Center Square News

(The Center Square) – Litigation against former Arizona U.S. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema by a woman from the North Carolina Sandhills has been moved from state to federal court.

Heather Ammel of Moore County says Sinema had an affair with her husband Matthew Ammel while he was in a security detail for her in 2023 and 2024. The couple separated in November 2024, about five months after he was named a defense and national security fellow on the congresswoman’s staff and had stopped wearing his wedding band.

The filing was made in Moore County Superior Court in September. This week, Sinema’s lawyers shifted the case to federal jurisdiction in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.

North Carolina is one of six states with alienation of affection laws. The others are Hawaii, Mississippi, New Mexico, Utah and South Dakota.

The litigation, 15 pages in length, gives the plaintiff’s account of the relationship inclusive of trips; concerts; and use of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine drugs more commonly known as MDMA, Molly and Ecstasy.

Relief in compensatory damages of at least $25,000 and “punitive damages for defendant’s willful and wanton conduct” is sought.

Heather and Matthew Ammel lived together with their three children prior to his being hired on her staff.

Sinema, 49, had already left the Green Party to join Democrats when she won the first of three terms in the Arizona House of Representatives. After a term in the state Senate, she succeeded retiring U.S. Sen. Jeff Flake with a win in the 2018 midterms becoming the first openly bisexual woman in the chamber.

Sinema left the Democratic Party on Dec. 9, 2022, to become independent and give the chamber four – Sens. Bernie Sanders, Angus King and Joe Manchin were the others. King and Sanders remain.

Sinema is with Hogan Lovells in Washington, a legal and lobbying firm.

(The Center Square) - Arizona education experts are pushing back on claims Gov. Katie Hobbs made about the Empowerment Scholarship Account program during her State of the State this week.

Hobbs claimed the state-funded school choice program operates unchecked in Arizona and squanders taxpayer money.

“It seems like every day, we learn about new shopping sprees happening at the expense of taxpayers … Diamond jewelry, high-end clothing and furniture … Who knows what taxpayers will be footing the bill for tomorrow?” the Democratic governor asked during her speech on Monday before a joint session of the Republican-controlled Legislature.

She also said the ESA program’s “most ardent supporters must agree: It’s time we tackle the waste, fraud, and abuse to ensure taxpayer dollars are going towards true educational purposes.”

According to Matt Beienburg, the Goldwater Institute’s director of education policy, many of the claims made by Hobbs in her State of the State address “don’t hold up under scrutiny.”

Arizona’s ESA program requires parents to “document every single purchase they make,” he said.

“ Every item and every penny spent has to be reported to the state of Arizona. That is maximum transparency,” Beienburg told The Center Square.

Katie Ratlief, the Common Sense Institute Arizona’s executive director, said if people in the ESA program make a purchase “not permissible under law,” their “account is immediately frozen.”

She also said people who make unauthorized purchases with their ESA funds have to repay them.

The same level of transparency in the ESA program does not apply to public schools, Ratlief told The Center Square.

Beinburg agreed with Ratlief. “It’s pretty clear that despite the talking points against the ESA program, if there’s actually concern about transparency, the focus should be upon our state-operated government schools, who in many cases are failing to disclose both finances and curriculum.”

For example, Beinburg brought up an incident in which state Rep. Matt Gress, R-Phoenix, attempted to obtain financial transaction data for Telleson Union High School last year. However, the school told the representative that it would cost over $26,000 in fees to fill his request.

Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne said under his leadership, the state Department of Education “has done a full-court press against waste and fraud.”

“I hired both a program auditor and an investigator, which had not been done before. I require that every expenditure be for a valid educational purpose and have been attacked for doing that,” Horne said in a statement to The Center Square.

“The governor needs to pay more attention to what is going on. She gets an ‘F,’” he added.

Regarding Hobbs’ claim the ESA program is squandering taxpayer money, “the vast majority” of Arizona’s K-12 spending goes to public and charter schools, Ratlief noted.

CSI Arizona said the ESA program for fiscal year 2026 costs $1 billion, while K-12 public school costs $7.1 billion, and charter school costs $2.1 billion. This means that public school funding accounts for nearly 70% of the state’s K-12 spending in fiscal year 2026.

Ratlief said around half of that money goes to students with special needs who have qualified for ESAs since 2011.

Beienburg noted Arizona public school funding has increased by $2.5 billion since 2022, when the ESA program opened to all students.

”Even adjusting for inflation on a per student basis. Arizona public school students are getting over $500 more a year today than they were prior to the expansion,” he stated.

In 2022, the state added $600 million in discretionary funding to its public schools, Beienburg explained.

“ That increase in public school funding in 2022 alone was larger than the entire net change in award amounts for the ESA program since the expansion. The net change in education dollars resulting from the ESA expansion is less than one year's increase in the public school system that state lawmakers gave,” he noted.

The governor recycled many “false talking points” from “teachers unions and radical activist organizations that oppose parental choice and students having the opportunity to pursue the best education possible if that happens to fall outside of an institution they control,” Beienburg said.

Since 2012, Arizona public school enrollment has gone down, Ratlief stated.

The reason Arizona public schools are closing is that school districts kept constructing new buildings while keeping buildings open “that weren’t operating at a capacity that was sustainable,” Ratlief explained.

She said Arizona school districts are realizing they need to close schools because “demographics have fundamentally changed.”

Looking at the data, public schools are facing “enrollment pressures,” but the main drivers are “competition amongst public schools and the drop in birth rates,” Beienburg stated.

Since 2017, an estimated 40,000 students have left public schools to enter the state’s ESA program, Beienburg noted.

Furthermore, he stated Arizona birth rates have fallen by 36% since 2007. He estimated the state is having 10,000 to 20,000 fewer kids yearly being born in Arizona than it did 19 years ago.

According to Beienburg, this means that there are around 200,000 fewer kids in Arizona who need to be educated.

“ We just don't have as many school-aged kids in Arizona as we used to. Things have changed fundamentally,” Ratlief noted.

Looking ahead, Ratlief said she encouraged lawmakers to view the ESA program through a “forward-focused lens.”

“Parents are used to choice in Arizona now. They want access to open enrollment, charter schools, ESAs, homeschooling, micro schools, all this,” she stated.

Ratlief noted Arizona needs to ask how it can “continue to improve things for parents and taxpayers in an environment they’ve come to expect,” rather than figuring out how to go backward.

(The Center Square) - A left-leaning activist group will hold its second "ICE Out for Good" protest Saturday in Surprise, Arizona.

The protest, which is against the fatal U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement shooting of Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis, is being organized by Northwest Valley Indivisible. It follows a Jan. 10 protest, attended by more than a thousand people in Surprise, which is about 30 miles northwest of Phoenix.

NVI is holding another protest because “the response from ICE has been to ramp up their efforts,” Brent Peak, a volunteer member of NVI, told The Center Square.

“Our goal is to keep showing up because they do, and we feel like what they’re doing is unwarranted, outta line, cruel [and] chaotic,” he explained.

Peak called the Jan. 7 killing of Good “horrific" and noted many are coming to the protests against the fatal shooting.

He noted the Surprise Police Department estimated 1,250 people attended last weekend’s protest. He expects a similar turnout at this Saturday's rally, set for 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. on a sidewalk at one of the main intersections in Surprise, a city of more than 143,000 people.

According to Peak, NVI thinks there is a “much more responsible way to enforce” America’s immigration policies.

The Center Square reached out to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for comment, but did not hear back before press time.

He said NVI doesn’t have an official position on whether ICE should be abolished, but he recognized that many of its supporters “wouldn’t mind” if that happened.

Peak did acknowledge America does need “something in place to take care of border security and immigration policy.”

“Given what ICE has become in the last year, I do strongly suspect that what's gonna be needed is to end ICE and reconstitute [it] as a different agency with more responsible policies that don't create this kind of chaos and havoc in our country,” he explained.

“We're not calling for the end of ICE, but we are certainly not opposed to it. What we are really calling for is an end to these practices,” Peak added.

NVI will be putting on a rally without any help from the national Indivisible organization, he explained.

On its about page, Indivisible says it was founded to resist President Donald Trump. The organization has received funding from billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, a nonprofit that funds many left-wing causes.

Peak said NVI will meet with Surprise police officers who will be at the rally and has a "great relationship" with the police department.

NVI is committed to “nonviolent, nonphysical and peaceful” protests because its “greatest fear” currently is that the organization will “become a convenient excuse to increase ICE efforts even more,” Peak said.

Over 8,000 people have shown up to NVI protests in the last year, and there haven’t been any examples of violence, Peak noted.

As an organization, NVI has two volunteer co-chairs and a team of volunteers that come together for protests and other events, Peak explained.

He said none of the NVI volunteers or protesters are paid to protest.

(The Center Square) - President Donald Trump’s approval rating among Arizonans declined 16 percentage points from February to December, a new poll shows.

Noble Predictive Insights released a poll showing that Arizonans' favorability toward Trump fell from +3% to -13% over a nine-month period.

Mike Noble, CEO of Noble Predictive Insights, told The Center Square that Trump’s unfavorable approval rating goes back to pocketbook issues.

“There’s been a lot of uncertainty created with a lot of the rapid changes in domestic policy that give voters a little bit of unease,” he explained.

Noble said Trump’s sliding approval rating in Arizona is “a flashing red warning light for Republicans – and a clear opening for Democrats.”

“In a state decided on the margins, an unpopular president changes the math,” he noted.

Like Trump, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs’ approval rating has gone down, according to the poll. In February, it stood at +6%, but in December 2025, it fell to +1%, a decrease of 5 percentage points.

“Incumbents can survive middling approval numbers, but sustained growth in disapproval is harder to outrun,” Noble noted. “Republicans will look at these trends and see a governor who has not consolidated public confidence heading into a critical election year.”

The poll found the main issues Arizonans cared about were inflation (48%), affordable housing (46%) and health care (41%). Health care and affordable housing saw the largest increases in Arizonans voting them as important issues from February to December, the poll showed.

Immigration (38%) used to be among the top three issues Arizonans cared most about, but that slipped from February to December.

Noble said this was due to border-crossing numbers declining under the Trump administration compared to the Biden administration.

The poll showed 52% of Arizonans view their state heading in the wrong direction, while 48% say it's in the right direction. These numbers are a far change from March 2021, when 56% of Arizonans thought the state was going in the correct direction.

Noble said the cost of pocketbook issues is the “primary driver” of why Arizonans feel the state is going the wrong way.

“For Arizonans who have been here for more than five years, Arizona’s always been known as a low-cost-of-living state. You look at every metric [and] that is not the case,” Noble stated.

In politics, Noble told The Center Square that this year's gubernatorial race will be “very competitive" and that Arizona will be another key battleground state for Democrats and Republicans.

An Emerson College poll from December showed Hobbs beating the Arizona Republican gubernatorial candidates, Andy Biggs or Karrin Taylor Robson, by 1 percentage point. Biggs and Robson were both endorsed by President Donald Trump.

The other Republican candidate, Rep. David Schweikert, R-Scottsdale, trailed Hobbs by 5 percentage points.

The margin of error for the Emerson College poll was plus or minus 3.3%, which means Hobbs is in a statistical tie with Biggs or Taylor Robson.

Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan election analyzer, rates the Arizona gubernatorial race as a toss up.

(The Center Square) - Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne applauded a recent ruling by the Arizona Court of Appeals that allows a parent to sue Mesa Public Schools after the district did not inform a parent that their child sought to change their gender.

In Walden v. Mesa Unified School District, Jane Doe, a parent, and Rachel Walden, a Mesa County School Board member, sued the district over its policy that hides children’s gender transition from parents.

Doe alleged that Mesa County Public Schools violated the state’s Parents’ Bill of Rights by concealing information about her daughter's use of a male name and identity at school. School policy prevented teachers and officials from hiding information from parents when students make a transition to another gender, the ruling noted.

Arizona’s Parental Bill of Rights reserves exclusive rights to parents of children under 18, giving them authority over their children and restricting when the government can interfere in their rights. Some of these rights include “right to direct the education of the minor child,” “right to direct the upbringing of the minor child” and “right to direct the moral or religious training of the minor child.”

The court ruled last month that these parental rights outlined in Arizona law allow Doe to move forward in her lawsuit against Arizona’s largest school district. Maricopa County Superior Court initially dismissed the lawsuit.

Horne said schools can’t act as “substitutes for parents, and they have zero right to withhold information that parents are entitled to know.”

“I am very pleased that the court made the correct ruling to defend parental rights and remind schools they should follow the law or risk legal action,” said the superintendent, who talked to The Center Square this week.

James Rogers, senior counsel at America First Legal, who represented the plaintiffs, said, “Arizona law puts parents, not school bureaucrats, in charge of their children’s upbringing, education, and mental health, and districts must answer when they cross that line.”

“Parents have the God-given right — and responsibility — to raise and nurture their children. Government schools should never try to secretly usurp that role,” he added. “Teachers and administrators should not deceive parents or hide critical information about their children’s welfare.”

According to Horne, parents “have a right to know what’s happening with their children.”

Imagine being a parent and finding out that “your child had changed genders without telling you and that the school had helped and kept it secret,” Horne told The Center Square.

“You’d be outraged, and you’d be very hurt,” he said. “Children are the most important thing in the world to their parents.”

Horne noted it is “hard to say” how often kids make a transition in genders in Arizona public schools and their parents aren’t notified. However, he did say that when this situation comes to his attention, Horne will call the school and threaten to publicize it if the school doesn’t stop. After these conversations, schools comply, he said.

Horne said he has made “some, but “not a lot” of those phone calls.

On top of this, if the superintendent finds out that teachers are helping kids change their gender, he said he would propose to the state of Arizona that the teachers should lose their teaching license. He said that hasn't happened yet in Arizona when teachers help students make a gender transition.

(The Center Square) - Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen was at the U.S. Supreme Court when oral arguments were heard on whether transgender athletes may participate in girls' and women's school sports.

Afterward, Petersen, R-Gilbert, expressed confidence that justices would rule in favor of Idaho and West Virginia's laws banning transgender athletes from those sports.

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling could set the stage for a lower court ruling on a similar ban in Arizona in another case.

The Republican majority in the Arizona Legislature filed amicus briefs in support of Idaho and West Virginia.

“I’m optimistic based off of what I heard," the Senate president told The Center Square. "We’re going to win this thing."

The court heard oral arguments Tuesday in Little v. Hecox and B.P.J. v. West Virginia. Little v. Hecox concerns a law Idaho passed in March 2020 that prohibits transgender athletes from competing in girls' and women's sports.

A month later, after the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act became law, Lindsay Hecox, a transgender athlete who identifies as a female, and Jane Doe, a cisgender high school athlete, filed a lawsuit against the law, saying it violated the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and Title IX.

B.P.J. v. West Virginia deals with a law the state passed in 2022 that requires biological males to compete only on biological male sport teams.

Becky Pepper-Jackson, an 11-year-old transgender person who identifies as a female, challenged the law, claiming it infringed the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and Title IX.

After the oral arguments in the two cases, Petersen said it was “fascinating” and an “amazing experience” to be “in the Supreme Court with the justices” and the two solictors general - the attorneys representing Idaho and West Virginia.

The Senate president told The Center Square four justices were in support of Idaho and West Virginia and three oppose the states. He said he sees Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, both appointed by President Donald Trump, as the swing votes.

Petersen predicted the Supreme Court would ultimately rule 6-3 in favor of Idaho and West Virginia. The court has a six-member conservative majority.

The Supreme Court rulings are expected sometime in June, he added.

The justices' decisions will have massive implications, Petersen told The Center Square.

If the court rules against the states, girls will “have nowhere to go where they can lead and dominate in sports,” he said.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Idaho and West Virginia, only biological males can only play in male sports in those states.

The Supreme Court’s decision will also affect a law Arizona passed in 2022 called the Save Women’s Sports Act, which prevented transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports. This law has been challenged and is currently before the Supreme Court.

The court set Arizona’s case aside to hear these two cases, Petersen said. He added justices will remand Arizona's case back to a lower court after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the Idaho and West Virginia cases.

If the lower court then ruled against the Arizona Legislature, Petersen said it would be appealed back up to the Supreme Court.

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, a Democrat, did not defend the state’s law when it was challenged in 2023. The plaintiffs in the case said it violated the same things as the two court cases in which the court heard oral arguments..

“Sadly, it appears that she is OK with boys playing in girls' sports. She's sympathizing with biological males playing in girls' sports,” Petersen said, referring to Mayes.

After Mayes decided not to defend the law, it fell to Petersen and former state House Speaker Ben Toma, R-Peoria, to represent Arizona.

Current House Speaker Steve Montenegro, R-Surprise, said women’s sports exist due to biological differences.

“Arizona lawmakers passed the Save Women’s Sports Act to preserve fair competition for girls. When Attorney General Mayes refused to defend that law, the Legislature stepped in,” Montenegro said.

“Courts should not erase reality or take opportunities away from female athletes through judicial decree,” he added.

According to Petersen, the Supreme Court could issue three possible rulings.

The first one is that the Court upholds state laws banning biological males from competing in female sports. The second option would be to send this question to the states and let them decide, and the third would be to repeal state laws preventing males from participating in female sports.

If the Supreme Court rules against Idaho and West Virginia in these cases, Petersen told The Center Square that Arizona’s law would be struck down as well.

However, he said he did not think this would happen.

(The Center Square) - Arizona taxpayers will actually save more than the original estimate of $1.1 billion over the next three years if the Republican majority in the Legislature passes its tax plan, according to a think tank.

The amount goes up if the federal government's SALT deduction standard is factored in, said Glenn Farley, the Common Sense Institute Arizona’s director of policy and research.

Last week, Arizona state Republicans unveiled their new tax plan, which they expect will save taxpayers $1.1 billion. Things included in the tax plan include no taxes on tips or overtime, income deductions and an increase to child tax credits.

But Farley told The Center Square that the amount is greater when the SALT deduction, already in effect in Arizona, is included. He said the deduction is the “subtraction of your federal income taxes for your state and local taxes paid in the prior year."

Arizona adopted the federal SALT deduction in its state income tax system, which means a person is “getting a subtraction for state and local taxes paid on both federal taxes [and] state taxes,” Farley said.

The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act limited the SALT deduction to $10,000 per year, he said. The Arizona GOP tax plan follows the 2017 deduction.

Arizona’s state income tax system closely follows the federal income tax system, Farley said. "A simple, clean Arizona income tax system is a win for taxpayers [and] the state.”

The Republican tax plan aligns with the tax changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill, Farley explained.

The two biggest things that will save Arizonans the most in taxes are raising the standard deduction and expanding the $6,000 deduction for seniors, Farley stated.

If the Republican legislators' tax plan takes effect, Arizona will need to figure out how to pay for it, Farley said. He explained Arizona can do this by increasing revenue growth or reducing expenditure growth.

Before starting at CSI Arizona in 2022, Farley spent eight years working for former Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican, as a policy adviser and chief economist. While at Ducey's office, Farley was part of a team that helped implement the changes made from Trump’s 2017 tax cuts.

He said the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act changed the federal adjusted gross income definition, which states use when “defining their state income tax system.”

The tax cuts included in the bill were federal-specific, Farley explained.

The things that mattered to the states were the “definitional changes,” which were the tax increases, the research director noted.

When Arizona implemented the federal tax changes between 2017 and 2019, the state needed to figure out what to do with the increased revenue, Farley explained.

”What we ultimately did was a series of tax reforms and tax cuts to simplify our income tax system and reduce the rates,” he said.

Farley added that these changes “laid the groundwork” for Arizona’s 2.5% flat tax rate, which passed in 2021.

Based on his experience working in the Ducey administration, Farley said savings from tax plans “tend to be conservative.”

”What I mean by that is if you're estimating the cost of a tax cut or the savings or revenue increases from a tax increase, you tend to overestimate the cost and underestimate the savings,” he explained.

Editor's note: This story has been updated since its initial publication to include a comment from the White House.

(The Center Square) – U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Arizona, is suing Secretary of War Pete Hegseth over his effort to reduce Kelly’s Navy retirement pay following the senator telling service members to disobey illegal orders.

The retired Navy combat pilot announced the suit Monday night. It was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In addition to Hegseth, the defendants are the Department of War, the Department of the Navy and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan.

Kelly, who's also a former astronaut, said the issue is bigger than him and that few things are as important as standing up for the rights of veterans who fought to defend Americans’ freedoms. In a statement, he called freedom of speech, the Constitution’s separation of powers and due process the “bedrock principles of our democracy that has lasted 250 years and will last 250 more as long as patriotic Americans are willing to stand up for our rights.”

“Pete Hegseth is coming after what I earned through my 25 years of military service, in violation of my rights as an American, as a retired veteran, and as a United States Senator whose job is to hold him — and this or any administration — accountable,” Kelly said. “His unconstitutional crusade against me sends a chilling message to every retired member of the military: if you speak out and say something that the President or Secretary of Defense doesn’t like, you will be censured, threatened with demotion, or even prosecuted.”

The Center Square reached out Tuesday morning to the White House, which commented about Kelly.

"Mark Kelly sowed doubt in a clear chain of command, which is reckless, dangerous, and deeply irresponsible for an elected official," White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told The Center Square. "As Secretary Hegseth said, Kelly’s status as a sitting U.S. senator does not exempt him from accountability.”

The Center Square on Tuesday reached out to the Department of War, which replied by email, “We are aware of the litigation. However, as a matter of policy, the Department does not comment on ongoing litigation."

The Center Square also reached out Kelly's press office, but did not receive an immediate response.

Hegseth announced on Jan. 5 that he was issuing a “Secretarial Letter of Censure” to reduce Kelly’s retirement rank. According to media reports, Kelly’s rank would go from captain to commander, with a corresponding reduction in retirement pay from approximately $6,000 a month to about $5,000 a month.

Hegseth said the action is being taken because of Kelly participating, along with five other members of Congress, in a video in November telling service members to disobey illegal orders. Hegseth has called the comments seditious but noted Kelly, as a retired military member, is the only congressional member in the video subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

“Six weeks ago, Senator Mark Kelly — and five other members of Congress — released a reckless and seditious video that was clearly intended to undermine good order and military discipline," Hegseth wrote Jan. 5 on X.

“Captain Kelly’s status as a sitting United States Senator does not exempt him from accountability, and further violations could result in further action,” Hegseth wrote.

"These actions are based on Captain Kelly's public statements from June through December 2025 in which he characterized lawful military operations as illegal and counseled members of the Armed Forces to refuse lawful orders," Hegseth said. "This conduct was seditious in nature and violated Articles 133 and 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, to which Captain Kelly remains subject as a retired officer receiving pay."

Kelly has said his First Amendment rights are being trampled, a point that the lawsuit emphasized.

“The First Amendment forbids the government and its officials from punishing disfavored expression or retaliating against protected speech,” according to Kelly’s lawsuit. “That prohibition applies with particular force to legislators speaking on matters of public policy.”

The lawsuit cites Bond v. Floyd, a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in which justices said the Constitution “requires that legislators be given the widest latitude to express their views on issues of policy.” The suit noted justices ruled “the government may not recharacterize protected speech as supposed incitement in order to punish it.”

“The Secretary’s letter makes clear on its face that he is disciplining Senator Kelly solely for the content and viewpoint of his political speech,” the lawsuit said.

The suit also accuses Hegseth of denying Kelly his due process. And it noted the censure interferes with the legislative branch’s constitutional ability to perform oversight of the executive branch, pointing out Kelly serves on committees that perform oversight. The senator's committees include Armed Services and Intelligence.

(The Center Square) – California Attorney General Rob Bonta, leading a massive multi-state coalition, has expanded a legal challenge against the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education.

The amended complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, adds new allegations targeting the administration’s recent transfer of department functions to other federal agencies. This follows an initial lawsuit filed in March 2025 regarding mass layoffs within the department.

“The Trump Administration is continuing its illegal effort to dismantle the Department of Education until it finally shutters for good. This isn’t about reducing bureaucracy,” Attorney General Bonta said in a statement. “If anything, these changes are only making bureaucracy worse.”

The coalition argues the administration’s actions violate the Constitution's separation of powers.

“Neither the President nor his agencies can undo the many acts of Congress that authorize the Department, dictate its responsibilities, and appropriate funds for it to administer,” the complaint states.

In California alone, the Department of Education provides $7.9 billion in annual federal funding to more than 9,000 public schools.

Administration officials have defended the effort by citing a lack of return on investment, pointing to findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress that show nationwide test scores at historic lows.

Since its conception in 1980, the U.S. Department of Education has spent $3 trillion on education, and the scores have continued to go down, U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon stated.

“We spent that money. Where has it gone? What can we show for it?” McMahon said. “So I think when we return education to the states … teachers, parents, principals working together know where those needs are in their states. There is no one-size-fits-all in education.”

In November 2025, the Department of Education initiated a major reorganization aimed at eventually closing the agency by transferring its core responsibilities to other federal departments. Six offices within the department were transferred to four partner agencies: Health and Human Services, Labor, Interior and State.

Bonta leads the lawsuit with New York Attorney General Letitia James, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell and Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez. They are joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.

The Center Square reached out to California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office for comment, but the office declined to comment.

(The Center Square) – Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs is making affordability her top priority this year.

The Democratic governor made the announcement Monday afternoon in her State of the State address before a joint session of the Legislature.

She noted Arizona has created tens of thousands of jobs and increased tax home pay for workers, as well as lowered the cost of child care, prescription drugs and housing to support working families and businesses.

But, Hobbs said, more needs to be done.

“Affordability isn’t a joke or some hoax,” the governor told senators and House members at the Capitol in Phoenix. “It is a real and consequential challenge that families across Arizona must grapple with every day.”

One way Hobbs thinks issues can be resolved is through tax relief for the middle class. She also called for billionaires to pay more taxes.

“If you think billionaires and big corporations should get a tax break before hard-working families, then you need to spend more time with real Arizonans who are struggling to get by,” said Hobbs.

The governor said she can relate to the struggles that parents and families experience today. Hobbs spoke of working multiple jobs to feed her children and put a roof over their heads. She explained it was these experiences that helped her understand “how it feels to work hard every day only to come up short on the bills” at the end of the month.

On the environmental front, Hobbs criticized the federal government’s “incomprehensible decision” to deny Arizona’s emergency funding request to help the Globe and Miami communities that suffered devastating floods in 2025.

“Families have had their lives shaken and their livelihoods destroyed,” said Hobbs. “I hope elected officials on both sides of this chamber and in Congress join me in calling on FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] to right this wrong and reverse their callous decision to deny our communities emergency assistance.”

Meanwhile, Hobbs wants data centers to “pay their fair share” for the water they use. Hobbs said it is time to make the booming data center industry work for the people of Arizona, not the other way around.

When it comes to border security, Hobbs said her administration is helping protect Arizonans.

She appeared to refer to the efforts by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in various cities. "While the federal government uses law enforcement resources to score political points in cities thousands of miles from the southern border, Arizona is laser-focused on securing the border, getting drugs off the streets and cracking down on criminals poisoning our neighborhoods and our children.”

The effort has not been cheap, and Hobbs said Arizona should be reimbursed.

“We have consistently picked up the slack for the federal government, racking up a tab of over $700 million in border security expenses over the last five years,” said Hobbs. “I made it clear to both the Biden and Trump administrations that we expect to be paid back.”

Hobbs later called for better oversight of Arizona’s Education Savings Account program. Hobbs said it is time for the state to tackle the “waste, fraud and abuse” to ensure taxpayer dollars are going toward what she called true educational purposes.

“While other government entitlements have strict requirements and oversight, the ESA program continues to operate unchecked, squandering taxpayer dollars with no accountability,” said Hobbs. “It seems like every day we learn about new shopping sprees happening at the expense of taxpayers, diamond jewelry, high-end clothing and furniture.”

Hobbs admitted that not everyone in the room would agree with her on issues, but she said that Arizonans are counting on them to deliver. She said it's time to get to work.

After her address, Senate President Pro Tem T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, appeared in a video saying that families are hurting today because of the Hobbs administration. Shope said Republicans are working to make things better.

“Senate Republicans are focused on lowering costs, protecting parental rights, strengthening public safety, and keeping Arizona free, competitive and affordable,” Shope said in the video emailed to The Center Square and other media.

Senate Majority Leader John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, also appeared in the video. Standing next to Shope, Kavanagh said things have not gone well during the governor’s time in office.

“Costs are higher, trust is lower, and too many problems remain unresolved,” said Kavanagh.

The Republican Governors Association also issued a statement saying that Hobbs proved she has no solutions to the problems Arizonans are facing today.

“Hobbs has turned a budget surplus into a budget deficit, while giving her friends and donors sweetheart deals totaling hundreds of thousands in taxpayer dollars,” said RGA Deputy Communications Director Kollin Crompton. “Arizonans deserve better leadership, and in 2026, they will hold her accountable.”

The general election is scheduled for Nov. 3. Three Republicans - U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert; Karrin Taylor Robson and U.S. Rep. David Schweikert, R-Scottsdale - are running for governor in the Aug. 4 primary. The winner will face Hobbs, who isn't facing any Democratic opponents, in the general election.

Seated behind Hobbs during her address were Assembly Speaker Steve Montenegro, R-Surprise, and Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert. Previously, Petersen told The Center Square that affordability tops legislative priorities for the Republican majority.

(The Center Square) - Arizona state Senate Republicans will focus on affordability for families this legislative session, according to Senate President Warren Petersen.

The Arizona Legislature is beginning an anticipated 100-day legislative session. The session will start Monday afternoon with opening ceremonies in the Senate and House and Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs' State of the State address, which will be covered by The Center Square.

Besides affordability, Senate Republicans will also prioritize “public safety in our communities, and a fiscally responsible budget that protects taxpayers while keeping Arizona competitive and free,” Petersen, R-Gilbert, told The Center Square.

He added that Senate Republicans are still “in the process of drafting bill language.”

“Look for legislation supporting our men and women in public safety, efforts to make our elections more efficient and secure, bills to shrink government and tackle fraud,” he said, answering The Center Square's questions by email.

“We’re also sending measures to the ballot allowing voters to decide on banning photo radar and [whether to prevent] biological males from using women’s restrooms and locker rooms,” the Senate president noted.

Last week, Senate and House Republicans introduced a tax plan estimated to save Arizonans $1.1 billion over the next three years.

Petersen told The Center Square that this tax plan advances “one of the largest tax cuts in state history to complement President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill – helping our citizens keep more of their hard-earned paychecks.”

Regarding spending, Arizona’s general fund has increased 44% from fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2025, according to Common Sense Institute Arizona. The general fund went from $32.8 billion to $66.2 billion.

Petersen noted Senate Republicans will be taking a “careful look at spending growth, prioritizing core responsibilities of government and pushing back on unnecessary government expansion so taxpayer dollars are used responsibly and transparently.”

The Senate president added that Republicans in the Senate and House “are aligned” on “protecting taxpayers, strengthening public safety, protecting individual rights and keeping Arizona competitive.”

“We will continue working closely to advance those shared priorities,” he said.

Last year, Arizona passed its fiscal year 2026 budget of $17.6 billion days before a state government shutdown. Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed two of the state House’s budget proposals before she signed the state Senate’s budget proposal.

To avoid last-minute budget negotiations, Petersen said budget discussions are “starting earlier” this year. These discussions will have “clear expectations” and be “disciplined to “avoid the uncertainty and last-minute brinkmanship that we saw last year,” Petersen noted.

“The speaker [Steve Montenegro, R-Surprise] strengthened the House leadership team with some key staff appointments back in November, so I’m confident the budget process will be smoother,” he added.

(The Center Square) - Voters from 36 states across the country will return to the polls to elect their next governors in 2026.

Several governors races are expected to see fierce competition between parties as they battle for control of their states. In other states, like California, primary challenges are likely to determine who will be elected to state leadership.

Out of 36 governors races in 2026, the Cook Political Report ranks five as “toss ups” where “either party has a good chance of winning.”

Here are those races.

Arizona

Incumbent Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs is seeking reelection in a race that appears to be hotly contested.

Karrin Robson, a former candidate for Arizona governor, and Arizona U.S. Reps. Andy Biggs and David Schweikert will face off in a three-way primary election for the Republican nomination. Both Biggs and Robson received endorsements from President Donald Trump in the race for governor.

Robson has run on implementing principles of Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency to reduce government spending in Arizona.

“While Katie Hobbs misplaces hundreds of millions of taxpayer funds and grows the government, Karrin will shrink it,” Robson’s website reads. “She will streamline operations, prioritize responsible spending, and hold every agency accountable.”

Biggs has focused on border security throughout his campaign so far, with a focus on implementing Trump’s immigration agenda.

Hobbs has made affordability a focus of her campaign, touting her record over the past four years of reducing budget deficits in the state and providing tax cuts to middle class families. She also highlighted her work to order National Guard troops to the southern border.

Arizona’s primary election to determine who Hobbs will face off against in the general election is set for Aug. 4.

Michigan

Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is term-limited and a crowded group looks to succeed her.

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrest, are looking to win the Democratic nomination for the Great Lakes State. They are joined by Democrats Marni Sawicki, former mayor of Cape Coral, Fla., and Chris Swanson, sheriff of Genesee County.

U.S. Rep. John James, former Michigan attorney general Mike Cox and Tom Leonard, former speaker of the Michigan House of Representatives, are vying for the Republican nomination to be Michigan’s governor.

Benson, seen as a frontrunner for the Democratic nomination according to recent polling data, has focused her campaign on highlighting past achievements as the secretary of state. She has highlighted past achievements in voter security, reducing government bureaucracy, and reducing costs.

“As Secretary of State, Jocelyn has overseen the highest turnout, most secure elections in Michigan’s history by making it easier to vote and harder to cheat,” Benson’s campaign website reads.

As frontrunner for the Republican nomination, James has focused his campaign on lowering taxes and healthcare expenses.

“John will audit wasteful DEI programs, eliminate foreign influence in our institutions, and rebuild trust in government,” James’ website reads.

Michigan will hold its primary election on Aug. 4.

Wisconsin

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers announced in July he is retiring from politics. Evers’ retirement has left a field open for others hoping to fill his post.

Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, former lieutenant Gov. Mandela Barnes, state Rep. Francesca Hong and Milwaukee County executive David Crowley are among a crowded field seeking the Democratic nomination.

In a less crowded race, Republicans in Wisconsin are looking to take back the governor’s mansion as U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, Washington County executive Josh Schoemann and Andy Manske have declared campaigns for candidacy.

Barnes has highlighted past issues from his campaign that he plans to focus on as governor. He focused on using public funding to lower energy costs in the state and expanded voting opportunities.

As Republicans look to retake the Wisconsin governorship, frontrunner Tiffany has touted his past legislative experience and pushed for an end to sanctuary jurisdiction laws in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin will hold its partisan primary elections on Aug. 11.

Georgia

Term-limited Gov. Brian Kemp will end his two-term run as the governor of Georgia and hand the reins off to another candidate in the Peach State.

On the federal level, Georgia is considered a swing state with two Democratic U.S. senators and the state’s preferring Joe Biden in 2020 but Trump in 2024. However, on the state level, Republicans have consistently had the advantage.

Several members of Kemp’s cabinet have declared their candidacy for the seat. Attorney General Chris Carr, Lt. Gov. Burt Jones and Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger are each vying for the Republican nomination.

President Donald Trump offered Jones his “Complete and Total Endorsement” for governor in August 2025, giving a boost to the lieutenant governor’s bid.

“We’re fighting for election integrity, lower taxes, and to secure Georgia values,” Jones wrote in a post on social media.

Democrats in Georgia are hopeful to capitalize on their wins in the U.S. Senate by flipping the governor’s mansion.

Former Republican Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, former mayor of Atlanta Keisha Lance Bottoms and Mike Thurmond have all declared candidacy for the Democratic governor nomination.

Lance Bottoms has focused on expanding Medicaid as a key component of her campaign for governor.

“Keisha will work to eliminate income taxes for teachers, crack down on corporate landlords that are buying up houses and making it harder for families to buy a home or afford rent, and she will invest in education so our children have better pathways to success through career training or college,” Lance Bottom’s website reads.

Georgia’s primary election is set for May 19.

Nevada

Incumbent Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo is running for a second term in Nevada. With less competition compared to other battleground states, Attorney General Aaron Ford looks to be the Democrat poised to take on Lombardo.

In 2024, Trump won Nevada as the first Republican president to do so since 2004.

Ford has received endorsements from both Democrat U.S. Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen in his bid for governor.

Trump has endorsed Lombardo is his reelection campaign.

"As governor, he is fighting tirelessly to Grow the Economy, Cut Taxes and Regulations, Ensure NO TAX ON TIPS, Advance MADE IN THE U.S.A., Unleash American Energy DOMINANCE," Trump wrote on social media. "Joe Lombardo is SMART, STRONG, AND TOUGH."

(The Center Square) – A federal court is allowing a lawsuit to move forward for an Arizona woman who says she was denied her freedom of speech at a city council meeeting.

Rebekah Massie was arrested in front of her 10-year-old daughter on Aug. 20, 2024, during a council meeting in Surprise, Arizona, where Massie resides. This was after the meeting was opened for public comments, and Massie raised questions about a government lawyer’s proposed pay raise.

The events were recorded on camera. The Center Square saw the city government's video of the meeting.

Approximately 2 minutes and 37 seconds into Massie’s comments, then-Mayor Skip Hall said he had to interrupt her to say that it is policy that “oral communications during the city council meeting may not be used to lodge charges or complaints against any employee of the city.”

Massie called that unconstitutional. Hall did not agree.

For the next two minutes, Massie and Hall debated the constitutionality of the policy until Hall called for law enforcement. When an officer approached Massie and whispered, "I need you to step out with me," Massie refused and said she was not leaving. She was later seen and heard yelling, “Do not put your hands on me.” Shortly thereafter, Massie and the law enforcement officer walk off camera with Massie yelling, “Let go of me!”

Another video from the city government, from an angle closer to Massie, shows her and the officer both raising their voices and Massie lying on the ground.

“Let go of me!” said Massie. “You cannot detain me for expressing my First Amendment rights.”

The officer, meanwhile, is telling her to “stop resisting.”

Attorney Conor Fitzpatrick of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, the law firm representing Massie, is glad to see the case moving forward.

Fitzpatrick called the treatment of the woman a violation of the First and Fourth Amendment as well as the Arizona Open Meeting Act.

“Not only did the court allow the Arizona Open Meeting law claims to go forward, the city did not even try to dismiss the constitutional claims,” Fitzpatrick told The Center Square. “She went to her city council meeting intending to speak at a portion of the meeting that is set aside for folks like her to make their views known. And she raised a concern about a proposed pay increase for the city attorney that she thought was disproportionate to what other municipalities were paying their city attorney.”

For that, Fitzpatrick said Massie “ended up in handcuffs, being thrown to the ground, escorted in cuffs out of the city council hall, and being detained” for two hours.

“All because she decided to criticize the mayor and her city,” said Fitzpatrick.

The Center Square reached out to the Surprise mayor's office and the Surprise Police Department for comment, but did not get a response from either.

The next phase of Massie's lawsuit involves what is known as discovery. That is where each side will have the opportunity to request documents from the other and will conduct depositions of various individuals.

From there, Fitzpatrick said both sides will likely file motions for summary judgment, which is where both sides will ask the court to rule in their favor.

Depending on what happens with those motions, the next step would be a jury trial.

“Everyone should care about a case like this,” said Fitzpatrick. “Our ability to go to our own city’s meeting is protected by the First Amendment, and when those rights are violated, whether it’s in Surprise or anywhere else, there has to be consequences. And if there are not consequences, then other cities will feel free to do the same thing, and that puts everyone’s constitutional rights in jeopardy.”

(The Center Square) - A new Arizona bill seeks to force priests and pastors to break their seal of confession if they learn about a case of child abuse.

State House Minority Whip Stacey Travers, D-Gilbert, pre-filed House Bill 2039 last month. The new legislative session starts Monday.

Under the legislation, priests and pastors would be forced to report child abuse if they have a reasonable suspicion “to believe that the abuse is ongoing, will continue or may be a threat to other minors.”

HB 2039 would also require priests or pastors to testify about confessions in court about child abuse cases.

If clergy fails to report an incident of child abuse heard in confession, they could be charged with a Class 1 misdemeanor, which could land them in jail for up to six months.

Priests and pastors could also be charged with a Class 6 felony if they failed to report a reportable offense. If convicted, they could face up to two years in prison.

Travers told The Center Square she introduced this bill to “create some guardrails and protections for children that had been associated with any clergy.”

“There needs to be something to protect children - if you know who the abuser is and you understand there to be multiple instances of that abuse," she said. "In my mind, the welfare of the child should always take precedence.”

According to a current Arizona law, priests and pastors are mandatory reporters of child abuse if they learn about it outside of the confessional setting.

Arizona Catholic leaders oppose the bill, Travers said.

The legislator said she thinks many of these “religious institutions are more concerned about their liability than they are about the faithfulness of the search for absolution.”

She accused the Catholic Church of trying to hide “behind the sanctity of the confessional.”

According to Catholic Canon Law, priests are not allowed to disclose anything they hear in confessions. If they do, they can be excommunicated.

The Center Square contacted the Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops for comment, but did not receive a response before press time.

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Tucson told The Center Square that it was unable to comment because it is in a “transition” stage with a new bishop.

Besides Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, certain Protestant churches and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also recognize some type of seal of confession.

Regarding concerns about protecting religious freedoms, Travers said nothing should hinder protections of children.

Even though she introduced the bill, Travers told The Center Square that she doesn’t think it will be heard by the Legislature. She said she has introduced the bill previously, but didn't get a hearing.

Travers said this bill was first introduced in 2019 by former state Sen. Victoria Steele, D-Tucson.

Like Travers, Jeanne Casteen, the executive director of Secular AZ, a nonprofit that advocates for the separation of church and state, told The Center Square she didn’t think this bill would get a hearing.

Casteen said fewer than 1% of bills proposed by Democrats are heard in the Republican-controlled Arizona Legislature.

The executive director said she did not perceive why the sacrament of confession needs to be protected at the expense of children. “I don’t understand why that sacrament is more important than [the] protection of children."

Dianne Post, Secular AZ’s legal director, said the nonprofit supports the bill and believes it is not unconstitutional.

Post, a lawyer, said other professions, such as attorneys and psychologists, have confidentiality rules like those of priests and pastors, but there is a difference between them.

Lawyers have to report someone who is “going to do a future crime,” and psychologists need to report someone if there’s “reasonable suspicion” a person “is going to commit a crime in the future and harm someone else,” Post noted.

She told The Center Square the same rules should apply to religions.

In the past, other states have attempted to break the seal of confession. Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson, who is Catholic, signed a bill into law in May 2025 that would force priests and pastors to break the seal of confession to report child abuse.

Catholic leaders in Washington state sued a month later over the law after Ferguson signed Senate Bill 5375. The Department of Justice also intervened in the lawsuit.

In July, a federal judge ultimately blocked this new law from taking effect. Attorney General Nick Brown, three months later, came to an agreement with the Catholic Church in Washington state to protect the seal of confession.

(The Center Square) - Republicans will introduce a state tax plan next week that's estimated to save Arizona taxpayers $1.1 billion over the next three years.

The plan is designed to align with federal tax reforms made under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, told The Center Square that the $1.1 billion estimate “reflects nonpartisan fiscal projections based on conforming Arizona’s tax code to recent federal tax reforms and maintaining key provisions that lower taxable income for individuals and families.”

The tax plan’s “largest benefits will go to working and middle-income families, particularly those with children, as well as seniors on fixed incomes and small businesses," Petersen said.

The plan will not give “special carve-outs,” but rather provide “broad-based relief” for Arizonans, he said, answering The Center Square's questions by email.

Petersen added that having Arizona’s tax code align with the federal government’s tax code “prevents higher state tax bills caused by federal-state mismatches and keeps Arizona competitive with states like Texas, Nevada and Utah.”

“By conforming to federal reforms, Arizona reduces compliance costs for families and small businesses, provides certainty during tax season, encourages job growth and investment and keeps Arizona affordable for workers and retirees,” he said.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler, and House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Justin Olson, R-Apache Junction, will introduce the bills proposing the tax plan: Senate Bill 1106 and House Bill 2153. The legislative session starts Monday.

To align with changes made at the federal level, the state Republicans' tax plan will remove taxes on tips and overtime pay.

The plan also allows child and dependent care expenses to be subtracted from taxable income.

And the plan lets residents make deductions, based on the federal changes, on income dating back to the start of 2025.

The plan also will allow Arizonans 60 or older to subtract up to $6,000 from their taxable income if the money comes from a pension or a retirement account. This means these individuals can have up to $6,000 in tax-free income in the state.

If a person over 60 is single and earns more than $75,000, the $6,000 retirement threshold is reduced by 6% of their income.

To illustrate, if someone earned $85,000 in income, the person’s reduction threshold would be determined by taking 6% of $10,000 ($600) and subtracting it from $6,000. Thus, this individual’s retirement reduction threshold would be $5,400.

Married people in this age group will see their retirement threshold decrease by the same percentage if they earn over $150,000.

According to Petersen, the difference between Arizona’s tax plan and the federal plan is that “the federal deduction was intended to relieve the tax burden for those receiving Social Security.”

“Arizona does not, and has not, taxed Social Security for a long time,” he noted.

Another deduction allowed under the tax plan would be for up to $6,000 in Roth IRA contributions. This means that if a person contributes $6,000 to a Roth IRA, then Arizona will not tax that income. For married couples who file jointly, the limit is $12,000.

To illustrate, if a person who earns $70,000 contributes $6,000 to their Roth IRA, Arizona would tax the individual at an income of $64,000.

This rule change retroactively takes effect at the start of the 2025 tax year.

The tax plan says that if a person also uses a Roth IRA and retirement distribution, the combined total can’t exceed $6,000.

To help families, the Republican tax plan provides credits that parents can deduct from their Arizona state income tax. The tax credit for a child under 17 would increase from $100 to $125.

This means a family can deduct $125 from their state income tax per each child under 17.

For example, if a family has four kids under 17 and would normally owe Arizona $1,000 for income tax, it can subtract $600 and pay only $400.

“Middle-income and working families will benefit the most, as the credit is available for taxpayers with incomes up to $200,000 for single filers or $400,000 for married filers,” Petersen said.

The tax plan also calls for Arizona to match its standard deduction to the federal one. This means whenever the federal government changes its standard deduction, Arizona’s will always match it.

The Internal Revenue Service says the standard deduction is a “specific dollar amount that reduces the amount of income on which” a person is taxed.

The federal standard deduction for the 2026 tax year is $16,100 and $31,500 for married couples who file jointly.

If the Arizona Legislature passes the Republicans’ tax plan, Petersen said he is optimistic Democratic Gov. Hobbs will “do the right thing by signing the bill when it hits her desk.”

“If not, we will cross that bridge when we get there,” he said.

Republicans hold majorities in both houses, but lack enough seats to override Hobbs' vetoes. The governor, though, has supported tax reforms.

In November 2025, Hobbs signed an executive order that implemented some of the reforms enacted under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including no tax on tips or overtime. Furthermore, she created a deduction for Arizonans 65 and older and increased the standard deduction from $15,000 to $15,750 for single filers and from $30,000 to $31,750 for joint filers.

This week, the Arizona Department of Revenue issued forms that reflect these changes so people can start filing their 2025 income taxes.

House Speaker Steve Montenegro, R-Surprise, said Hobbs “jumped ahead of the law by issuing state tax guidance this week that assumes legislative action.”

Hobbs' executive order “only deepens confusion,” he said.

“This kind of unilateral overreach undermines the process and leaves families, tax preparers, and businesses stuck in the middle,” Montenegro said. “The Legislature is moving to restore certainty, respect the separation of powers and make sure Arizonans have clear, lawful guidance.”

According to Rep. Olson, the Republicans' tax plan “will enable hardworking Arizonans to keep more of what they earn, so they can more easily provide for the needs of their families.”

(The Center Square) – Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes has announced a major settlement involving groundwater usage.

Speaking Thursday afternoon in Cochise County, Mayes said the deal between Arizona and Riverview LLP will reduce the dairy’s groundwater usage and deliver $11 million for well-drilling, water hauling and groundwater access.

“In 2024, I stood here in this room filled with members of this community and heard countless stories of wells that had gone dry, roads and even houses that were damaged by land subsidence, and fears that without intervention, things would get worse and worse,” the Democratic attorney general told reporters at a community center in Pearce.

Land subsidence is the sinking or collapsing of surface land due to the removal of things such as underground water, oil or gas.

“Longtime residents told me that they were afraid that without intervention, they would not be able to stay in the communities they loved if groundwater supplies continued to be depleted,” said Mayes. “Retirees who had spent their life savings to buy property to live in this quiet and beautiful part of our state worried that their investments were at risk and did not know what they would do if they no longer could access water supplies.”

In the two legislative sessions since that town hall meeting, Mayes said there has been no action by lawmakers to address these concerns. However, the attorney general’s office said it has been busy trying to address the problem with the tools Mayes has available.

“Last year, I sued Fondomonte in La Paz County for their actions that we allege have created a public nuisance for communities in western Arizona, and for the past year and a half, we have been investigating the actions of Riverview here in Cochise County,” said Mayes. “But unlike Fondomonte, Riverview and its owners have engaged with us over the past year to attempt to come to a compromise that will help the residents here near the dairy and surrounding areas.”

The $11 million in funding will be split between two funds to help ensure continued access to potable water for residents. Potable water is safe for humans to drink or use for cooking.

As part of the settlement, Riverview has agreed to fallow 2,000 acres of farmland in the Sulphur Springs Valley to reduce groundwater usage and conserve more water for the future, Mayes said.

“As they fallow the lands, they will have strict reporting requirements to the attorney general’s office,” said Mayes.

(The Center Square) - The Arizona Department of Education’s top priority for the upcoming legislative session is school safety, according to Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne.

The session begins Monday.

The department is requesting legislators approve a $100 million increase in its budget to deploy more police officers in public schools, Horne told The Center Square.

He said he has placed emphasis on assigning police officers to schools as school resource officers since becoming superintendent in 2023.

Over the last three years, the number of SROs in Arizona public schools has increased from 190 to 565, representing a 197% increase.

Even with this increase in SROs, Arizona public schools are expecting additional demand next year, Horne noted.

To cite the importance of SROs in schools, Horne highlighted an instance at Legacy Traditional School in Tucson, where an SRO found Daniel Hollander on the school campus with a gun and a knife. When the SRO found him, he was talking to himself in the school gym with students and staff present, 12 News reported.

Hollander received 1½ years in prison for his actions.

Horne said the request for an additional $100 million may be voted along partisan lines because Democrats think it's better to have health care professionals instead of police officers in schools. Republicans have majorities in both the Arizona Senate and House, but lack enough seats to override vetoes by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs.

The Department of Education funds more health care professionals than police officers, Horne said.When Horne became superintendent, he said he inherited this situation and kept it because he didn't want people to lose their jobs.

The DOE supports House Bill 2142, which was pre-filed by state Rep. Matt Gress, R-Paradise Valley. His bill would create a School Safety Center within the department, the superintendent said.

The bill would mandate the center to recognize “best safety practices for enhancing school safety” as well as provide training in emergency preparedness, threat response and campus safety.

In addition to seeking $100 million for more SROs, the Department of Education will also be requesting $2.2 million for literacy teachers, Horne said.

Horne said the department currently has 34 coaches, but wants to hire another 25.

The superintendent noted these teachers have increased reading proficiency by 12%.

Reading proficiency amongst Arizona K-12 students is “very unsatisfactory,” Horne noted. In 2024, the National Assessment of Educational Progress showed that only 26% of fourth graders in Arizona were proficient at reading.

The Department of Education is working hard to improve reading proficiency, Horne said. He added that Arizona universities need to do a better job at training teachers to teach literacy.

The additional funds for literacy teachers will be a budget request, Horne said.

Another topic the department is attempting to address in the upcoming legislative session is school discipline.

Horne told The Center Square that he is a “great believer” in the idea that “kids can’t learn if they don’t have an orderly classroom.”

If teachers don’t have the support of administrators in imposing discipline, Horne said, it is “a nightmare” for them.

According to Horne, the DOE is backing Senate Bill 1074, which was pre-filed by Senate Majority Leader John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills. This bill requires administrators to provide students who are being disciplined with a written certification that says they have been allowed to return to the classroom and the disciplinary action taken against them.

Senate Bill 1074 mandates students who are disciplined receive this written certification before returning to the classroom.

On top of all this, Horne said he wants to see the Legislature extend Proposition 123, so teachers can get a pay increase.

Arizona approved Proposition 123 in 2016, which allocated $3.5 billion in education funding by increasing the percentage of money K-12 schools got from the state’s public land trust from 2.5% to 6.9%, according to Ballotpedia. The proposition expired in June 2025 after state elected officials failed to reach an agreement on what to do with the program.

Horne previously told The Center Square that teachers' pay in Arizona could increase if the proposition is renewed.

Arizona is losing more teachers than it is attracting to the classroom, the superintendent stated.

The DOE released a survey last year showing Arizona had lost over 1,000 teachers between July 2025 and November 2025.

According to Horne, the two main reasons the state loses teachers are low pay and insufficient support for disciplining students.

“They’re not being rewarded properly for their work,” he said.

(The Center Square) – A community activist is not happy with Banner Health mandating masks at all its facilities in Arizona during a flu surge.

The mandate also applies to Banner Health's facilities in California, Colorado, Nebraska, Nevada and Wyoming.

Banner Health, which is based in Phoenix, did not respond to The Center Square's request for comments. However, the nonprofit health care system did state in a press release that the mandate is “due to a significant surge in seasonal influenza” and is meant to protect patients.

“This measure is necessary because older patients and those with immunodeficiencies are at heightened risk, and these extra precautions will help safeguard our most vulnerable populations,” said Dr. Marjorie Bessel, Banner Health chief clinical officer. “Our top priority is to protect our patients, staff, and the communities we serve by reducing the spread of the virus.”

Arizona activist Lisa Everett first voiced her frustration in an emailed newsletter. She said the problem is that masks are mandatory.

‘It should be a choice,” Everett told The Center Square. “If I’m concerned about my health, I can wear a mask, but I don’t think someone like myself, who is asthmatic, should be required to wear a mask and have breathing problems because I need to go to the doctor for something else.”

Everett added that “the jury is still out” on whether masks work.

“Even the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has stated the simple little masks that they hand out at any doctor’s office desk do not really offer much protection,” Everett said.

Everett recommended people opposed to mask mandates make their voices heard.

Be polite about it, she said, but state your opposition.

“Of course, you’re going to have to comply to be seen, and if you do, please don’t re-wear a mask because that is just breathing in germs from before, and that is going to create health problems,” said Everett. “It’s very sad when I see people shove their mask in their purse or their pocket or whatever and then reuse it over and over again. That’s just not sanitary and safe.”

Banner Health’s mask mandate is in effect until further notice.

“The flu kills tens of thousands of people each year,” Dr. Bessel said in the Banner Health press release. “Our masking plan will help us protect everyone, especially high-risk groups including those 65 and older, children 2 and under, pregnant women, and people with chronic health conditions such as asthma, diabetes, and heart disease.”

(The Center Square) - New legislation would allow Arizonans to obtain Ivermectin over the counter.

House Bill 2007 would let people get the medication without a prescription or consultation with a health professional.

State Rep Nick Kupper, R-Buckeye, who pre-filed HB 2007 last month, told The Center Square he decided to sponsor this bill after constituents kept asking him about it.

According to WebMD, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of Ivermectin in humans to treat parasitic worm infections. Ivermectin is also used to treat parasitic worms in livestock animals.

Ivermectin is listed on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines.

Kupper said one of the things that pushed him to promote this legislation was an argument when the recreational use of marijuana for adults 21 and older was legalized in 2020. That legalization came when approximately 60% of Arizonans casting ballots approved Proposition 207. An argument for the measure was that people were already using marijuana, so why not regulate it and make it safer?

According to Kupper, the same logic applies to Ivermectin.

The drug is already legally available, but only at a feed store, meaning it is labeled for animal use rather than human use, he told The Center Square.

“If your concern is that people are already going to the feed store and buying the horse version and using it off-label, then doesn’t it make sense to follow the same thought process with marijuana and have a human-labeled version available?” Kupper asked. “If you want to use it and it’s not harming anybody else, why do I, as the government, care?”

“If you’re using Ivermectin and it’s safer than these other things, I shouldn’t care that you’re using it. That should be your decision,” he said.

If the bill is voted on during the legislative session, legislators will most likely vote on it along party lines, Kupper said, but he added not every issue needs to be partisan.

If the bill passes, Kupper said he is “not gonna hold a lot of hope” that Gov. Katie Hobbs would sign it.

Arizona would become the fifth state to allow people to obtain Ivermectin over the counter if HB 2007 became law, joining Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana and Tennessee.

During the upcoming legislative session, Kupper told The Center Square he will focus on bills related to individual liberties.

In November, Kupper pre-filed HB 2005, which prevents doctors and healthcare providers from denying or providing substandard medical care based on a person’s vaccination status.

A month later, the state representative also pre-filed HB 2059, which would create “derestricted speed zones” in some rural regions of Arizona where people operating non-commercial vehicles would not be subject to a daytime speed limit. For these zones to be established, they need to meet safety and infrastructure requirements.

The speed limit would go down to 80 mph 30 minutes before sunrise and 30 minutes after sunset, HB 2059 noted.

(The Center Square) – A new year means new laws, and that is certainly the case for Arizona in 2026.

On Jan. 1, the state’s minimum wage rose to $15.15 an hour. In Tucson, it is now $15.45 an hour. This is due to Tucson Proposition 206, an initiative that voters approved in 2021.

Also happening as of Jan. 1, the business property tax exemption was increased to $500,000, while property tax exemptions expanded to 100% for disabled veterans and their spouses. The individual income tax subtraction for unreimbursed adoption expenses also increased from $3,000 to $5,000 for a single individual or head of household. For a married couple filing a joint return, it is $10,000.

Meanwhile, some laws took effect in the final months of 2025.

“Without lines built into the law specifically, it’s always 90 days after the end of the session,” said Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry CEO Danny Seiden. “For the most part, the end of September is when our laws were in effect.”

One bill the Chamber supported was Senate Bill 1543. Also known as the Axon Bill, the measure allowed a proposed expansion of Axon’s Scottsdale headquarters to continue and prevented a voter referendum from local activists to block the project.

Axon manufactures various products, including tasers, body cameras and digital evidence management.

“They are a public safety company, homebred here in Arizona, and we don’t have a lot of those,” said Seiden.

Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, signed the bill in April 2025.

The Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry also supported legislation (House Bill 2704) that approved public funding for renovations at Chase Field.

The stadium, which is home to Major League Baseball's Arizona Diamondbacks, is public property in Maricopa County.

“After what happened with the Coyotes and Utah, we got to work and passed a law that allows for them to recapture some of the sales tax and other revenue generated from within the stadium district to fund the stadium improvements,” said Seiden. “That’s continuing the public-private partnership going forward, and it was a win-win for everyone.”

The Coyotes were the National Hockey League franchise in Arizona before moving to Utah and changing its name.