Vetoed April 18, 2025 · 57th Legislature, 1st Regular Session
SB1584
public employees; merit; hiring practices
BLAME HOBBS!
THE CONTEXT: The Arizona Constitution prohibits the state from granting preferential treatment or discriminating on the basis of sex, race, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, education or contracting. This prohibition does not include qualifications based on sex that are reasonable and necessary, actions to establish or maintain federal programs that would otherwise result in a loss of federal money or invalidate court orders and consent decrees ( Article II 36, Const.
WHAT THE BILL DID: The final vetoed version would prohibit the state or its political subdivisions from doing the following: a) establishing policies or practices that require employees be hired based on anything other than their merit; or b) manipulating or influencing the composition of employees with reference to race, ethnicity, sex or national origin except to ensure color-blind and race-neutral hiring in accordance with state and federal antidiscrimination laws, authorize the Attorney General, a county attorney or any other person to file for declaratory relief, injunctive relief or damages for a violation of this measure, and entitles a prevailing party in the action against the state or its political subdivisions to costs and reasonable attorney fees.
WHY IT MATTERED: The practical reason for this bill was to set a clear legal boundary for public employees instead of leaving the conduct unaddressed. It would prohibit the state or its political subdivisions from doing the following: a) establishing policies or practices that require employees be hired based on anything other than their merit; or b) manipulating or influencing the composition of employees with reference to race, ethnicity, sex or national origin except to ensure color-blind and race-neutral hiring in accordance with state and federal antidiscrimination laws, and would also authorize the Attorney General, a county attorney or any other person to file for declaratory relief, injunctive relief or damages for a violation of this measure, rather than leave the current rule unchanged.
Related vetoes
HB2324
forfeiture; digital assets; reserve fund
2025 · Government & transparency
SB1019
photo enforcement systems; prohibition
2025 · Government & transparency
SB1514
employer-employee arbitration; contract; disputes
2025 · Government & transparency
HB2948
amusements; 2025-2026
2025 · Government & transparency
HB2955
human services; 2025-2026
2025 · Government & transparency
HB2957
local government; 2025-2026
2025 · Government & transparency