by Matthew Holloway | Aug 29, 2024 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma filed an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit against Arizona State University and the Arizona Board of Regents for “unlawfully mandating racist DEI training for faculty.” The lawsuit was brought by Dr. Owen Anderson and the Goldwater Institute. The Arizona Board of Regents brought a motion to dismiss the case, which Petersen and Toma are urging the court to reject.
In the text of the brief, Petersen and Toma establish first and foremost that the case brought by Goldwater and Dr. Anderson “is a civil rights case,” citing Arizona Revised Statutes “enacted in part to prohibit discriminatory state and local government practices, including conduct that could qualify as, or lead to, a discriminatory work environment and even liability for the State.”
Sharing the brief, the Arizona Republican Party wrote in a post to X, “We refuse to normalize discrimination in higher education, or anywhere in the state of Arizona.”
As reported by Goldwater, the crux of the complaint by Dr. Anderson is that Arizona State University is using taxpayer funds to mandate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion training among the university’s faculty. And that Dr. Anderson’s refusal to participate in the inherently discriminatory training has left him open to discipline from his superiors.
“I shouldn’t be forced to take training and affirm ideas with which I disagree as a condition of employment,’” Dr. Anderson said. “This ‘training’ is simply racism under the guise of DEI. It goes against my conscience, and I want no part of it.”
Goldwater Staff Attorney Stacy Skankey noted, “Arizona state law prohibits mandatory training for state employees and use of taxpayer resources to teach doctrines that discriminate based on race, ethnicity, sex, and other characteristics.”
“But the ‘ASU Inclusive Communities’ training teaches discriminatory DEI concepts, including things like ‘how…white supremacy [is] normalized in society,’ how to ‘critique whiteness’; ‘white privilege’; ‘white fragility’; and the need for ‘transformative justice.’ Even ‘seemingly innocuous questions and comments’—like asking people where they’re from or commenting on their hair—can be deemed ‘racist.’”
Skankey and co-counsel Parker Jackson, representing Dr. Anderson, alleged in the complaint that the Arizona Board of Regents and ASU are “using public money to prepare and disseminate mandatory faculty and staff training for its employees that presents forms of blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity or sex, in violation of state law.” They add that the University is “compelling the speech of public employees by requiring faculty and staff to take an examination following a training that presents forms of blame or judgment on the basis of race, ethnicity or sex, and answer with Arizona State University’s ‘correct’ answers, in violation of the Arizona Constitution.”
The training included slides containing these objectively racial and gender discriminatory statements and concepts:
- “[A]cknowledging the history of white supremacy and the social conditions for it to exist as a structural phenomenon.”
- “How is white supremacy normalized in society.”
- “[G]iven the socio-historical legacy of racism, sexism, homophobia and other forms of structural inequality, perceptions of authority and control are not always granted to minoritized [sic] faculty.”
- “White Fragility.”
- “What is White Privilege, Really.”
- “Explaining White privilege to a broke white person… .”
- “7 Ways White People Can Combat Their Privilege.”
- “Racism … can take the form of … and include seemingly innocuous questions or comments, such as asking people of color where they are from … .”
- “Sexual identities are linked to power, and heterosexuality, the dominant sexual identity in American culture, is privileged by going largely unquestioned.”
A video segment of the training includes the statements via transcript:
- “[I]t scares people to talk about white supremacy or to be called a white supremacist. But if we start thinking about it in terms of whiteness as something that is culturally neutral and we’re moving it from that neutral space into a critical space.”
- “[W]e also have to open the space to critique whiteness.”
- “[W]hite supremacy … referring to here is the period between the 1500’s and the 1800’s that encompasses both Spanish colonization and Euro American colonization. And what colonization did, was it really created this system of binary thinking. There were folks that were inherently good and folks that were inherently bad, and that led to the systems of superiority that were then written into the foundation documents of our nation.”
The original complaint summarizes: “The Inclusive Communities training provides discriminatory concepts including, but not limited to: white people are inherently racist and oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; heterosexuals are inherently sexist and oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; white people should receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of their race or ethnicity; white people bear responsibility for actions committed by other white people; land acknowledgement statements are a way of holding one race or ethnicity responsible for the actions committed by other members of the same race or ethnicity; transformative justice calls for an individual to bear responsibility for actions committed by other members of the same race, ethnic group or sex; and dominant identities (whites or heterosexuals) are treated morally or intellectually superior to other races, ethnic groups or sexes.”
Skankey explained, “ASU is essentially forcing its employees to agree to a certain type of speech, which violates the Arizona Constitution’s broad protections for free speech.”
Speaking with Fox & Friends in March, Dr. Anderson explained, “I was told I need to ‘decolonize my classroom.’”
In a statement responding to the lawsuit, an ASU spokesman told Fox producers, “The Goldwater Institute suit misleads the court and misrepresents both the content and requirements of this training to make an argument the represents a political perspective but is not based on the law. ASU’s commitment to providing a support and welcoming educational environment for students of all backgrounds will continue and the university will respond appropriately to the Institute’s tactic.”
The case is currently awaiting a response from the Arizona Board of Regents.
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 Daniel Stefanski | Aug 17, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Arizona Legislative Republicans put the finishing touches on one of their signature legal victories over the state’s Democrat governor in court.
Earlier this week, Arizona Senate Republicans announced that “Governor Katie Hobbs admit[ted] she violated state law through her scheme to circumvent the Senate confirmation process for director nominations and has agreed to submit new candidates for consideration, as required by law.”
“We continue to see a disturbing trend unfolding, where Democrats are weaponizing the government in an attempt to force unlawful and extreme agendas upon our citizens,” said Senate President Warren Petersen. “No elected official is above the law, and the Governor’s manipulative scheme to circumvent Senate confirmation demonstrates the crucial role the Legislature serves in holding the executive accountable against abuses of power. I’m grateful we can move forward from the insanity and chaos our state agencies and our citizens have been experiencing due to the Governor’s actions, and I look forward to reinstating the confirmation process so that we can properly vet director nominations in an effort to ensure only the most qualified candidates are serving in these critical roles.”
According to the press release issued by the Senate Republicans, “Senate President Warren Petersen spent the last several months working to hold the Governor accountable in Arizona State Senate v. Katie Hobbs. In September of 2023, after a Senate committee recommended a nominee accused of plagiarism not be confirmed, Hobbs sent a letter to President Petersen notifying him that she was going to evade the senate-confirmation process for agency directors, mandated by A.R.S. § 38-211. Under her ill-advised plan, blessed by Attorney General Mayes, Hobbs withdrew 13 director nominations still pending before the Senate. She then re-installed these same individuals with a fake title of ‘Executive Deputy Directors.’ Based on flimsy legal reasoning, which Hobbs’ own attorney later described as ‘strange,’ Hobbs claimed these fake directors had the same power and authority as Senate-confirmed directors. After months of discussions, she continued to insist she was above the law.”
Republican Senator Sine Kerr reacted to the news, posting, “A big win for the rule of law in AZ!! The people of AZ deserve legitimate, qualified, lawful agency Directors confirmed by the Senate!”
On the other side of the aisle, Democrat Senate Leader Mitzi Epstein said, “I applaud Governor Hobbs for consistently taking the high road and working diligently to protect the interests of hard-working Arizonans. Governor Hobbs was elected fair and square in 2022 and it is time Republicans get out of the way and let her govern for all Arizonans. It’s 2024, the games need to end and that starts now with ensuring we get every director across the finish line in the Senate.”
Epstein added, “Republicans have repeatedly rejected bipartisanship, and the burden falls squarely on Arizona taxpayers every time. Democrats will continue to act in good faith and do everything possible to ensure government runs smoothly in the upcoming legislature.”
In their press release, the Senate Republicans argued that it was their constitutional duty (and obligation by law) to stand in Hobbs’ way on certain matters, writing, “Consistent with the United States Constitution and the laws of states across this nation, Arizona law requires its agencies to be led by Senate-confirmed directors, under A.R.S. § 38-211. This requirement exists to preserve the liberties of Arizona’s citizens. Just as the Governor’s veto serves as a check on legislative power, Senate confirmation of agency directors serves as a necessary check on the Governor’s power.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Aug 5, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A federal appeals court’s decision to overturn an order from its own panel has Arizona conservatives outraged.
This week, a panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a recent opinion from another panel within the court that had allowed Arizona’s law on state voter registration proof of citizenship requirements to go into effect. This latest decision from the Ninth Circuit now vacates that order, allowing individuals to essentially register to vote with state or federal forms in Arizona without providing proof of citizenship.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen, who was one of the intervenors in the case defending the law against its challengers, issued a statement in condemnation of the Ninth Circuit’s order. Petersen said, “This is just another example of why the radical Ninth Circuit is one of the most overturned circuits in the nation. They routinely engage in judicial warfare to carry out their extremist liberal agenda that’s contrary to the laws our citizens elected us to implement. We will seek assistance from the Supreme Court to ensure only American citizens are voting in our elections. If this principle is not followed, democracy as we know it, and as our Founding Fathers intended, is in jeopardy.”
According to the Arizona State Senate Republican Caucus, “This lawsuit stems from radical Left activists, some of which are from outside of Arizona, opposing two laws passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature back in 2022 restricting voters who don’t provide documentation confirming they are in fact legal citizens of the United States.”
Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, also weighed in on the decision from the Ninth Circuit panel, writing, “This opinion from two radical judges on the Ninth Circuit is a travesty of law and to the legal process, overturning a ruling issued just last week by the same court. We are hopeful that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly intervene and reverse this poorly reasoned decision on appeal.”
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club was extremely instrumental in the origination and passage of HB 2492, which is one of the state laws at the heart of the legal matter.
In this Ninth Circuit’s order, there was one judge who dissented from his other colleagues – Judge Patrick J. Bumatay. He wrote, “Motions for reconsideration of a motions panel’s order are not meant to be a second bite at the apple. On the contrary, they are highly irregular and strongly disfavored, primarily appropriate if there have been ‘[c]hanges in legal or factual circumstances’ since the motions panel addressed the issue.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Jul 14, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States and presumptive Republican 2024 nominee, survived an attempted assassination in Butler County, PA, on Saturday. According to reports, an assailant opened fire with a 22-caliber rifle from a rooftop approximately 150 yards away from the mainstage where Trump was addressing his rally, grazing him in the right ear and killing a rally attendee. The Secret Service told reporters that two spectators were also critically injured. The would-be assassin was engaged by police snipers according to the New York Post with one bystander saying, “They blew his head off.”
As the shots rang out, President Trump can be seen raising a hand to his ear and exclaiming “Oh!” after the first round grazed him. A moment later he dropped to the ground and was swarmed by Secret Service Agents as rally goers took cover behind him. One of the agents can be heard on microphone shouting “Get down, get down, get down, get down!” Seconds later, per the Associated Press, the agents can be heard saying “shooter’s down.” The agents conferred for a few moments before helping Trump rise to his feet. After asking for his shoes, Trump is heard telling his agents to wait before looking out to the crowd with blood trailing across his face from his wounded ear and mouthing, “Fight, Fight, Fight” to his supporters.
Trump was transported to an area hospital in stable condition and released later in the evening.
Within moments, Arizona politicos and elected officials began to respond to the narrowly averted assassination.
Governor Katie Hobbs (D) posted a statement to X saying, “Political violence is unacceptable, and has no place in this country. I am glad that former President Trump is safe, and hope that others at the rally were not seriously injured. I hope the perpetrator of this heinous act will be swiftly brought to justice.” Her comments echoed the sentiment of many prominent Democrats such as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) condemning political violence.
Speaker of the Arizona State House of Representatives Ben Toma (R-AZ-27) wrote within minutes, “Praying for President Trump, first responders, and any others who may have also been injured at the rally.”
Arizona Senate Presdient Warren Peterson looked back on a recent attempt by Democrats in Congress to strip Trump of Secret Service protection in a post to X saying, “It is a good thing the Democrats have not been successful in taking the secret service from Trump.”
In April, Democratic Congressman Bennie Thompson from Mississippi, the Ranking Member of the Committee on Homeland Security led an effort to remove Trump’s protective detail known as the Disgraced Former Protectees Act (H.R. 8081) as reported by USA Today. The bill was co-sponsored by Reps. Troy A. Carter Sr., Barbara Lee, Frederica Wilson, Yvette D. Clarke, Bonnie Watson Coleman, Jasmine Crockett, Joyce Beatty, and Steve Cohen.
Arizona’s Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes offered her thoughts in a statement to X as well writing:
“The attack against former President Trump must be strongly condemned by ALL Americans — no matter their political beliefs. Poltical violence is never acceptable. Never. My thoughts are with the former President and anyone else who may have been injured or hurt at today’s rally.”
Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell noted, “This is horrifying. Violence is never the answer. Praying for a full and speedy recovery for President Trump.”
Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes offered his statement, notably without mentioning Trump by name, saying, “I condemn political violence in the most unequivocal terms. NO American political figure should ever be threatened with OR acted against with violence. If we want to beat a political opponent, we do it with ballots, not bullets.”
Arizona State Senator Janae Shamp lauded the efforts of the U.S. Secret Service protecting President Trump writing, “God bless the men and women who put their lives on the line to protect President Trump! #absoluteheroes”
State Rep. Steve Montenegro (R-AZ-29) shared a now iconic image of Trump raising his fist defiantly saying, “Praying for President Trump. #StandWithTrump”
Republican Senate primary candidate Kari Lake issued a statement saying, “I am shaken and horrified by the assassination attempt on President Trump’s life today. I am praying for President Trump and the innocent attendees who were tragically injured or killed. I am grateful for the brave Secret Service agents and law enforcement officials for their swift action and for preventing this incident from becoming even more tragic.”
She later joined RSBN during the network’s live coverage and wrote, “Today, we saw an assassination attempt on a man who’s been fighting for this country. I’m praying for Donald Trump. I’m praying just as much for his family, & the people in that crowd, & more than anything, I pray for this great Republic & that we can come together as Americans.”
Fellow GOP Senate contender, Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb, wrote, “Our prayers are with President Trump and his entire family. I applaud the quick reaction and work of law enforcement and members of the Secret Service to move the President to safety and neutralize the suspect.”
Congressman Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), who is also running for the Senate seat of outgoing Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), wrote, “Absolutely horrible. Political violence should never be tolerated. I hope President Trump and everyone at the rally is safe. Grateful Secret Service and law enforcement got the situation under control so quickly.”
President Trump made a statement posted to Truth Social, first thanking the Secret Service and law enforcement and offering condolences to those injured and killed and their families: “I want to thank The United States Secret Service, and all of Law Enforcement, for their rapid response on the shooting that just took place in Butler, Pennsylvania. Most importantly, I want to extend my condolences to the family of the person at the Rally who was killed, and also to the family of another person that was badly injured.”
He added, “It is incredible that such an act can take place in our Country. Nothing is known at this time about the shooter, who is now dead. I was shot with a bullet that pierced the upper part of my right ear. I knew immediately that something was wrong in that I heard a whizzing sound, shots, and immediately felt the bullet ripping through the skin. Much bleeding took place, so I realized then what was happening. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”
Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), a popular contender to serve as Trump’s Vice Presidential pick, declared on X, “Let’s be clear: This was an assassination attempt aided and abetted by the radical Left and corporate media incessantly calling Trump a threat to democracy, fascists, or worse.”
Fellow VP short-lister Sen. J.D. Vance echoed a similar sentiment saying, “Today is not just some isolated incident. The central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs. That rhetoric led directly to President Trump’s attempted assassination.” He also condemned Rep. Thompson for his efforts to strip Trump of his protective detail saying “Remember this? I do. Kick his ass out of Congress. Absolute scumbag.”
Former Governor of North Dakota Doug Burgum, another rumored potential VP, noted, “Please join Kathryn and me in praying for President Trump, his family and everyone attending the rally today,” adding, “We all know President Trump is stronger than his enemies. Today he showed it.”
Possible Vice-Presidential pick and former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy offered a lengthy statement saying in part, “First they sued him. Then they prosecuted him. Then they tried to take him off the ballot. The only thing more tragic than what just happened is that, if we’re being honest, it wasn’t totally a shock. Biden’s inevitable ritual condemnation of political violence today (when it comes) will be insufficient and irrelevant. No amount of verbiage today changes the toxic national climate that led to this tragedy.
Apoorva and I mourn for the rally attendee who was apparently killed by the shooter. We believe the fact that President Trump is safe right now is nothing short of an act of God. My heart tells me God intervened not just for Trump, but for our nation. Today, the future survival of the United States of America came down to less than a hair’s width in the path of a bullet.”
He added, “If any good comes of today, let it be this: Americans just had the chance to see our next President’s true character, unvarnished. He took the fire, he took the hit, he felt the blood, and then he stood right back up for the people he was put here to lead. Regardless of who you vote for, let’s unite around the TRUTH that what happened today is unacceptable, now and forever.”
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 | Jul 2, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The United States Supreme Court ruling in Johnson v. City of Grants Pass, has settled the question of a city’s ability to arrest and fine people for sleeping and encamping in public spaces.
In the 6-3 ruling, the high court found that enforcing laws against camping on streets, sidewalks, and public lands does not constitute “cruel and unusual punishment,” and therefore survives a challenge based on the Eighth Amendment. Communities beleaguered with an entrenched homeless population living illegally on city streets, in vacant lots, and even parks will now be able to clear them and get the homeless, and frequently mentally ill and/or addicted off the streets and hopefully to the resources they need. As noted by AZFamily, the small city of Grant’s Pass, Oregon, was vindicated by the Supreme Court in its assertion that forbidding homeless encampment is not unconstitutional.
Along with Grant’s Pass, the City of Phoenix was also cleared for a new city law to take effect in two months making it illegal to camp within 500 feet of a school, childcare center, or city-owned park as previously reported by AZ Free News. According to The Center Square, Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen is quite pleased with the SCOTUS ruling. He told reporters, “This ruling is a victory in our state’s efforts to tackle the humanitarian crisis destroying lives and livelihoods within our communities on a daily basis.”
“Our children shouldn’t be forced to walk to school on streets littered with needles, feces, and trash. The individuals camping out should be discouraged from this practice through enforceable laws and be provided with the mental health or substance abuse services they need to overcome this terrible situation.”
Phoenix’s Democrat Mayor Kate Gallego said in written statement Friday, “Phoenix has continued to make meaningful progress on this issue while simultaneously navigating a web of conflicting legal opinions.” She added, “Today’s Supreme Court ruling provides the necessary clarity we need to help even more people find safe, stable shelter,” as AZFamily reported.
Independent City Councilman Kevin Robinson observed, “We want to have the flexibility (to issue citations). I think it needs to be there if it’s a critical type of situation. But the expectation is we lead with services first. We look for ways to help people.” Democrat Councilwoman Kesha Hodge Washington added, “The decision provides municipalities with an accountability tool, if and when appropriate.”
Her fellow Democrat Councilman Carlos Galindo-Elvira explained that Phoenix needs to achieve a balanced approach between law enforcement and the dignity of the homeless. “It cannot be open season on the unhoused. That’s not acceptable to me,” he said. “I worry about that everywhere in the United States.”
Although he noted, “Citations have to be an option to ensure equity and to maintain space and access to it.”
Republican Councilwoman Ann O’Brien, who led the encampment ban in the council, told the Arizona Republic that the ruling has affirmed the new ordinance but stressed that Phoenix will continue offering services to the homeless, although for those who refuse assistance, she supports enforcement.
“We want to get them back on their feet. … If we can lead with services, that’s my preference. When they say, ‘No,’ then if that means they need to be ticketed, then I would welcome them to go through the community court process,” O’Brien said.
“What’s important to remember is this isn’t just about the homeless community. It’s about all the citizens of Phoenix and quality of life issues for everyone,” she added.
The City of Phoenix issued a statement published by ABC15 saying in part, “The City of Phoenix has worked strategically over the last several years to balance court orders from two different lawsuits, community needs, and available resources to address homelessness in our community. The City will continue to lead with services and will not criminalize homelessness, while we evaluate our programs based on the court’s ruling today. The City is confident in the processes created by the Office of Homeless Solutions and supporting departments to address encampments in a dignified and compassionate manner, connecting our most vulnerable residents with services while preserving the quality of life in our neighborhoods for all residents.”
Writing for the majority of the court, Justice Neil Gorsuch reached for the work of Alexis de Tocqueville to conclude his ruling:
“Homelessness is complex. Its causes are many. So may be the public policy responses required to address it. At bottom, the question this case presents is whether the Eighth Amendment grants federal judges primary responsibility for assessing those causes and devising those responses. It does not. Almost 200 years ago, a visitor to this country remarked upon the ‘extreme skill with which the inhabitants of the United States succeed in proposing a common object to the exertions of a great many men, and in getting them voluntarily to pursue it.’ 2 A. de Tocqueville, Democracy in America 129 (H. Reeve transl. 1961).
If the multitude of amicus briefs before us proves one thing, it is that the American people are still at it. Through their voluntary associations and charities, their elected representatives and appointed officials, their police officers and mental health professionals, they display that same energy and skill today in their efforts to address the complexities of the homelessness challenge facing the most vulnerable among us.
Yes, people will disagree over which policy responses are best; they may experiment with one set of approaches only to find later another set works better; they may find certain responses more appropriate for some communities than others. But in our democracy, that is their right. Nor can a handful of federal judges begin to ‘match’ the collective wisdom the American people possess in deciding ‘how best to handle’ a pressing social question like homelessness. Robinson, 370 U. S., at 689 (White, J., dissenting).
The Constitution’s Eighth Amendment serves many important functions, but it does not authorize federal judges to wrest those rights and responsibilities from the American people and in their place dictate this Nation’s homelessness policy. The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
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.
