Prohibit Race- or Ethnicity-Based Preferential Treatment, Public Education Offices, and Disciplinary Policies Amendment
Affirmative Action & Constitutional Rights
Summarized
What Would This Do?
Proposition 142 would add detail to the Arizona Constitution's existing prohibition on preferential treatment or discrimination by the state based on race, ethnicity, or other protected classes.
It would specifically prohibit: (1) compelling individuals to support preferential treatment or discrimination based on race or ethnicity as a condition of education, employment, or contract opportunities; (2) spending public money on positions in public education responsible for promoting preferential treatment or discrimination based on race or ethnicity; and (3) implementing disciplinary practices that treat students or employees differently based on race or ethnicity.
Prohibited conduct would include requiring or asking an applicant, employee, student, or contractor to provide a statement in support of race-based diversity, equity, and inclusion beyond upholding the federal Equal Protection Clause, or asking such a person to discuss their race or ethnicity or others' race or ethnicity. The amendment contains exceptions for health services, legal requirements, and other specified reasons.
A “Yes” Vote
A "yes" vote supports amending the state constitution to prohibit the state from requiring an individual to endorse preferential treatment or discrimination based on race or ethnicity; using public funds to create or operate a public-education office promoting such preferential treatment or discrimination; or requiring enrollment in a course or training that promotes race-based diversity, equity, and inclusion or intersectionality.
A “No” Vote
A "no" vote opposes these additional constitutional prohibitions, maintaining the current constitutional language on preferential treatment and discrimination.
Official Language
Full Legal Text
Ballot Title & Summary (as filed with the Secretary of State)
Ballot Title
PROPOSITION 142 — PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION OF PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT AND DISCRIMINATION. OFFICIAL TITLE: AMENDING ARTICLE II, SECTION 36, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA. DESCRIPTIVE TITLE: ADDS FURTHER DETAILS TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITION AGAINST PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT OR DISCRIMINATION BY THE STATE BASED ON RACE, ETHNICITY, OR OTHER CLASSES.
Ballot Summary
A "yes" vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution's current prohibition against preferential treatment or discrimination by the state based on race, ethnicity, or other classes, to specifically prohibit: (1) compelling individuals to support preferential treatment or discrimination based on race or ethnicity as a condition of education, employment, or contract opportunities; (2) spending public money on positions in public education responsible for promoting preferential treatment or discrimination based on race or ethnicity; and (3) implementing disciplinary practices that treat students or employees differently based on race or ethnicity. The amendment contains certain exceptions for health services, legal, and other reasons. A "no" vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current prohibition in the Arizona Constitution against preferential treatment or discrimination by the state based on race, ethnicity, or other classes.
Support
Officials
State Sen. Frank Carroll (R) · State Sen. Janae Shamp (R) · State Rep. Leo Biasiucci (R) · State Rep. Walter Blackman (R) · State Rep. Selina Bliss (R) · State Rep. Michael Carbone (R) · State Rep. Neal Carter (R) · State Rep. Pamela Carter (R) · State Rep. Joseph Chaplik (R) · State Rep. Lupe Diaz (R) · State Rep. Lisa Fink (R) · State Rep. John Gillette (R) · State Rep. Matt Gress (R) · State Rep. Gail Griffin (R) · State Rep. Ralph Heap (R) · State Rep. Rachel Keshel (R) · State Rep. Alexander Kolodin (R) · State Rep. David Livingston (R) · State Rep. Chris Lopez (R) · State Rep. David Marshall (R) · State Rep. Teresa Martinez (R) · State Rep. Steve Montenegro (R) · State Rep. Quang Nguyen (R) · State Rep. Justin Olson (R) · State Rep. Michele Pena (R) · State Rep. Beverly Pingerelli (R) · State Rep. Tony Rivero (R) · State Rep. James Taylor (R) · State Rep. Michael Way (R) · State Rep. Jeff Weninger (R) · State Rep. Julie Willoughby (R) · State Rep. Justin Wilmeth (R)
Organizations
Arizona Free Enterprise Club · Arizona Women of Action · Goldwater Institute · Heritage Action for America
“DEI in Arizona is, thankfully, facing a reckoning with a new federal investigation and now a major case before the Arizona Supreme Court. ... Now is the time for lawmakers to end discriminatory 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' practices for good by giving voters the chance to enshrine protections in the state constitution through HCR2044.”
“[HCR 2044's] provisions are centered around a single underlying evil: the use of state power and state resources to compel Arizonans to voice support for, or to be indoctrinated in, the idea that people should be treated differently on the basis of race.”
Opposition
Officials
State Sen. Denise Epstein (D)
Organizations
ACLU of Arizona · Civic Engagement Beyond Voting LD3 Democrats Northeastern Maricopa County · League of Women Voters of Arizona · Lutheran Advocacy Ministry Arizona · Mi Familia Vota · Our Voice Our Vote · Will of the People
“Ideas are not illegal, and there is no 'government-approved' speech exception to the First Amendment. The state cannot adopt a policy or rule that punishes faculty, administrators, or students for expressing their beliefs or prohibits wide scopes of ideas from being debated at universities.”
“This culture-war-driven measure would block teachers from discussing accurate history, censor certain content from being taught in schools, and ban trainings on how to support LGBTQ+ staff and students.”
“Equal treatment is important, but this measure goes further by limiting institutions' ability to address inequity and support inclusion. ... Because justice requires more than formal sameness, LAMA is concerned that this measure would weaken public efforts to repair exclusion and build belonging.”
Verify