2025 AZ Legislative Scorecard

HB2152 grants parties the right to a jury trial in key domestic relations cases, including divorce, legal decision-making custody, and parenting-time disputes. A written demand must be filed at least 30 days before trial. The jury may decide on facts such as property classification, community property value, child custody best‑interest factors, relocation requests, spousal maintenance, and allegations such as domestic violence or child abuse. The court must then incorporate the jury’s factual findings when issuing final orders regarding support, parenting time, and maintenance. These provisions give families an option to resolve factual disputes through a jury rather than solely relying on a judge.

The Arizona State House of Representatives passed HB2152 on March 4, 2025 by a vote of 33 to 25. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because this bill reinforces the constitutionally protected right to a jury trial in civil matters by extending that protection to key domestic and family relations cases. The Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution affirms that “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved,” which strengthens due process and restores a critical check on judicial power.

HCR2049 asserts Arizona's sovereignty under the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The resolution serves as a formal notice to the federal government, demanding the cessation of mandates that exceed its constitutionally delegated powers. It denounces the enforcement of unconstitutional federal laws and encourages Arizonans to take legal action to uphold state sovereignty.

The Arizona State House of Representatives passed HCR2049 on March 3, 2025 by a vote of 32 to 26. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because the 10th Amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” This resolution rightly affirms Arizona’s sovereignty; reminds the federal government of its limited, enumerated powers under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution; and asserts the state’s duty to nullify any mandates or laws that exceed those powers. HCR2049 takes a necessary stand for constitutional government and the rightful balance of federalism.

HB2059 prohibits state and local entities from using state resources to enforce or cooperate with certain federal environmental regulations. Specifically, the bill targets federal programs under the Clean Air Act related to ozone and particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment areas and the Good Neighbor Plan rule. It also prohibits participation in federal actions concerning coal, oil, gas, timber, and other extractive resources if such actions would restrict Arizona's authority over its natural resources. The bill establishes civil penalties for violations and outlines a judicial standard of review for enforcement actions.

The Arizona State House of Representatives passed HB2059 on February 26, 2025 by a vote of 32 to 27. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because this bill is a proper exercise of state nullification, grounded in the U.S. Constitution under Article VI and the 10th Amendment, defending Arizona’s sovereign authority against unconstitutional federal overreach. HB2059 rightly blocks state cooperation with environmentalist federal policies, which promote globalist schemes such as the UN's Agenda 2030, and ensures that Arizona’s natural resources remain under local control. Under Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, only laws made “in Pursuance” of the Constitution are the supreme law of the land—meaning unconstitutional federal acts are null and void. Article VI, Clause 3 further binds state officials by oath to uphold the Constitution. Arizona lawmakers therefore have both the right and the duty to resist and nullify federal usurpations. Nullification remains a vital constitutional remedy for reining in an out-of-control federal government.

HB2649 affirms the Arizona Legislature’s support for the U.S. Electoral College. The bill emphasizes that the Founding Fathers intentionally established the Electoral College in the Constitution as the preferred method for selecting the president, highlighting its role in ensuring nationwide participation and providing certainty in election outcomes. While the bill did not propose any changes to election procedures, it served as a legislative statement on the importance of the Electoral College.

The Arizona State House of Representatives passed HB2649 on February 25, 2025 by a vote of 33 to 27. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because the Electoral College is a vital constitutional safeguard that protects state sovereignty and prevents the consolidation of power through raw majority rule. HB2649 serves as a necessary reaffirmation of this constitutional mechanism in the face of growing threats such as the National Popular Vote movement, which seeks to circumvent the Electoral College through unconstitutional interstate compacts. Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution guarantees every state a republican form of government—one rooted in law and representative institutions, not shifting popular majorities. By affirming support for the Electoral College, Arizona lawmakers are upholding the constitutional structure designed to preserve federalism, state representation, and the integrity of our electoral system.

HCR2041 applies to Congress for an Article V constitutional convention to propose a U.S. constitutional amendment imposing term limits on members of Congress.

The Arizona State House of Representatives passed HCR2041 on February 19, 2025 by a vote of 31 to 28. We have assigned pluses to the nays because term limits undermine the right of the people to choose their representatives. More importantly, efforts to call an Article V “convention of the states” are dangerous and must be opposed. Although framed as limited, such a convention could become a “runaway convention” with the power to rewrite or significantly alter the U.S. Constitution—jeopardizing the very protections that limit government power. Article V was intended to correct structural defects in the Constitution, not to address the failure of elected officials to uphold their oath of office. Instead of risking a constitutional convention, states should use Article VI to enforce the Constitution as written by nullifying unconstitutional federal laws. Upholding and applying the Constitution—not rewriting it—is the proper remedy for federal overreach.