Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Navigates Rocky Path to Renewal

Debate is intensifying among Arizona lawmakers regarding the future of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC) as it approaches an expiration deadline. Accusations of misconduct and suspicions of espionage have emerged, particularly from certain Republican legislators.

During a House Judiciary Committee meeting on Wednesday, a bill aimed at dissolving the ACJC by year’s end gained traction. In contrast, a Senate proposal supported by a bipartisan coalition seeks to extend the commission’s existence for another eight years.

House Bill 2702, put forth by Representatives Alex Kolodin of Scottsdale and Quang Nguyen of Prescott, previously included extensive claims asserting that the ACJC was monitoring law-abiding citizens.

“The ACJC is too dangerous to exist and must be discontinued,” Kolodin stated during the committee hearing.

The ACJC plays a pivotal role in researching and implementing criminal justice policies, managing grant programs, and analyzing the justice system for various stakeholders, including law enforcement and legislative bodies. Its composition includes a mix of officials from different political backgrounds, reflecting a diverse range of perspectives within Arizona’s justice landscape.

Kolodin and Nguyen accused the commission of pushing legislation that expands its data-collection capabilities and engaging in lobbying practices deemed improper. They assert that ACJC has pressured organizations to alter their stances on proposed legislation and misrepresented those positions.

Nguyen, as the chair of House Judiciary, expressed frustration over the commission’s communication style. He pointed out the challenges in contacting ACJC members during past sessions and highlighted the lack of outreach from Executive Director Andrew LeFevre concerning discussions about its future.

LeFevre defended the commission’s practices and rejected the allegations, emphasizing that data collection occurs only with legislative approval. He acknowledged previous communication lapses, offering an apology to Nguyen during his remarks.

Questions arose regarding ACJC Chairman David Byers’ involvement in the Judicial Branch’s Task Force on Disinformation, which aims to safeguard the state’s courts against foreign misinformation efforts. Kolodin characterized the task force as a means of suppressing free speech, although credible sources supporting this claim were not identified.

Rep. Alma Hernandez, a Democrat from Tucson, opposed HB 2702, suggesting that the conversation had veered into personal attacks against Byers. She advocated for addressing individual concerns outside the committee debate.

The Administrative Office of the Courts, via a spokesperson, indicated that Byers was unaware of the accusations and is open to discussion to clarify any misunderstandings about the task force’s intentions.

LeFevre reiterated the independence of the task force from the ACJC’s functions, describing Byers as a dedicated public servant.

A forthcoming Senate bill, which aims to extend the commission, was unexpectedly delayed by the Judiciary and Elections Committee, leaving its fate uncertain.

The allegations resurfaced during the hearing echo statements made when LeFevre first testified on January 15 as part of the regular review process for state agencies. Nguyen and Kolodin have scrutinized the commission’s data practices and expressed concerns about a proposed gun registry, leading to the introduction of House Bill 2702 for its termination at the end of this year.

Although HB 2702 initially included allegations about monitoring gun owners, amendments passed on Wednesday removed those claims from the bill. In a letter dated January 29, the ACJC refuted the accusations from Nguyen and Kolodin, labeling them as misleading assertions aimed at undermining the commission’s work.