Center Square News

This story has been updated since its initial publication.

(The Center Square) - Colorado environmental leaders approved landmark water protections in reaction to a U.S. Supreme Court decision that they believed weakened regulations in Western states.

The bipartisan Water Quality Control Commission convened to pass stream and wetland protections that come as the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency pushes for further federal deregulations.

“These rules create a robust program for protecting Colorado waters – including wildlife habitat, recreation opportunities, the role that waters play in flood mitigation, cleaning water and actually increasing water supplies,” said Joro Walker, senior attorney at Western Resource Advocates. She also represented wildlife hunting and angling groups in the WQCC process.

“All those values that Colorado waters bring to the citizens of the state are essentially being protected by this program,” Walker told The Center Square.

The WQCC meeting comes in the middle of a years-long scramble to address critical threats to the Colorado River’s supply. The river provides water to an estimated 40 million people between Colorado, California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, Mexico and tribal nations. The water is used primarily for agriculture, as well as municipal needs.

The nine-person WQCC summit was organized by a 2024 state law, House Bill 1379, which passed the Colorado Senate unanimously with two excused votes and the House with 80% approval. The bipartisan mandate nearly fell apart after nearly 16 months of meetings and public hearings with industry leaders, water providers, farmers and environmental advocacy groups. Just days before the Dec. 8-10 meeting, industry leaders argued the environmentalists were trying to manipulate the law.

The new water regulations came in reaction to a landmark 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Sackett v. EPA. It found that the 53-year-old Clean Water Act, foundational to water protections across the U.S., only applied to streams with an indefinite lifespan or wetlands that flowed year-round.

The specifically worded rule had huge impacts in Western states, such as Colorado, where most water flows seasonally, largely due to snowmelt.

“That understanding of the Clean Water Act promises to have a significantly profound effect on particularly western states, or let's say states in the interior West, like Nevada,” said Walker.

Under Trump’s second term, the EPA has pushed to dissolve environmental regulations, putting Western water under further pressure. Walker told The Center Square that an estimated 97% of Colorado wetlands and 68% of stream miles will no longer be protected under the updated Clean Water Act.

But Colorado’s new state-level regulations would almost entirely cover what the federal government dropped.

“The Colorado legislature recognized how important it is to protect waters of the state,” Walker said.

Regulation exceptions for waters related to farming and industry, similar to existing regulations before the Sackett decision, will remain.

“By 'protect,' it does not mean that there's no development allowed in these waters,” said Walker.

Despite the threat to states across the interior West, Walker said she was not too confident most states would follow Colorado’s lead.

“Some states won't expand their permitting programs,” said Walker. “Some states don't have the resources or the expertise to do that.”

New Mexico has begun the process to adopt similar state-level water regulations, with rule-making set for summer 2026.

“I hope that other states will follow suit when they recognize just how important this level of regulation is to the interests of its citizenry,” said Walker. “I mean, what kind of economic activity or quality of life can you have without water?”

While sometimes only seasonal, waterways connect. In Colorado, many find their way to the Colorado River.

“One of the things that this Colorado program is helping to secure is that the water that eventually makes its way into the Colorado River will be cleaner,” said Walker. She added later, "Wetlands also improve flows, not just water quality – but also water quantity. Colorado is doing its part to protect the Colorado River with this program.”

The Colorado River, as the region’s main water source, currently faces an historic 25-year drought that threatens many major Western cities. Roughly half of Denver’s water comes from Colorado River tributaries, according to Denver Water.

The drought has been characterized by low river flows – 30% lower than a century ago – and excessive water consumption by the seven states and Mexico that the river runs through.

One month prior to Colorado’s WQCC summit, the seven Colorado River states missed a federal deadline in November to submit a first draft plan for new, reduced water usage guidelines. The federal government has told the Colorado River parties they must now reach a preliminary decision by Feb. 14.

“We will find a way forward; long-term partners always do, but the path ahead may require us to evolve,” said Gene Shawcroft, president of the Colorado River Water Users Association.

Colorado River states met at the annual CRWUA conference this week in Las Vegas to work on the soon-approaching deadline. Again, no decision was made on the Colorado River’s future.

(The Center Square) - A Phoenix jury Thursday sentenced serial killer Cleophus Cooksey Jr. to death for committing six murders over a three-week period in 2017.

Cooksey, 43, was convicted in September of first-degree murder for eight killings in the Phoenix area. The Maricopa County Superior Court jury decided the death penalty would be the punishment in six of the killings, but couldn’t reach a unanimous decision concerning the murders of Cooksey’s mother, Rene Cooksey, and stepfather, Edward Nunn.

Cooksey was found guilty of shooting and killing Parker Smith and Andrew Remillard while they sat in a car. The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said that started a killing spree that culminated in the murders of Cooksey’s mother and stepfather. In addition to Smith, Remillard, Renee Cooksey and Nunn, Cleophus Cooksey was convicted of killing Salim Richards, Latorrie Beckford, Kristopher Cameron and Maria Villanueva.

The murders took place in 2017 between Nov. 27 and Dec. 17 in Phoenix and its suburb, Glendale, Maricopa County Attorney’s Office spokesperson Erin Pellett told The Center Square Friday.

“Anyone who questions why we need the death penalty needs to look no further than this case,” Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell said in a statement. “It takes a special kind of evil to prey upon the vulnerable and needlessly take the lives of eight innocent people. Death is the only just punishment for him, and we will do everything in our power to see it carried through.”

Under Arizona law, Cooksey’s murder convictions are under automatic appeal to the state Supreme Court, Pellett told The Center Square.

No date is currently set for the case to be heard in the court, Richie Taylor, a spokesperson for the Arizona attorney general's office, told The Center Square Friday.

According to Mitchell's office, Cooksey was connected to the murders through evidence tying the crime scenes together. The evidence included DNA, firearms and casings. Cooksey was also found to possess items belonging to the murder victims, the office said, pointing to Cooksey wearing a gold necklace stolen from Richards when he was arrested. The office added that Villanueva's car keys were found in Cooksey's apartment.

In addition to the murders, Cooksey was found guilty of other felonies: two counts of kidnapping, three counts of armed robbery and one count of attempted sexual assault. Cooksey was sentenced to more than nine years in prison for the non-capital charges.

(The Center Square) - Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport and Salt Lake City International Airport rank as the nation's top two airports for smooth travel during the holiday season, a new report says.

Travel by Luxe released a study earlier this month ranking the top 30 airports in America for the easiest holiday travel.

Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport took the No. 1 spot on the list. Salt Lake City was No. 2.

The Phoenix airport has the fastest security wait times of two minutes, according to the report.

Monica Hernandez, a public information officer for the airport, told The Center Square by email that the Phoenix facility maintains “regular, ongoing communication with the Transportation Security Administration [TSA] to help them staff appropriately.”

She added that the airport works with “TSA on technology improvements and line management strategies, including programs like PHX Reserve, which allows passengers to reserve a place in line up to six days ahead of their trip.”

The Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport had the third-lowest cancellation rate among these airports at 0.31% and the fourth-lowest flight delay rate at 18.98%, the report noted.

According to the report, Phoenix’s airport had the 11th-lowest average airplane fare at $379.86.

Last December, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport handled nearly 2.3 million passengers, ranking 20th for volume on the list, the report said.

However, Hernandez told The Center Square that the actual number was 4.7 million passengers last December. For all of 2024, the airport saw 52.3 million passengers, she added.

To deal with the holiday travel occurring this season, the airport staff meets “regularly to review passenger volumes,” which lets the airport “strategically deploy resources where they will have the greatest impact,” the public information officer noted.

“We also work closely with our business partners to identify areas where the airport can support their operations during peak travel periods,” she added.

Going forward, Hernandez said Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport is “to improve existing infrastructure, like the new Terminal 3 North Concourse and crossfield Taxiway Uniform, and to add new capacity, such as a planned west terminal.”

The airport has “identified desired infrastructure improvements, such as adjusting the airport’s roadways to improve traffic flow,” she added.

In April, Arizona’s largest airport announced it was undertaking a $356 million construction project to expand its Terminal 3, The Center Square reported. Hernandez said the construction for the project is 15% complete.

For Salt Lake International Airport, the report found it had the lowest delay time of any airport at 17.15% and the lowest cancellation rate at 0.25%.

Heidi Harward, the airport’s operations manager, told The Center Square in a phone interview that “good planning, coordination and communication” between the airport’s airline partners helps “mitigate issues before they arise.”

Harward added that the airport also works closely with the Transportation Security Administration to communicate during peak travel times.

In the report, Salt Lake International Airport had a security wait time of 14 minutes, ranking 13th in that category.

The airport is streamlining security processing by coordinating with the TSA to ensure they have sufficient staffing,” Harward said.

The airport uses family lanes, which allow big families to enter a dedicated lane to get through security, Harward noted, adding that this makes the process smoother for those families and other travelers.

The airport is part of a new pre-check program called Touchless Identification Solution, Harward said.

This program allows people to be processed quickly by using facial recognition technology instead of having to pull out their identification and boarding pass, she explained.

Harward said the airport has one of these machines, but it plans to eventually get another one.

According to the report, the airport handled 1.1 million passengers and had average fares of $453.66, ranking 27th.

To accommodate more travelers and workers, the airport is building a new parking lot, Harward noted.

Besides Salt Lake City and Phoenix, others that rounded out the report's top five were Washington Dulles International Airport, Tampa International Airport and Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas.

This story has been updated since its initial publication.

(The Center Square) - Americans support stricter criminal measures and homelessness reform, according to a new poll by The Cicero Institute.

The overwhelming support for reforms transcend party and demographic lines, according to Stefani Buhajla, the Austin, Texas-based think tank’s senior director of communications.

“Folks want accountability. They’re tired of feeling unsafe,” Buhajla told The Center Square this week. “They see crime as increasing, and they want their states to do something about it.”

According to the poll, 75% of respondents said violent crime in America is “increasing/staying about the same.”

Buhajla noted 82% of respondents supported life in prison or the death penalty for people convicted of “aggravated murder, even if they have a mental illness.”

They think dangerous individuals “should be removed from the public so they can’t cause harm anymore,” she said.

The poll also found 61% of respondents supported having habitual criminals with a history of mental illness get court-ordered treatment and stabilization.

“People are worried that it could be their child, wife, or loved one [who is] next. They want assurances that the criminal justice system is going to do its job [and] they’re going to put these criminals away,” she said.

According to Buhajla, America’s justice system has been “letting the American people down for a long time.”

In Phoenix, violent crime from Jan. 1 to June 30 compared to the same time last year has seen slight decreases in homicide, rape, robbery and aggravated assault incidents, according to Major Cities Chiefs Association.

The association’s survey also found this trend occurring across 68 cities in America.

Regarding homelessness, the Cicero Institute poll found 64% of respondents said homeless people should be mandated to go to addiction and mental health treatment and job programs as part of them getting taxpayer-funded housing.

Research has shown that a large portion of “chronically homeless individuals” have mental health issues, Buhajla said.

Sixty-four percent of respondents also opposed allowing homeless people to camp on public property.

Furthermore, 75% of respondents said they backed the idea of creating temporary camping areas away from residential and business areas that contain water, sanitation and police services.

“Voters are interested in compassionate solutions when it comes to general homelessness. People in communities really do want solutions that help these people get their lives back together,” Buhajla stated.

The Cicero Institute’s poll gathered responses from 2,102 likely voters from Sept. 20-25. The poll's margin of error is plus or minus 2.18%.

(The Center Square) - The Phoenix metro area has the 43rd largest economy in the world, according to a new report.

The report by Common Sense Institute Arizona found that the city's economy is $398 billion, ranking it behind Romania and Hong Kong. The Phoenix metro area’s economy is bigger than Chile’s, the Czech Republic’s and Egypt’s, the report said.

The Phoenix area has grown “very quickly” over the last 10 years, said Glenn Farley, the CSI’s director of policy and research.

He added that the city, in terms of economic output, has gone from a “below-average income jurisdiction” to a “high-income jurisdiction.”

Many people started moving to Phoenix in the 1990s and early 2000s, Farley told The Center Square.

Phoenix’s population did not grow “particularly fast” until 2015, when Phoenix started to attract a lot of people moving to the city, he said.

Farley said Phoenix’s consumer spending base has increased 64% since the pandemic, more than double the average for a major metropolitan area, which is 27%.

The report found that the city’s retail base is America’s 10th largest, with nearly $164 billion in sales, up from 34th place in 1970.

The two fastest growing components of the Phoenix metro area since the pandemic, according to Farley, are its consumer spending and housing prices.

However, as housing in Phoenix has become less affordable and more constrained, the city risks losing momentum in its economic growth, Farley told The Center Square.

As of September, the report stated that Zillow found a typical Phoenix home value of $447,000, ranking Phoenix as the “104th most expensive typical home price in the country.”

CSI’s report noted Phoenix has “been able to keep housing prices relatively reasonable compared to other metro areas,” which is a “positive sign for the future” of the city.

According to Farley, housing plays an important role in determining whether Phoenix can expand its consumer base. He added that “affordable housing” is required to “sustain flows” of people moving to the area.

Farley said over the last five years, housing prices in Phoenix have increased. These “runaway housing prices” risk outpacing the city’s economic growth and ability to “absorb those with higher incomes,” he stated.

If home prices don’t come down or incomes keep increasing, people may stop moving to the area, Farley noted, adding that this would slow the growth rates Phoenix has seen over the last 10 years.

Arizona does many things well, such as having a competitive tax structure and business-friendly regulations, but the state struggles to build housing “quickly and cheaply,” Farley said.

A reason Arizona struggles with this, he stated, is regulatory barriers at the city level.

The evidence of the last five years suggests that if Arizona cities are “left to do their own thing,” it is “unlikely they’ll be able to permit enough housing or cheap enough housing to solve this problem on their own,” Farley stated.

CSI released a report earlier this year showing Arizona will never be able to close its housing deficit, The Center Square reported. The report found that Arizona faced a housing deficit of 56,047 units in the first quarter of fiscal year 2025.

(The Center Square) – Pima County removed a controversial ordinance affecting a copper mine from a Board of Supervisors meeting.

And one law firm hopes the whole thing does not come back for debate.

At issue was a proposed ordinance to limit the number of heavy-duty trucks on county roads to 75 trips per day. The same proposal would also require a permit “for all persons, firms or entities driving or causing heavy-duty trucks to be driven, among other changes.”

Reasons for the proposal included efforts to improve air quality, but the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute has warned that such an ordinance would substantially impair the copper mine that operates in the county.

“Counties don’t have legal authority to act unless there’s a state law that permits them that authority,” Goldwater Institute attorney Jon Riches told The Center Square. “Here, there is no state law that says the county has the legal authority to impose this limitation on heavy-duty trucks.”

Riches added that the mine is “a crucially important economic engine for Pima County." He added that the county is trying to do indirectly what it can’t do directly to impair one of the largest economic drivers in Southern Arizona.

“So I think everyone should be concerned about both the improper way in which the county is acting and the consequences of imposing this arbitrary trip limit," he said.

Goldwater shared these concerns with the Pima County Board of Supervisors in a Dec. 12 letter. Much like Riches did with The Center Square, Goldwater attorney Adam Shelton expressed to the board his “serious concern with the legality of these changes.” Shelton added that, if adopted, these provisions would exceed the board’s statutory authority and create legal vulnerabilities for the county.

Goldwater attorneys did not receive a response to the letter.

When The Center Square reached out to the Pima County Board of Supervisors for comment, it was told “the Board removed the item from the agenda” at Tuesday’s meeting.

On Wednesday, a member of Pima County’s Communications Office told The Center Square that the county considered creating an ordinance to regulate heavy truck traffic on unpaved roads.

“The board delayed action on the item to obtain further feedback from the County Attorney’s Office,” said the Pima County Communications Office. “The Board met in executive session yesterday (Tuesday) and, after that session, pulled the item from the agenda, so the issue is moot.”

As to why supervisors pulled it, The Center Square was told that it is tied up in the executive session, “which statute prevents anyone from speaking about what was discussed.”

(The Center Square) – Wisconsin-based Menards has agreed to pay a combined $4.25 million to settle a lawsuit from 10 states related to deceptive marketing for its 11% rebate.

The states attorneys argued that the Eau Claire retailer misled consumers in some cases that the 11% rebate would be a discount that customers would receive at checkout instead of a rebate that needed to be mailed in and returned for a later store credit.

The company agreed to make payments to Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa, Arizona, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio and South Dakota.

“Figuring out how much you’ll have to pay to buy something should be straightforward,” Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul said in a statement. “It shouldn’t be an adventure.”

Menards also agreed to several terms, including allowing one year for customers to return rebate forms and investigating how to create an option for consumers to safely and securely submit rebates online instead of mailing in the forms and receipts.

“Menards’ deceptive marketing left many customers believing they were getting a discount, when, in fact, the store was only offering an in-store credit for future purchases,” Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul said in a statement. “Customers deserve to know what they will be charged when they make a purchase, without deceptive deals and fine print. I’m pleased that this settlement requires Menards to end these practices, and I will continue to work to ensure Illinois consumers are treated fairly.”

Menards agreed to pay Wisconsin $450,000 and Illinois nearly $947,000, Iowa nearly $447,000 while each of the 10 states will receive payments.

(The Center Square) – Fifteen state treasurers, auditors and comptrollers are urging President Donald Trump to revise a Biden-era proposed rule they say would disrupt financial markets while financially benefiting Bloomberg L.P., primarily owned by Democratic megadonor Michael Bloomberg.

In a letter dated Dec. 3, the state financial officers asked Trump to direct federal agencies to remove the Financial Instrument Global Identifier, known as FIGI, from a proposed rule issued under the Financial Data Transparency Act.

The rule, proposed in August 2024, has not yet been finalized. It would require market participants to use FIGI as the exclusive identifier for financial instruments. Bloomberg L.P. created FIGI, and it remains closely tied to the company.

Financial instrument identifiers are standardized codes used to identify securities and other financial products, letting transactions be processed and settled efficiently across markets.

In the letter, the state officials said the proposed rule would upend the current system. The lawmakers also said it would create unnecessary costs and confusion for market participants.

“The agencies overstepped the bounds of the Financial Data Transparency Act by issuing such an extreme and disruptive proposal despite the law requiring no such selection of an identifier,” the letter says.

The officials noted that the Committee on Uniform Securities Identification Procedures, known as CUSIP, has long been used to identify instruments like municipal securities. They warned that forcing a transition to FIGI could hurt market efficiency and increase the risk of errors.

The letter also expressed worries about Bloomberg L.P.’s influence in the financial services industry and the benefits the company could receive if the government mandates that companies use FIGI.

“All of this raises serious questions about how this rule could further empower Bloomberg L.P., a private company that already maintains extraordinary influence over the financial services industry,” the letter says.

The officials pointed to the timing of political contributions made by Michael Bloomberg, who contributed nearly $20 million to support President Joe Biden’s reelection effort in June 2024. The Biden administration proposed the rule selecting FIGI about two months later.

The letter cited public reporting that described Bloomberg L.P. as deeply embedded in the financial industry. The elected officials warned that the proposed rule could further strengthen the company’s data dominance.

O.J. Oleka, CEO of the State Financial Officers Foundation, said the proposal raises many concerns.

“This proposed rule raised red flags from the very beginning,” Oleka said. “The financial officers behind this letter are absolutely right to refuse to let it stand. It was clearly written with the wishes of a partisan mega-donor, not the health of our financial system, in mind.”

Oleka said he hopes the Trump administration will put a stop to it.

“I hope and trust that President Trump will take necessary action to protect our markets and the prosperity of everyday Americans,” he said.

The signers of the letter include financial officers from Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming.

The officials asked the administration to remove FIGI from the final rule and allow continued use of existing identifiers.

It remains unclear when federal agencies plan on finalizing the rule.

(The Center Square) - Arizona’s economy has been experiencing slow but positive growth, according to Zachary Milne, a senior economist at Common Sense Institute Arizona.

CSI released a report last week detailing the state's economic outlook for September.

The nonpartisan research organization's report said Arizona’s unemployment rate increased from 4.1% to 4.2%, tying it for America’s 34th-lowest rate with New York. The No. 1 lowest rate in the nation is in South Dakota. At the bottom of the list with the worst jobless rates are California at No. 50 and Washington, D.C., as No. 51.

From August to September, Arizona added only 2,200 jobs, which ranked 21st nationally, the report stated.

Just like in Arizona, employment growth nationwide has slowed, Milne told The Center Square. The economist described America’s economy as “uneasy.”

The sectors that saw the most significant job growth in Arizona were professional and business services, which added 2,000 jobs from August to September.

Arizona’s manufacturing sector lost 200 jobs in September, the report stated.

The report found Arizona has gained 32,600 jobs, representing 1.01% year-over-year economic growth. This ranked higher than the national average of 0.83%.

Arizona’s “economic footing” is in “the middle of the pack” in America, Milne said.

Arizona’s economic growth is “underperforming” compared to where it was a couple of years ago, the economist stated. Furthermore, the state’s economic growth is not as high as it was before the COVID-19 pandemic, he added.

Over the next couple of months, Arizona will see the same type of economic growth, Milne said.

From September 2024 to September 2025, the industries that saw the biggest economic growth were mining and logging and education and health services. The mining and logging industry grew 8.8% year over year, while the education and health services grew 4.1% during the same time period.

The education and health services sector accounts for a large share of Arizona’s economy, representing around 17% of the state’s non-farm employment, Milne noted.

Arizona’s biggest sector is the trade, transportation and utility, which accounts for around 19% of its non-farm employment, he said. This industry saw a 0.1% decrease in employment gain year over year.

In 2025, the report showed that the Tucson Metro area experienced the biggest economic growth of any metro area in Arizona, with a 0.5% increase. This ranks 0.1% in front of Phoenix’s metro area.

Regarding wages, Arizona private-sector workers earn an average of $35.17 an hour, up from $33.96 a year ago, the report noted.

Job numbers since the pandemic have undergone extensive revisions after release.

This trend will continue, Milne said, but added September’s revisions “were not very large.”

While many states have seen downward revisions in their corrections job numbers, Milne pointed out Arizona has seen positive revisions.

(The Center Square) – An Arizona state senator wants to ban fluoride additives in Arizona’s public drinking water.

Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, is introducing Senate Bill 1019, which prohibits individuals and political subdivisions from adding fluoride or fluoride-containing compounds to public water systems.Shamp said Utah and Florida have already gone this route.“Fluoridation of our water is forced medication without informed consent,” Shamp told The Center Square Monday.Shamp added that part of her motivation comes from “studies that the FDA is now putting out,” as well as information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Shamp also pointed to a 2024 federal court ruling that current fluoride levels pose an unreasonable risk to children’s IQ.“That to me is something that we need to be looking at, and it shouldn’t be a partisan issue," said Shamp. "I think that Arizona should lead by example and protect our residents from any of these avoidable hazards.”Shamp, a registered nurse, said she does not want to see people harmed.“We’re talking about infants to the elderly that are ingesting a chemical that they don’t need,” Shamp said. “As a nurse, that offends me, and medical decisions should be personal and not mandated by the government.”Not every person or organization supports the removal of fluoride. A study published in May by JAMA Health Forum finds that cessation of fluoridation of US public water systems is projected to "worsen oral health in children" and significantly increase the cost of health care. Researchers for the study, called Protected Outcomes of Removing Fluoride From US Public Water Systems, looked at data of 8,500 children around 9 years of age.Shamp is not concerned.“There are plenty of communities that have stopped fluoridation, and they have not seen a surge in cavities, and dental health crises stem more from other issues, right?” said Shamp. “To say that people may not necessarily be able to take care of their teeth or brush properly is kind of actually insulting.”Pointing to her role as a legislator, Shamp said she believes elected officials have an “obligation” to make sure government is not “putting this chemical into anybody’s water when they don’t understand the risks.” Shamp said she is not alone, adding that opposition to fluoridation comes from all kinds of people, including scientists, doctors and public health advocates.“There’s little benefit with lots of harm, and we all know that you can brush your teeth and keep you from getting cavities. We all know that if a dentist deems that you need fluoride on your teeth, you can get sealants for that,” said Shamp. “There are treatments for that, but to willy nilly put it into the water, I don’t believe it is any way to treat cavities.”

(The Center Square) - The Arizona Senate majority leader has pre-filed a bill to regulate how fast people can ride electric bicycles and scooters on sidewalks and pathways.

Under Senate Bill 1008, these two modes of transportation would be limited to 15 mph on sidewalks or pathways. On top of this, if people are riding one of these vehicles while attempting to pass someone, the bill says they can only go 5 mph.

State Sen. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, who is the sponsor of SB 1008, told The Center Square that when people are riding their electric bikes or scooters too fast, it poses a “real hazard to people walking.”

Over the last couple of years, Kavanagh said he has seen more people, particularly young people, going “dangerously fast on sidewalks” while passing pedestrians.

According to Kavanagh, his bill aims to create a “foundational safety rule” that limits how fast someone can ride an electric bike or scooter on a sidewalk or pathway.

SB 1008 does not regulate bikes or e-scooters on roads because there are already regulations that address them, Kavanagh noted.

He added that he spoke with a retired Phoenix motor officer to develop the 15 mph rule for electric bicycles and scooters.

If this bill were to become law, Kavanagh said he expects police officers to go after the most “dangerous actors” who are going really fast, passing pedestrians. The state senator compared it to how law enforcement enforces other traffic safety laws.

Kavanagh added he does not plan to introduce a bill to ban electric bikes or scooters in Arizona.

In some of Arizona’s major cities, regulations surround these modes of transportation. Arizona’s largest city, Phoenix, prohibits electric bikes and scooters from being on sidewalks.

Tucson allows them in bike lanes and pathways, but they can only go up to 19 mph.

Scottsdale does not allow electric bikes or scooters on its sidewalks, pathways or public streets. Electric bikes and scooters can only go up to 21 mph in the city.

Kavanagh told The Center Square he plans to introduce numerous other bills for the upcoming legislative session. They will cover topics such as immigration, humane animal treatment and homeowner associations.

He said he usually introduces between 30 and 40 bills each session. After last year's session, Kavanagh was named leader of the Senate's Republican majority.

(The Center Square) – A new bill meant to protect children was introduced by U.S. Rep. Wesley Hunt, R-Texas, called the National Educator Safety and Accountability Act of 2025.

It aims to protect, prevent and respond to educator sexual misconduct in schools.

The legislation would establish a National Educator Misconduct and Discipline Registry to track offenders and create a federal task force on educator sexual misconduct. Hunt presented the bill Tuesday to the House of Representatives.

Studies state 10% of children experience sexual misconduct or grooming by a school employee before graduation. That's around 5.2 million and 9.4 million U.S. public school students. This misconduct can result in lifelong consequences, negative physical, psychological and academic outcomes.

There are no systems that exist to prevent employees dismissed for misconduct from moving to new districts undetected, according to Hunt.

“Under no circumstances should a child fear the adults who are supposed to provide a supportive, educational environment,” Hunt told The Center Square in an email. “This situation is unacceptable, and it is the responsibility of leadership to ensure that our children have safe communities. This bill will establish the National Educator Misconduct and Discipline Registry, which will give school districts the proper background checks on school employees. This incentive is crucial for ensuring our children’s safety.”

Arizona state Sen. Janae Shamp, R‑Surprise, praised Hunt's proposal, as she has long supported stronger protections for children against sexual predators.

“This bill will finally end the shameful practice of ‘passing the trash’ by creating the mandatory National Educator Misconduct Registry for every federally funded school employee, volunteer and contractor, banning secret settlements that hide sexual deviants, and withholding federal funds from non-compliant districts,” Shamp told The Center Square. “Our kids deserve to learn in safe environments, and good teachers deserve a profession free of sexual predators hiding in plain sight.”

Shamp emphasized the legislation is a critical step toward ensuring schools are safe and accountable. She noted offenders cannot continue moving from district to district without consequence.

The Texas Education Agency did not respond to The Center Square's request for comment on this bill.

(The Center Square) – Democratic attorneys general from California and 18 other states sued the Trump administration Friday over its new $100,000 fee on H-1B visas.

President Donald Trump imposed the rule Sept. 19 for new petitions for the nonimmigrant visas, which allow U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in response to labor shortages among physicians, surgeons, researchers, educators, nurses and other vital workers.

The new fee will make it more difficult for health care centers, schools, universities and others to hire workers, California Attorney General Rob Bonta said during a news conference Friday morning in San Francisco. He said it will make current labor shortages worse.

Bonta and Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell are co-leading the coalition of states in the suit, which is California's 49th one this year against the Trump administration.

Bonta said the new fee violates the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act's notice-and-comment process.

The Center Square Friday reached out to the White House, which commented on the lawsuit.

“President Trump promised to put American workers first, and his commonsense action on H-1B visas does just that by discouraging companies from spamming the system and driving down American wages, while providing certainty to employers who need to bring the best talent from overseas,” White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers told The Center Square in an email. “The Administration’s actions are lawful and are a necessary, initial, incremental step towards necessary reforms to the H-1B program.”

The Center Square also reached out to the U.S. departments of Homeland Security and Labor, but did not hear back before press time.

Bonta noted the visas allow employers such as schools, hospitals, universities and research institutions to hire highly skilled workers.

“California, like every other state, needs more teachers, more nurses, more doctors,” the California attorney general said. “There is a shortage of supply in those professions.”

Bonta's office said employers filing H-1B petitions typically pay between $960 and $7,595 in regulatory and statutory fees.

Bonta said the $100,000 far exceeds processing costs and call the new fee an “unnecessary obstacle” to hiring the workers America needs.

“The consequences for California would be devastating,” Bonta said. “We’re already facing a nationwide teacher shortage. Last year 74% of U.S. school districts struggled to fill open positions, especially in areas such as special education, foreign language and STEM [science, technology, engineering and math] fields. Nearly 30,000 educators nationwide hold H-1B visas.

“And hundreds of colleges and universities rely on them to support instruction and support research,” he said.

“Public schools, many of which operate on very tight budgets, can’t absorb an extra $100,000 for hire,” Bonta said.

“The health care sector is equally at risk,” he said, noting rural communities would be especially hit by the loss of workers. He said patients would see “longer wait times, reduced access to care, growing health disparities.”

Bonta said Congress didn’t authorize Trump to impose the new $100,000 fee.

“No presidential administration can rewrite immigration law,” the attorney general said. “No president can destabilize our schools, our hospitals, our universities on a whim. And no president can ignore the co-equal branch of government, the Congress; the Constitution or ignore the law.”

Besides California, states filing the lawsuit are Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.

In other litigation news, Democratic attorneys general praised this week’s federal ruling that blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to close a Federal Emergency Management Agency program designed to protect communities from natural disasters before they strike.

Democrats won their suit to protect FEMA’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program. Those filing the suit included attorneys general from Arizona and California.

"We're winning case after case as we protect Arizonans from harm and rising prices that the Trump administration continues to illegally pursue," Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said in a news release. "Arizonans will notice this victory the next time a wildfire or flood hits - thanks to the work of those in my office, our state will be prepared."

(The Center Square) – Arizonans think a situation involving Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia should result in the release of a Phoenix area business owner facing deportation.

Garcia is the "Maryland man" who the Trump administration has argued is in the U.S. illegally and needs to be deported.

A federal judge Thursday ordered Garcia to be released for reasons including Zadvydas v. Davis, a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court case that established limits on indefinite immigration detention.

It is that same case that Democrat Brent Peak of Arizona has pointed to in his efforts to have Kelly Yu, a restaurateur in the Phoenix suburb of Peoria, released after being in detention for months. Yu is an illegal immigrant but has received bipartisan support from Arizonans who say she's a responsible business owner and a respected member of the community.

Yu is being detained at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in Eloy, Arizona.

“The court determined that if someone is being held, but there is no record and their deportation is not foreseeable, like, there’s no foreseeable resolution to completing the deportation, then they must be released,” Peak told The Center Square. “She has no record. She has 20 years of upstanding conduct and residency in the U.S, so, at this point, from what I understand it would simply take a filing, filing a habeas petition, and a judge would order her release awaiting deportation.”

A habeas petition is a legal request that someone in custody files to ask a court to rule their imprisonment is unlawful.

Yu has been in detention for six months.

Republican Lisa Everett has been partnering with Peak to try to help Yu. Like Peak, Everett is optimistic that the Garcia situation will benefit Yu.

“Kelly Yu should be released because she has not violated any laws,” Everett told The Center Square. “She pays her taxes. She is a business owner and employs Americans. She is who we want in an immigrant.”

In August, when The Center Square first reported about Peak and Everett’s efforts to keep Yu from being deported, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security said Kelly Yu, aka Lai Kuen Yu, is “an illegal alien from Hong Kong, one that has had a final deportation order from a judge since 2005.” U.S. Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin also told The Center Square in an email that Yu “was arrested illegally crossing the border by U.S. Border Patrol in Arizona on February 4, 2004.”

Yu was released into the country days later.

“On November 14, 2013, the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed her appeal and upheld her final order of removal," McLaughlin told The Center Square. "On August 23, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied her appeal. On June 12, the Board of Immigration Appeals granted her a temporary stay of removal while they consider her motion to reopen. She will remain in ICE custody pending her removal proceedings."

According to Peak, the reason Yu has not been deported is because China has not responded to the U.S. to finalize the passport.

“That normally is done in a few weeks,” said Peak. “That’s why we thought all along that deportation was imminent because we were just waiting on the China side of whatever needs to be done for the passport, and I don’t know the details of that, of how that works."

China isn't doing anything, which leaves Yu stuck in prison, Peak said.

Yu’s husband, Aldo Urquiza, is an American citizen. He runs the two restaurants he has with his wife. Meanwhile, Yu’s daughter, Zita Yu, is in college and works at the restaurants.

Peak and Everett have been in touch with Urquiza on a regular basis.

“At this point, the family has given up,” said Peak. “My hope is that some other organization or perhaps even I would love to see Kris Mayes, our attorney general [in Arizona], file on her behalf to get a judge to order her released as she awaits deportation.”

Pointing again to Zadvydas v. Davis, Peak said “it is illegal to continue to imprison her for an indefinite time frame when the U.S. cannot determine how long they need to hold her” in custody.

“They do not know when her deportation will happen because they cannot get the answers that they need and the follow up that they need from China,” said Peak.

The Center Square has tried multiple times since August to get interviews from Arizonans in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

No one has responded.

“Sadly, I have not gotten a response from any of these officials with the exception of one returned phone call from Mark Kelly‘s office back in August I believe,” said Everett. “I have reached out to most of these offices repeatedly.”

The Center Square also reported on Yu’s situation in October and November.

(The Center Square) – Utah could be on pace for a measles outbreak unlike any since the 1970s.

State health officials have identified 115 people with measles. That's an increase of 25 people in the last three weeks.

“The thing that’s most concerning to us is while this outbreak originally was located mostly in southern Utah, we’re now seeing it expand into other areas,” Dr. Leisha D. Nolen, a Utah state epidemiologist, told The Center Square.

Of the cases reported thus far, 82 are in Southwest Utah. Ten are in Utah County, followed by nine in Wasatch County. Bear River has four cases. Salt Lake County and Southeast Utah both have three cases, while Central Utah and Davis County have two cases each.

“We’ve talked to people who we have been able to contact, and we do find that most of them have had contact with someone or have been down in Southern Utah,” said Nolen. “So it does seem to be a person-to-person spread and just in-state travel.”

A dashboard operated by the Utah Department of Health and Human Services shows these numbers, and HHS updates the information on a weekly basis.

Officials say measles can remain airborne up to two hours after an infected person has exited a room. Symptoms are known to start seven to 14 days after exposure and include high fever, cough, runny nose, watery eyes and rash.

Utah is recommending people get vaccinated for measles.

“We know that a lot of our population - in fact, over 90% of our population - is already protected, so they don’t have any concerns and really can go about their regular life,” said Nolen. “The people we’re most worried about are those people who are not protected because they have not been vaccinated.”

So far, no deaths have been reported in this outbreak. Still, Nolen said that over 20 clinic waiting rooms in Utah have been exposed to measles. Utah has also had “a number of daycare exposures.” That, said Nolen, puts the youngest Utahns at risk.

“Last time we’ve had over 100 (measles cases) was 1996,” said Nolen. “We think we’re going to break that very soon, and it’s probably back into the 70s.”

(The Center Square) – Democratic attorneys general applauded a federal judge’s ruling this week that the Trump administration can’t halt development of all wind energy projects.

Proponents have long considered wind energy to be a clean, renewable energy source that produces electricity without burning fossil fuels. But opponents warn against turbines' impact on wildlife and land. They also question wind power's reliability and affordability.

On Jan. 20, President Donald Trump issued an executive order halting all federal approvals for development of offshore and onshore wind energy projects. Approvals were stopped pending an indefinite federal review of wind leasing and permitting.

Judge Patti Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled in favor of the 17 states and District of Columbia, who sued Trump to resume wind energy development. The ruling said Trump’s executive order was “arbitrary and capricious” and contrary to law.

Attorneys general praised Saris’ ruling and warned what the end of wind energy would have done to their states.

“Trump’s illegal wind order would have driven up energy costs on Arizonans already struggling with high utility bills,” said Attorney General Kris Mayes of Arizona.

Mayes noted in a news release that wind energy projects on state trust lands provide critical revenue for public schools.

“The Trump administration’s illegal freeze of these programs would have harmed Arizona and threatened our state’s economy and environment,” Mayes said.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office noted wind energy is reliable and affordable and supports hundreds of thousands of jobs. The office noted the energy source, which supplies more than 10% of the nation's electricity, creates billions of dollars in economic activity and tax revenues.

“Today, we celebrate another victory against the Trump Administration. A court has agreed with California and our sister states nationwide: The Trump Administration’s attempt to thwart states’ efforts to make energy more clean, reliable and affordable for our residents is unlawful and cannot stand,” Bonta said Monday in a news release.

Meanwhile, Wayne Winegarden, a senior business fellow at the Pasadena-based Pacific Research Institute, said he isn’t questioning the ruling against Trump’s executive order and understands states found themselves in a predicament with the executive order. “Often Trump does things without doing them the proper way.”

But the economist told The Center Square, “The more important point, the longer lasting point, is we’re over-investing in wind and under-appreciating its consequences." He noted there are questions over wind power's reliability and its burden on the energy grid. He noted it increases costs and that there's uncertainty about how much power it actually generates.

“We want affordable, reliable, lower-emission energy infrastructure,” Winegarden said.

Wind power also threatens the environment, Winegarden said. “Offshore wind tribunes harm whales.”

And on land, wind tribunes create noise, he said.

“What do we do with these huge blades once they wear out?” Winegarden said. “That’s an environmental and costly issue that needs to be managed.”

Blades consist of high-tech composite materials that critics say are hard to recycle.

Other critics have noted turbines have killed birds and bats. They warn about the loss of large tracts for wind farms.

But if the land used for wind or solar power can be used for other purposes, the impact is minimal, according to the Our Worlds in Data website.

Proponents of wind power say modern turbines are safer for wildfire and setbacks can mitigate noise.

The Center Square reached out to the California Wind Energy Association for comment, but did not get a response.

In addition to California, Arizona and the District of Columbia, jurisdictions suing the Trump administration include Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island and Washington.

(The Center Square) – The Utah man charged with assassinating conservative activist Charlie Kirk appeared in person before a Utah court Thursday for the first time since his arrest.

Thursday’s hearing covered some evidentiary and procedural issues ahead of the trial of 22-year-old Tyler James Robinson, who has been charged with multiple felonies in connection with Kirk’s murder.

Robinson wore gray dress pants and a light blue button-down shirt with a softly patterned tie. In an earlier audio-only virtual hearing, the judge had agreed to allow Robinson to wear civilian clothing at pretrial hearings, as the defense had argued his jail attire could prejudice potential jurors.

Though in regular clothing, Robinson still had to wear handcuffs in court and even though the judge had earlier ruled that his shackles couldn’t be visible in any media photographs or video captured in the courtroom, they were visible on at least one livestream Thursday.

Robinson appeared fairly relaxed before the hearing started, even smiling some while talking quietly with some of his lawyers.

Judge Tony Graf Jr. of Utah’s Fourth Judicial Court began the hearing by listing the three issues they would be covering. The parties were to discuss which portions of the audio recording of an Oct. 24 closed hearing would remain sealed and which, if any, could be made public. According to a statement from the Utah County Attorney’s office, the portions in question concerned “the Defendant's motion to appear at hearings in civilian clothing and without restraints.”

This part of the hearing was closed to the public.

Robinson’s lawyers asked Graf if the defendant's parents and brother, who attended the hearing, could be present for that portion, but after the prosecution voiced a concern, Graf ultimately decided against it.

“My only concern with that, Your Honor, is that we're going to be talking about court security measures, and I don't know that we'll have to go into a lot of detail about that, but I do have concerns about those issues being discussed in public,” a state attorney said.

“Given the nature and the sensitivity of it, I believe it is appropriate to treat all parties and all in the public equally, though I do recognize their relationship with Mr. Robinson,” Graf said.

After they concluded that part of the hearing, everyone reconvened in the courtroom and turned to two other matters Graf had mentioned: The state’s motion to amend or clarify the gag order and a motion filed by media lawyers that they would receive notice of any motions to close, seal or reclassify any evidence in the case.

The prosecution argued that the case’s gag order was vague and overbroad and asked that the term “witnesses” be clearly confined to just the prosecution team – not to any witnesses the state might call upon. Legally, there are strict rules about how a court can restrain the speech of non-attorney trial participants, and some people connected to the case should be allowed to speak rather freely about it, the prosecution argued.

“And I think the court also needs to note that there are several people associated with this case who have very significant interest in exercising their First Amendment rights and talking about how this case has affected them,” a state attorney said.

On the second point, the defense reiterated that they do not believe they should have to give media lawyers a copy of its pleadings in advance, citing concerns about leaks and media “chaos” being brought into the courtroom.

Media attorneys continued to push for limited party status in the case, so they could be kept abreast of important developments.

Graf said he would have a decision on the first issue soon and the parties scheduled another virtual hearing for Dec. 29, where he will issue rulings on the other two. The next in-person hearing will be Jan. 16.

(The Center Square) - U.S. Rep. Abe Hamadeh, R-Arizona, introduced a bill that would add a dual citizenship question to the U.S. Census.

The census is conducted every 10 years and helps to reshape congressional districts across the country.

The Arizona congressman told The Center Square that the Make Allegiances Clear Again Act, which he introduced last week, is “a long overdue reform of our nation’s census system.”

“You cannot fix a breach in national security if you refuse to look at it. The MACA Act ends what seems to be our willful ignorance and finally treats sovereignty as a serious question,” Hamadeh said, answering The Center Square's questions by email. “Once we know the full scope of the problem, we can close loopholes that allow malign foreign actors to influence our domestic policy.”

Under current Department of State policy, U.S. citizens are not required to choose between American and a foreign country’s citizenship. Americans can naturalize in other countries without risking loss of their American citizenship.

But Hamadeh said other countries don’t compare to America and that “no other country should be competing for a U.S. citizen’s loyalty.”

“The American people deserve clarity on divided allegiances — especially at a time when global threats are growing. We are simply asking for honesty,” the representative noted.

Citizenship is a covenant, not a travel convenience," Hamadeh told The Center Square.

“We have Americans who pledge allegiance to the United States on Tuesday and vote in a foreign election on Wednesday. That is fundamentally incompatible with a sovereign republic,” he said.

U.S. Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, went a step farther by introducing the Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025. Under this bill, U.S. citizens could not be citizens of another nation.

Moreno, who is originally from Colombia, said becoming an American citizen at 18 was “one of the greatest honors” of his life. The senator added that being a U.S. citizen is “an honor and a privilege.”

“If you want to be an American, it’s all or nothing. It’s time to end dual citizenship for good,” he said.

Hamadeh noted his bill “works naturally alongside” Moreno’s legislation.

“We are done with the era where American citizenship is treated as an insurance policy by people whose hearts belong to another country. It is all or nothing,” Hamadeh said.

The representative said the U.S. Census lumps “illegal aliens, guest workers, dual nationals and loyal American citizens into the same generic population buckets.”

Americans need to know if they are “sending billions in federal tax dollars to subsidize enclaves where the majority of the population holds allegiance to a foreign flag,” he said.

Hamadeh told The Center Square that Americans “have the right to adjust their checkbooks accordingly,” if data shows specific “congressional districts are effectively outposts for other nations.”

Regarding legal challenges, Hamadeh said he is “on firm legal ground” with this bill.

“The Constitution is crystal clear: Congress has the absolute authority under Article I to direct the census,” he said.

Hamadeh noted if activist judges decide to “legislate from the bench,” he welcomes the fight. He called it a battle he would win.

(The Center Square) – Arizona continues to see measles cases along the Utah border.

There have been 176 total cases for 2025. Of those, 172 are associated with the outbreak on the Arizona-Utah border, specifically in Mohave County.

“For the last two weeks, we have seen an increase of 22 cases,” said Shane Brady, deputy state epidemiologist with the Arizona Department of Health Services. “We are at six hospitalizations.”

Sixty-six percent of cases involve people under age 18. A majority of those people - 97% - are unvaccinated.

“Vaccination is the best way to protect yourself and your family from measles,” Brady told The Center Square Wednesday. “One dose is about 93% effective, and two doses provides 97% protection, so it is really important to make sure that everyone stays up to date on all their vaccines, including measles, as it is the best way to protect yourself from disease.”

Measles is a contagious virus that officials say can remain airborne up to two hours after an infected person has exited a room. Symptoms are known to start seven to 14 days after exposure and include high fever, cough, runny nose, watery eyes and rash.

Navajo County is the only other county in Arizona where measles cases have been reported this year. Coconino and Apache County do not have any cases, and like Navajo and Mohave County, they are also on the border with Utah.

When asked why other Arizona counties do not have cases, Brady said that could be due to a number of factors.

“We do know that vaccination rates we’re talking about are childhood vaccinations,” said Brady. “For school data in terms of the 2024-2025 school year, 88.7% of kindergarteners were fully vaccinated for measles, and in Mohave County, that’s 78.4%.”

Brady added that the statewide average is lower than the 95% needed to prevent outbreaks, leading Brady to state that Arizona is “very fortunate that we have not spread outside of Mohave County” for this outbreak. That, said Brady, is why Arizona is encouraging people to make sure that they are vaccinated to prevent further spread.

“Some people who get vaccinated will have a breakthrough infection,” said Brady. “Typically, breakthrough infections are less severe. That is not necessarily always the case, but we know that a vaccine is the best way to protect yourself and prevent the disease in the first place.”

In a November story for The Center Square, Nicole Witt, Arizona’s assistant director for public health preparedness, said the current outbreak is the largest Arizona has seen since the 1990s.

(The Center Square) – A coalition of states led by New York Attorney General Letitia James and another coalition of teacher unions filed lawsuits against the Trump administration, alleging it violated federal law by excluding certain organizations from a student loan forgiveness program.

Under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness, the administration’s updated rule disqualifies employers that it says have “a substantial illegal purpose." The administration has applied that phrase to organizations that provide gender-affirming care, support immigrants, or promote diversity, equity and inclusion.

Now two lawsuits are challenging that rule.

The lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of 22 jurisdictions says that the Public Service Loan Forgiveness is “a decades-old bipartisan Congressional promise to support those who choose to dedicate their careers to public service.”

Created to help government and nonprofit workers, the program was intended to forgive student loans for employees considered to be serving the public.

In October, the administration said it was “rightsizing the program to ensure that PSLF benefits go only to borrowers employed by organizations that genuinely serve the public,” according to the U.S. Department of Education.

James responded in a post on X, accusing the administration of “weaponizing” the loan forgiveness program “illegally.”

Her office said the new rule could deem entire state governments, hospitals, schools and nonprofits ineligible if the federal government determines they engage in activities the administration opposes.

“The coalition argues that the sweeping new rule is unlawful, politically motivated, and targeted to punish states and organizations that the administration does not like,” James’ office said in a statement.

Currently 40 million Americans hold student loans, and the debt is over $1.6 trillion.

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, who is leading the union coalition, noted the program’s bipartisan origins, saying it “was created by a Republican president and Democratic senators to help attract and retain teachers, nurses, firefighters and so many others who’ve dedicated their careers to helping others.”

She said the administration is imposing “an ideological litmus test on millions of public servants and their employers that’s antithetical to American values and contrary to the statute at hand. “

It is an “illegal attack” on those relying on the program, she added.

The New York Attorney General's Office and the U.S. Department of Education did not respond to The Center Square's request for comment.

Joining James in filing this lawsuit are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia.

Joining the American Federation of Teachers in this lawsuit are the National Council of Nonprofits, city of Boston, city of Albuquerque, city of Chicago, city and county of San Francisco, county of Santa Clara, Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, Legal Aid Society of the District Of Columbia, Oasis Legal Services, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, National Education Association, and National Association of Social Workers.