by Matthew Holloway | Jan 11, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
A report released by the Arizona Child Fatality Review Team (CFRT) has generated severe backlash from Arizona State Representatives Quang Nguyen and Selina Bliss, who serve as Chair and Vice-Chair of the House Judiciary Committee. The backlash came after the CFRT made the blatant unconstitutional recommendation to “remove all firearms in households with children,” claiming that “the presence of firearms in a household increases the risk of suicide among adolescents.”
According to a press release from the Arizona House of Representatives, Reps. Nguyen and Bliss penned a letter to Jennie Cunico, Cabinet Executive Officer of the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS), voicing in the strongest possible terms their objections to the CFRT’s report.
In their letter, Nguyen and Bliss wrote:
“We are appalled that the CFRT, speaking on behalf of the Arizona Department of Health Services, is actually advocating for stripping Arizonans of their Second Amendment rights in their own homes. This radical proposal is reminiscent of New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s 2023 gun control order, which attempted to prohibit carrying of firearms in public for self-defense. You may recall that Governor Grisham’s order—accurately characterized as ‘insanely unconstitutional’ and ‘outrageous’—was swiftly blocked in court.
“The CFRT’s ‘do something’ approach to child-fatality legislation would not only violate the constitutional rights of millions of Arizonans; it is also irrational from a policy perspective. The CFRT’s Report notes that 31 children drowned in 2023 and that the majority of these deaths occurred in pools and hot tubs. Yet the CFRT does not recommend the elimination of pools and hot tubs. Instead, the CFRT advocates for common-sense ideas: ‘close, constant supervision of children when around water, increased availability and affordability of swim lessons for children, and proper pool enclosures.’
“Effective policy solutions—even for problems that are difficult and complex—must be designed to fully protect constitutional rights and liberties. We urge you to direct the CFRT to reconsider its unjustified attack on the Second Amendment and amend its Report.”
“Proposals to strip citizens of their firearms are not only unconstitutional but also lack common sense,” Nguyen explained. “While the report suggests reasonable safety measures for other risks, such as drowning, the CFRT overreaches by advocating for the elimination of firearms entirely from homes with children.”
“Our state should focus on education and safe practices, not on extreme measures that undermine individual liberties,” Representative Bliss agreed. “We stand firm in defending the Second Amendment rights of Arizona families.”
In a later post to X, Nguyen acknowledged an op-ed from AZCentral’s Laurie Roberts criticizing him for his stance writing, “Anytime Roberts writes about my work negatively, I know I’m doing the right thing. I’m very sure she’s okay with abortion of innocent children.”
Roberts suggested the report’s call to remove guns from Arizona homes does not violate the Constitution and “goes on to recommend that ‘parents of adolescents should remove all guns from their homes, especially if there is a history of mental health issues or substance abuse issues.’ This because more children are dying by suicide, with close to half killing themselves with guns.”
However, as the Representatives point out, the language explicitly used by the report is as follows:
“Since the CFRP determined that access to guns was the biggest risk factor for firearm deaths, CFRP believes that the most effective way to prevent firearm-related deaths in children is to remove all firearms in households with children because the presence of firearms in a household increases the risk of suicide among adolescents.”
The recommendation of the CFRT is direct, unambiguous, and lacks the nuance suggested by the local columnist.
The CFRT is comprised mostly of appointees nominated by the state officers who were in turn appointed or nominated by Democrats Governor Katie Hobbs and Attorney General Kris Mayes.
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 Seth Leibsohn | Dec 13, 2024 | Opinion
By Steve Twist & Seth Leibsohn |
With the major election season behind us, voters are undoubtedly recovering from the fatigue of non-stop political ads flooding their TVs and social media apps, but potential candidates are already setting their sights on 2026, which—while not the presidential Superbowl—will have hugely impactful consequences for Arizona. Fresh off a nationwide red wave, Republicans in Arizona are hoping to capitalize on this momentum by taking back important statewide offices won by Democrats in 2022. Fortunately for Republicans, Arizonans, and the rule of law, we have an excellent candidate who could be the next Arizona Attorney General. In many ways, he already is.
Both of us have worked with or closely observed every Attorney General since Bob Corbin in 1979. Sadly, we’ve never seen an Attorney General whose decisions about the use of power are more partisan than Attorney General Kris Mayes. Lawlessness, wokeness, and injustice have become recurring themes under her leadership. In response, Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen has taken her on, thwarting and mitigating her run-a-way train of progressivism.
Thanks to a law passed by a prior legislature, the Senate President may intervene in cases where the Attorney General refuses to defend the law. Over the past two years, this tool has proven to be invaluable, and Warren Petersen has deployed it, both smartly and aggressively.
When Attorney General Mayes bowed to the radical left and refused to defend Arizona’s law ensuring biological boys and men could not compete on female-only sports teams, President Petersen got involved to protect our girls and women, serving as the last line of defense for the Save Women’s Sports Act. When Mayes gave bogus legal advice to provide cover for the lawlessness of Katie Hobbs and her violations of the separation of powers, Petersen checked Mayes in court and made sure Arizona laws were followed, stopping a Mayes-approved illegal scheme, where Governor Hobbs avoided confirmation of agency directors.
When Mayes tried to hijack the state budget and assert control of $115 million in state opioid settlement funds, Petersen fought back, won, and was awarded over $40,000 in attorneys’ fees against Mayes. Perhaps nothing more clearly demonstrates that Petersen is already fulfilling the role of moral leader of the Attorney General’s Office than his call to Mayes to end her illegal delay in following court ordered executions. Within a week of Petersen’s public statements, Mayes reversed course.
President Petersen has not only filled the void in state court litigation, but he’s also picked up the slack to fight the Biden administration’s big government overreach in federal court, while Mayes has remained silent. Petersen led the legal fight on national issues of importance to Arizona. From Covid vaccine mandates to forced-electric vehicle mandates, infringement of second-amendment rights, homeless encampments, immigration enforcement, and business-crushing federal regulations, Petersen has intervened in a variety of issues important to the lives and livelihoods of our citizens. Meanwhile, Mayes has been AWOL, seemingly driven by a leftist ideology instead of objective law enforcement.
And now comes the astounding revelation that a “far-left” group, the States United Democracy Center, gave Mayes a forty-seven-page memo which served as her “plan” to prosecute the 2020 alternate electors. If true, it represents an unprecedented abdication of the independence we need from our Attorney General.
We do not need four more years of highly partisan bias and selective application of the law for Arizonans to appreciate the value of having a true advocate in the Attorney General’s Office. And while there are two more years to go under Mayes, we should be thankful that we have two more years of Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen there to continue his protection of our state constitution and laws.
We’ve worked with President Petersen on legal issues for over a decade. Whether as Judiciary Chairman, or now as Senate President; time and time again, he has demonstrated the ability, courage, and leadership to put Arizona first and fight for its interests, whether at the legislature, or in the courts. In many ways, for the last two years, Petersen has been the moral voice for justice in our legal affairs. Now is the right time for him to run to become the actual Attorney General.
Steve Twist is a lawyer in Scottsdale. Seth Leibsohn is a radio host in Phoenix and Senior Fellow with the Claremont Institute.
by Daniel Stefanski | Dec 3, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
The Arizona Legislature’s two Second Amendment hawks achieved a major victory for their constituents’ freedoms.
Earlier this month, the Sedona City Council announced plans to reconstruct a local ordinance that had caught the ire of two Republican state legislators this fall, Representatives Quang Nguyen and Selina Bliss. The news came after the lawmakers had taken their dispute to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office over the City of Sedona’s Ordinance 12.30.090, which prohibits individuals from carrying firearms on “any trail or open space area.”
Nguyen had previously written, “The City of Sedona has had ample time to address these concerns and has chosen not to act. We are left with no choice but to seek the Attorney General’s involvement to ensure the rule of law is followed.”
The letter to Mayes followed Representative Nguyen’s prior communication to Sedona Mayor Scott Jablow and city councilmembers over the ordinance. Nguyen had highlighted that the Ordinance’s prohibition “on carrying firearms is not consistent with Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-3108,” thus making it “invalid and unenforceable because it exceeds what state law authorizes. He pointed out that “cities may…enact ordinances ‘[l]imiting or prohibiting the discharge of firearms in parks and preserves’ when certain statutory conditions are met.”
In a comment to another local publication, a City of Sedona spokeswoman said, “In the new ordinance, a person will be able to carry the firearm in the park but can’t discharge it unless in self-defense.” This ordinance is expected to be updated on December 10, at the next city council meeting.
Bliss responded to the announcement from the municipality, saying, “A message to cities and towns…don’t violate the rights of the people!”
Nguyen and Bliss, two seatmates in a Yavapai County legislative district, have quickly proven themselves to be some of the top Second Amendment advocates in the state. Over the past two years, both lawmakers have won the “Legislator of the Year” award from the Arizona Citizens Defense League for their protection of Second Amendment rights. They will look to continue their defense of Arizonans’ constitutional rights to keep and bear arms in the upcoming legislative session in yet another divided state government.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Nov 23, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Two Arizona Republican lawmakers are escalating their defense of the Second Amendment in a dispute of a local ordinance.
On Monday, State Representatives Quang Nguyen and Selina Bliss announced that they had sent a letter to Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes over the City of Sedona’s Ordinance 12.30.090, which prohibits individuals from carrying firearms on “any trail or open space area.”
In a statement that accompanied the announcement, Nguyen said, “The City of Sedona has had ample time to address these concerns and has chosen not to act. We are left with no choice but to seek the Attorney General’s involvement to ensure the rule of law is followed.”
The letter to Mayes follows Representative Nguyen’s prior communication to Sedona Mayor Scott Jablow and city councilmembers over the ordinance. Nguyen had highlighted that the Ordinance’s prohibition “on carrying firearms is not consistent with Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-3108,” thus making it “invalid and unenforceable because it exceeds what state law authorizes. He pointed out that “cities may…enact ordinances ‘[l]imiting or prohibiting the discharge of firearms in parks and preserves’ when certain statutory conditions are met.”
The northern Arizona lawmaker requested that the city leaders “conduct a legal analysis of the validity of Ordinance 12.30.090 and contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss your findings and any next steps you intend to take to ensure that Ordinance 12.30.090 complies with state law.”
In their most recent communication over the issue, Representatives Nguyen and Bliss told the state’s attorney general that Sedona “has not responded to our letter and, to our knowledge, has not taken any actions to remedy the Ordinance’s legal flaws.” The lack of response or corrective action led the legislators to request that Mayes “review the question identified above and issue a written report within 30 days as required by [state law].” They added that if the Arizona Attorney General’s Office were to find a violation of state law, there should be a pursuit of special action in the state’s Supreme Court to resolve this matter.
Nguyen and Bliss, two seatmates in a Yavapai County legislative district, have quickly proven themselves to be some of the top Second Amendment advocates in the state. Over the past two years, both lawmakers have won the “Legislator of the Year” award from the Arizona Citizens Defense League for their protection of Second Amendment rights. They will look to continue their defense of Arizonans’ constitutional rights to keep and bear arms in the upcoming legislative session in yet another divided state government.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Oct 31, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A rural Arizona legislator received an honor for his defense of a timeless right embedded in the Bill of Rights.
Earlier this month, State Representative Quang Nguyen, a Republican, received the 2024 “Legislator of the Year” award from the Arizona Citizens Defense League (AzCDL) for “his steadfast commitment to protecting Second Amendment rights.”
In a statement accompanying his announcement of the award, Nguyen said, “I’m deeply honored to receive this recognition from the Arizona Citizens Defense League. Protecting the Second Amendment is a responsibility I take seriously, and I will continue to stand with the citizens of Arizona to ensure their rights are not infringed upon. The AzCDL plays a vital role in protecting our constitutional freedoms of firearm owners across our state. I’m proud to work alongside this important organization in this ongoing effort to safeguard the liberties of all Arizonans.”
According to his press release, Representative Nguyen “plays a key role in advancing legislation that defends the rights of gun owners in Arizona, while blocking efforts aimed at undermining those protections.” Nguyen serves as the Chairman of the all-important House Judiciary Committee, where much of these proposals originate.
Last year, Nguyen’s seatmate, Representative Selina Bliss, earned the same award from the Second Amendment organization.
Demonstrating his watchful eyes over the Second Amendment rights of Arizonans, Nguyen recently sent a letter to municipal leaders in the City of Sedona, requesting that they review an ordinance dealing with firearms. He highlighted that the prohibition in the ordinance “on carrying firearms is not consistent with Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-3108,” thus making it “invalid and unenforceable because it exceeds what state law authorizes.
Nguyen was previously named to “a select group of Republican legislators nationwide chosen for GOPAC’s 2024 Class of Emerging Leaders, an honor which recognizes a member’s strong sense of service, purpose, and effective leadership in the State Legislature.”
According to its website, AzCDL “is a non-profit 501(c)(4), all volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization dedicated to the principles contained in Article II, Section 2 of the Arizona Constitution that ‘All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.’”
The organization’s goals for Arizona are as follows:
- Freedom to Carry – Restore and protect the right of law-abiding citizens to carry a firearm openly or discreetly anywhere they have a right to be.
- Fewer restrictions on the lawful carrying of firearms on public property (state and local government buildings, parks, etc.).
- Restaurant Carry – The ability of law-abiding citizens to dine out while carrying a firearm.
- Continued strengthening and preservation of the right of presumed innocence in self-defense situations.
- Strong State Preemption – Firearms laws should be consistent throughout the State.
- Liability responsibility for property owners who ban firearms.
- Continued improvements to CCW laws.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
