Arizona Supreme Court voids host of legislative changes

Court rules it was illegal to pile changes – including ban on mask mandates in schools – into budget bills

PHOENIX – The Arizona Supreme Court on Tuesday voided a ban on mask mandates in public schools and a host of other legislative changes, ruling it was illegal for lawmakers to pile them into a handful of budget bills.

Without comment, the judges rejected arguments by Assistant Attorney General Beau Roysden that there’s nothing inherently wrong with the process that lawmakers have used for years to put policy changes, like whether schools can mandate masks for staff and students, into bills that are labeled only as relating to the budget.

Also now voided are a host of other measures, ranging from a prohibition against colleges requiring vaccinations and how to teach about race in public schools to the kind of paper that counties must use for ballots and stripping Secretary of State Katie Hobbs of her powers to defend state election laws.

In upholding a lower court ruling, the justices also slapped down arguments by Roysden that the legislature alone decides whether what it puts in bills complies with the Arizona Constitution. Among those requirements is a mandate that all measures deal with only a single subject and that all bills have a title that informs the public of what changes they make.

During a hearing earlier in the day, Roysden, in essence, told the justices they should butt out of legislative business.

“It is not for the court to second guess that,’’ he argued.

That did not go over well.

“So the single subject rule is just a suggestion?’’ asked Chief Justice Robert Brutinel.

Justice William Montgomery got more specific, citing provisions in one challenged bill labeled only as dealing with “budget procedures.’’

“So how does dog racing relate to budget procedures?’’ he asked.

“I think that’s the toughest question in this case,’’ Roysden conceded.

But he maintained that people, in reading the title “budget procedures,’’ are put on notice that there may be a grab-bag of individual items in there. And that, Roysden said, is all that’s constitutionally required.

With Tuesday’s order, the justices said that’s not the case. But they did not explain their decision, promising a full-blown ruling at some point in the future.

That will be crucial as lawmakers, now banned from using the reconciliation bills as catch-alls, now will be looking for guidance about what they can – and cannot – do in the future.

Senate President Karen Fann, R-Prescott, said the more immediate question is what to do about the now-voided provisions.

“We’re going to have to go

through and get a list of what was affected and how it was affected,’’ she said.

One possibility, Fann said, would be a special legislative session. There, each of the provisions that the Supreme Court nullified could be reintroduced and brought up for a vote on an individual basis, avoiding the illegal practice of bunching them together.

But it remains unclear whether each could pass on its own.

For example, legislation spelling out how race, ethnicity and gender can be taught in public schools had failed on its own.

It was only when that language about what lawmakers called critical race theory, was put into a reconciliation bill that it passed. That forced foes to accept the all-or-nothing package to get other provisions they wanted.

That’s why House Minority Leader Reginald Bolding, D-Laveen, called the ruling “a win for the legislative process.’’