Phoenix

Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs Faces Backlash for Vetoing Bills Championed as Advocating Parental Rights and State Sovereignty

AI Assisted Icon
Published on April 18, 2025
Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs Faces Backlash for Vetoing Bills Championed as Advocating Parental Rights and State SovereigntySource: Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs finds herself at the center of controversy after vetoing four bills that have been dubbed as supporting 'parental rights,' 'state sovereignty,' and 'biological truth' by their proponents. The blocked legislation, which Representative Lisa Fink sponsored, claimed to reinforce various aspects of personal freedom and clarity in legal definitions. According to an official press release from the sponsor, these bills were meant to align with the values and beliefs of many Arizonans across the state.

Among the vetoed legislation, HB2058 was designed to empower adult students with information regarding opt-out rights for vaccine requirements at public colleges, for reasons including religious and personal beliefs. HB2060 aimed to declare Arizona's authority over voting qualifications in federal elections, ensuring residency and citizenship requirements are uniform. HB2062, coined as the Arizona Sex-based Terms Act, sought to define sex-based legal terms strictly along biological lines. Finally, HB2063 required schools to notify parents about their legal rights regarding immunization exemptions for their children, promoting what Fink calls "honesty and freedom."

In her justification for these vetoes, Governor Hobbs was accused of preferring governmental overreach over personal liberty, with Fink characterizing the governor's actions as belittling parental rights and denying the state's independence. "Governor Hobbs doesn't trust parents, she doesn't trust voters, and she clearly doesn't trust biology," Fink stated in the press release. Her remarks were underscored by disappointment in Hobbs' decisions, framing the vetoes as favoring federal control and ideological inclinations over practical legislative proposals.