Horne responds to Attorney General threats against voter-protected English language law AGO sent warning to AZED

For immediate release: August 14, 2023
Contact: [email protected]
 

Horne responds to Attorney General threats against voter-protected English language law
AGO sent warning to AZED

PHOENIX – State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne has responded to a warning sent last week to his office by the Arizona Attorney General regarding the enforcement of the state’s voter-approved English language instruction model. Horne says the warning amounts to a threat and ignores the will of Arizona voters when they passed the voter-protected Proposition 203 in 2000.

In the letter, Horne states, “The voter-protected initiative… specifically states that ‘all children in Arizona public schools shall be taught English by being taught in English, and all children should be placed in English language classrooms…’ The voter-protected initiative is not subject to being overruled by the Attorney General, the State Board, or anyone, including me. I must faithfully execute the law as it is written.”

The Attorney General’s email to Superintendent Horne claims that the Department of Education “places barriers in front of schools and their students trying to register for (Dual Language Instruction) classes like requiring Waivers…” The email cites a recent Attorney General Opinion that says waivers are not required of students enrolled in those classes. It also claims potential legal liability if the Department of Education does not conform to the law as defined in the recent formal AG Opinion.

In response, Horne said, “The AG’s threat regarding potential liability of the agency and individuals is offensive, and unworthy of the Attorney General’s office. She will not win legal arguments to ignore voter-protected initiatives, by making those kinds of empty threats. We are all obligated to perform our functions according to state law, including voter-protected initiatives. No threats will ever persuade us to abandon that duty.”

He added, “The AG’s opinion is interesting. The AG clearly wanted to find that Dual Language was in conformity with the law. But she could not because the above quoted law is so clear. So, she specifically said that she would refuse to answer that question. All she said was that the State Board not the Superintendent of Schools enforces that law. We have always known that it is the Department of Education’s job to propose to the State Board cutting off funds for violation of law, and the Board’s decision to do so. She added nothing to that. Where she refused to answer the key question and only added the obvious, the opinion was vacuous.”

Horne intends to pursue this matter in a legal challenge.