in Mesa. Mesa residents are fed up with the high taxes, shabby road conditions, wasteful… pic.twitter.com/oS1gPvUgJ0
Earlier this month, the Arizona Freedom Club PAC officially endorsed Dorean Taylor in the Mesa Recall Election. Scot Mussi, Chair of the Arizona Freedom Club PAC said in a statement posted to X, “Dorean Taylor is exactly the kind of leader Mesa needs—someone who will stand up for taxpayers and put families first. Her vision for safer communities, responsible government, and protecting hard-working families from higher taxes aligns with the values we fight for every day.”
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club escalated its call for accountability, urging the County Attorneys of Mohave, Pinal, and Yuma Counties to launch investigations into Arizona State University (ASU) leadership for allegedly manipulating 2022 gubernatorial debate rules to favor Democratic Katie Hobbs over Republican Kari Lake.
The action follows a complaint filed by the Club in August 2025, with the Arizona Attorney General and Maricopa County Attorney, which was dismissed without a thorough review, prompting a broader push for enforcement under state law.
Breaking: The Arizona Free Enterprise Club has filed a Hatch Act complaint against ASU for using taxpayer-funded resources to meddle in the 2022 Governor’s race.
Internal communications reveal ASU leadership broke long-standing debate rules, blocking equal airtime for Kari Lake… pic.twitter.com/yqyB7eRHkK
In a sharply worded letter addressed to the Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith, Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller, and Yuma County Attorney Karolyn Kaczorowski, Club President Scot Mussi detailed evidence of ASU’s deviation from established debate protocols, accusing university officials of using public resources to influence the election in violation of A.R.S. § 15-1633.
The statute states: “A person acting on behalf of a university or a person who aids another person acting on behalf of a university shall not spend or use university resources for the purpose of influencing the outcomes of elections or to advocate support for or opposition to pending or proposed legislation.”
This call-to-action stems from a September 2022 debate co-sponsored by ASU, Arizona PBS, and the Citizens Clean Elections Commission (CCEC).
Under longstanding CCEC regulations (Ariz. Admin. Code § R2-20-107(K)), a candidate declining an invitation to debate their political opponent forfeits airtime, granting the attending opponent a 30-minute solo interview.
When Hobbs announced she would skip the debate, ASU and PBS bypassed set regulations, granting her an exclusive 30-minute interview, a first in years to do so.
Internal communications, obtained and reported by the Arizona Republic, exposed the intent behind the decision. ASU President Michael Crow, Chief of Staff James O’Brien, and ASU Media Enterprise Managing Director Mi-Ai Parrish allegedly prioritized Hobbs’ comfort over neutrality.
Parrish’s emails to O’Brien highlighted concerns that “Katie is getting roasted hard” for dodging the debate and pressed CCEC staff to limit Lake’s discussion of election integrity, arguing that airing “a person with those views was wrong.” CCEC Executive Director Tom Collins confirmed to the Republic that Parrish sought to suppress Lake’s platform.
Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly listed the names of the County Attorneys. They have now been corrected.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Attorneys from the Goldwater Institute, representing the Center for Arizona Policy and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, joined former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould on Thursday to challenge Proposition 211. The measure, called the “Voters’ Right to Know Act,” is being contested on the grounds that it violates the state Constitution’s protections for free speech and privacy.
In the wake of Turning Point USA co-founder Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and a decade marked by attacks on political figures—the security risks of effectively doxxing political donors loom large in the case.
If upheld, the law would force nonprofit groups that weigh in on ballot measures or reference incumbents near an election to publicly disclose their donors—not just names and amounts, but also home addresses and employers—in a searchable database.
In today’s climate of escalating political violence—from death threats and swatting to vandalism, arson, and even assassinations—a database like this could essentially become a “hit list.”
In the AZ Supreme Ct today w my @GoldwaterInst colleagues to defend free speech & privacy rights in the #Prop211 case. You can learn more about the case here https://t.co/AzcEiCOulg
And watch the oral argument live in a few minutes on the court’s website: https://t.co/dkcgE7KDHC
In a press release the Goldwater Institute explained its position stating, “While proponents of the Voters’ Right to Know Act say they’re simply combatting so-called ‘dark money’ in politics, it is clear to Goldwater and its clients — the Center for Arizona Policy, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, and individual donors — that their real intent is to intimidate their political opponents into silence.”
“Arizona’s Proposition 211 is as un-American as it is dangerous. No one should be exposed to retaliation or violence simply for supporting causes they believe in,” said Jon Riches, Goldwater’s Vice President of Litigation. “The law also violates Arizona’s Constitution, which provides stronger protections for freedom of speech and privacy than even the U.S. Constitution. That’s why we at the Goldwater Institute believe the Arizona Supreme Court will ultimately strike down Proposition 211.”
Prop 211 is silencing free speech in Arizona!!!
At today’s press conference, Scot Mussi of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club explained how this vague and dangerous law forced us to curtail our speech last campaign cycle. Why? Because Prop 211 puts the privacy and safety of donors… pic.twitter.com/fgctJGt5K4
Arizona Free Enterprise Club President Scot Mussi added, “They’re afraid of the activist organizations out there. They’re afraid of politicians and others that want to exact retaliation because they simply support a position or belief that they disagree.”
Mussi characterized the law as “a dangerous threat to our right to free speech and association.”
“As drafted, the law can be used to unconstitutionally target and harass private citizens, including our organization and our supporters,” Mussi stated. “We are confident that the Supreme Court will recognize the danger this law poses and will rule in our favor.”
In a statement to AZ Free News in May, Mussi elaborated on the potential for political intimidation: “Both the U.S. Constitution and the Arizona Constitution guarantee citizens the right to speak freely, which includes the right to not be forced to speak. Prop 211 not only violates this right for donors by silencing them from supporting causes they believe in but impairs the speech of nonprofits like ours as well.”
Peter Gentala, President of the Center for Arizona Policy, stated in a press release that Proposition 211 “creates an atmosphere of fear among those who support nonprofits that engage in the most pressing issues in Arizona today.”
