Arizona Republicans Pass Bill Allowing Individual Lawmakers to Order Arrests For Ignoring Subpoenas

State Legislature seeks expanded contempt powers without full chamber vote

PEORIA — Arizona Republicans on Thursday passed a controversial bill that would give individual lawmakers the power to order arrests of people who ignore legislative subpoenas, without requiring a vote from the full House or Senate.

House Bill 2745, sponsored by Rep. Tony Rivero, R-Peoria, would allow the Senate president, House speaker, or any committee chairman to unilaterally issue an order of contempt for anyone who fails to comply with a legislative subpoena. Under current law, either chamber can hold someone in contempt only after a majority vote of the full House or Senate.

The proposal would also authorize sheriff's deputies to arrest those who ignore legislative subpoenas, according to the Phoenix New Times.

Sen. Lauren Kuby, D-Tempe, voted against the bill on Thursday. One person, whether it's the chair or the presiding officer of either body in the legislature, should not have the power to arrest someone for failing to comply with the legislative subpoena, she said before the vote. This is far too much power to put in the hands of one single person in a political body, and it needs to remain with the full Senate and the House to make such a serious decision.

The Senate president, House speaker and committee chairmen already have the power to issue subpoenas to compel people to testify in front of them. If the subpoenaed person refuses, the 60-member House or 30-member Senate can hold them in contempt, but only following a vote. If that contempt resolution is approved, the body's sergeant-at-arms can arrest the person and bring them to the legislature to testify.

Rivero's proposal would hand a lot of power to some of the Arizona Legislature's lawmakers with extreme far-right views, according to the Phoenix New Times. Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff, who is the chairman of the Senate Judiciary and Elections Committee, was censured by her own Republican-controlled chamber in 2022 for comments calling for people she perceived as enemies to be hanged from gallows.

Rep. John Gillette, R-Kingman, the chairman of the House Federalism Military Affairs and Elections Committee, last year made a series of social media posts that were laced with profanity, calling Muslim immigrants savages and accusing them of pushing Sharia law onto Americans.

Only three people officially registered in support of Rivero's proposal, while 337 registered against it. It passed the House on Feb. 26 by a vote of 32-20 and the Senate on Thursday by a vote of 17-10, both along party lines. It is almost certainly headed for a veto from Gov. Katie Hobbs, according to the Phoenix New Times.

The Phoenix Mirror reported that the proposal would allow those accused of contempt to supply evidence to refute the allegations. His proposal would also allow sheriff's deputies to arrest those who ignore legislative subpoenas.

If Rivero's proposal had been the law in 2021, the Senate president alone could have held the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors in contempt for refusing to comply with wide-ranging subpoenas for election equipment and materials to be used in the Senate's partisan audit of the 2020 presidential election results. Instead, Republicans in the Senate failed to find the board in contempt after one Republican joined with Democrats, who voted against the resolution.

During a House Government Committee hearing on Feb. 18, Rivero said that since he started his political career in the Peoria City Council, his goal was always to increase the power of the body he served in. He claimed the proposal will give the legislature teeth to force the executive branch to supply information without having to wait for a vote from the full chamber.

Republicans control the House and Senate now, and have done so nearly uninterrupted for 60 years.

Sen. Kuby wrote in a veto letter that the bill weaponizes the power of the legislature in a way that could be used to intimidate Arizonans. Holding someone in contempt is a very serious matter and is best left to be determined by the entire body, rather than one legislator.

The bill has drawn criticism from civil liberties advocates who say it could be abused for political gain since it would allow either the House speaker or Senate president to find someone in contempt without a full chamber vote.