AG hopefuls debate border, elections
6 make their cases for Republicans to pick them
On a crowded stage in downtown Phoenix on Wednesday, the six Republican candidates vying to become the next attorney general sparred over how partisan the role of Arizona’s seniormost legal officer should be.
Former U.S. Attorney’s Office border security section chief Lacy Cooper; attorney Rodney Glassman; former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould; Karsten Manufacturing corporate counsel Dawn Grove; former Maricopa County prosecutor Abe Hamadeh; and Eloy lawyer Tiffany Shedd all tried to make the case for why they should be Republican voters’ pick to appear on the November ballot.
Border security and election issues dominated much of the hourlong debate, and most of the candidates said they would not have participated in certifying the 2020 election in Arizona, despite a lack of evidence of any significant problems with it.
The debate, hosted by Citizens Clean Election Commission and Arizona PBS, was the first and so far only televised debate before the primary election on Aug. 2. It is available to watch online at azpbs.org.
Arizona’s attorney general serves as the state’s legal representative in lawsuits, advises the majority of statewide government bodies on legal affairs and ensures consumer protection laws are followed, among other responsibilities.
The current attorney general, Mark Brnovich, is term-limited out of office. He is running to be the Republican nominee against incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly.
The winner of the Republican primary will face Kris Mayes, the presumptive Democratic nominee and former Corporation Commissioner who does not have a challenger in the primary.
With moderator Ted Simons from Arizona PBS, the candidates discussed their vision for the office and whether the position should be politicized. That more philosophical question was raised alongside border security and the veracity of the 2020 election as key issues in the hourlong debate.
Glassman, a Judge Advocate General’s
Corps reservist, argued that the attorney general’s job is to protect people from the government. He pointedly went after Gould, who highlighted his experience, and Glassman countered that his strength was ideology. The attorney general should be an activist, Glassman said, and he would be a “conservative Republican fighter.”
Gould responded by saying that the job warrants aggressiveness for certain policies, but shouldn’t serve as a vehicle to push ideological beliefs.
“When it comes to the border, you have to be an activist,” Gould said, referring to a proactive “law and order” policy. “But in terms of trying to be an activist to twist the law ... you don’t weaponize the law and push your preferred political agenda.”
Gould, who was a prosecutor prior to becoming a judge, argued that he had the most legal experience of all the candidates.
Grove, the only candidate currently in the business sector, also took a less partisan view, saying she would be the attorney general “for all the people of Arizona.” She emphasized that said she would protect “families, faith, freedom and free enterprise.”
Cooper focused on a more legal view of the position, saying, “You uphold the Constitution and the rule of law, and then you are representing all of Arizona because that is what the job is.”
She argued that her prior position in the U.S. Attorney’s Office made her the best candidate to handle what she said was Arizona’s most pressing issue: border security. “Border security is national security,” she said.
Cooper, a government attorney for 15 years, also took aim at Glassman’s characterization of the government as an enemy.
“I don’t understand how Rodney is applying for this job and he’s trying to save people from the government.
Who’s going to save us from Rodney if he is a government attorney?” she said.
Shedd noted that she was the only large land-owner in the race, and had real-life experience dealing with the border crisis. She also views the position as one that. She said the job naturally comes with a partisan bent.
“The Attorney General’s Office is an elected position, not an appointed position, for a reason because it’s where law, politics, and policy meet. And I’m a constitutional conservative,” she said.
Hamadeh argued that the position should not be partisan, but took the opportunity to brandish his conservative bona fides.
“Justice is not partisan and I think that’s what we have to realize. But if you’re asking me what my values are: I’m going to fight for justice. I’m going to fight against the radical left where they’ve infiltrated every single aspect of our lives,” he said.
He noted that “a big component of the Attorney General’s Office is to protect senior citizens, veterans from the unfair practices of businesses.”
Shedd, however, said that consumer protection was not her top priority. “Our law enforcement is underfunded in the state of Arizona, and I think that consumer fraud, not being a violent crime, would take a backseat.”
Candidates rip Brnovich
Current Attorney General Brnovich came under fierce criticism in the debate, particularly for his handling of the 2020 election. If they were in the position to certify the 2020 election results as a witness, as Brnovich did, four candidates – Glassman, Grove, Hamadeh and Shedd – said they would not have done so.
Only Cooper said she would have signed as a witness given the facts known at the time. She did, however, say that he did not assert a strong enough position consistently on border protection.
While Gould did not answer the question on certification, he said that his decision would be guided by whether he had enough proof that could hold up in court: “If ... you’re able to garner enough evidence to prove at least substantial questions, then I wouldn’t have signed.”
Glassman seized on this in another attempt to distinguish himself from
Gould, saying that the attorney general’s job is to find facts, not wait for them.
Gould chastised Glassman’s position as “reckless.”
Candidates on border security
Border security was another point of contention for the candidates.
Glassman said he would encourage the Legislature to pass immigration enforcement laws, which Gould said would be struck down as unconstitutional because only the federal government can change immigration law.
Instead, Gould said that he would use state law to create a “no trespassing zone,” and use that as a first step for prosecuting cartels and seizing drugs. Suing the federal government to get them to enforce immigration laws was futile, he said.
While Gould’s plan on trespassing was panned by the other candidates, Cooper also disagreed with Gould’s assertion that litigation to get the government to act on issues like immigration was ineffective.
She argued that state attorney generals from across the country are having some success with their cases, especially with the Supreme Court’s new conservative supermajority after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death.
“We could be in a situation where the Supreme Court would make decisions that would have a huge impact on what’s going on at our border,” the protection of which was her No. 1 priority, she said.
Shedd says that she has “skin in the game” living and owning property close to the border and that tough stances are needed.
“We have to go for things like human smuggling, calling them terrorists. We have the right to protect this state and deport and stop an invasion,” Shedd said.
Grove said she would classify the border crisis as an invasion so the state could guard the border itself.
Touting endorsements by members of Trump’s national security team, Hamadeh said he would label cartels as terrorists and that, “We have to start taking matters into our own hands.”