With the caveat that I am not by any stretch of the imagination an attorney: I really don't understand the logic behind the argument that appellate judges should be elected statewide because their decisions affect the whole state. Can't the same thing be said about legislators, especially those who are in key positions like the Senate president? I know the analogy isn't perfect, but still, the whole idea of having local elections is to make sure that different parts of a larger entity have a say, rather than having the majority control everything.
I think you mean the current legislative majority. Which hopefully will change in the coming years - we need more legislators who DO want to support public education.
About English language immersion: English is simply weird. I have great sympathy for someone trying to learn it. For instance, a common joke among speech scientists and engineers is that a plausible pronunciation of "ghoti" is "fish" - "gh" is often pronounced "f" (as in tough), "o" can be pronounced "ih" (as in women), and "ti" is often pronounced "sh" (as in nation). Anyway, in a language like English that uses words from many different sources, it can be quite difficult for people to get the nuances, nuances that are needed when you are trying to learn a new subject. Having some time with your own native language would seem to be important.
Hank, you're granting the Superintendent too much facial validity. The key language from Proposition 203 comes from the Findings and Declarations (Section 1):
"6. Therefore it is resolved that: all children in Arizona public schools shall be taught English as rapidly and effectively as possible.
"7. Under circumstances in which portions of this statute are subject to conflicting interpretations, these Findings and Declarations shall be assumed to contain the governing intent of the statute."
So the purpose of initiative is for children to learn English, and that's explicitly granted interpretive authority as to the people's intent. Plausibly, the state supreme court could rule in favor of Horne. But it could also rule that given research published in the last quarter century strongly in favor of dual-language immersion, the 2019 statute eliminating 4-hour SEI and the 50-50 option approved by the Board of Education does advance Finding/Declaration #6. We just don't know now.
Totally. Idk if he’ll actually win this case. But the fact that the legislature tried multiple times to repeal the law the right way, by sending it to voters, is something of an admission that this workaround was and perhaps not exactly a constitutional one.
From my other life as a union activist in Florida, that idea is important in the construction of collective bargaining agreements: "If you had to ask for it, that means you didn't have it." I suspect that's a less persuasive argument on statutory construction in this case because portions of a legislature aren't the same as parties to a contract. But IANAL, etc.
With the caveat that I am not by any stretch of the imagination an attorney: I really don't understand the logic behind the argument that appellate judges should be elected statewide because their decisions affect the whole state. Can't the same thing be said about legislators, especially those who are in key positions like the Senate president? I know the analogy isn't perfect, but still, the whole idea of having local elections is to make sure that different parts of a larger entity have a say, rather than having the majority control everything.
When are the voters in Arizona going to realize the legislature doesn't give a shit about public education?
I think you mean the current legislative majority. Which hopefully will change in the coming years - we need more legislators who DO want to support public education.
About English language immersion: English is simply weird. I have great sympathy for someone trying to learn it. For instance, a common joke among speech scientists and engineers is that a plausible pronunciation of "ghoti" is "fish" - "gh" is often pronounced "f" (as in tough), "o" can be pronounced "ih" (as in women), and "ti" is often pronounced "sh" (as in nation). Anyway, in a language like English that uses words from many different sources, it can be quite difficult for people to get the nuances, nuances that are needed when you are trying to learn a new subject. Having some time with your own native language would seem to be important.
Hank, you're granting the Superintendent too much facial validity. The key language from Proposition 203 comes from the Findings and Declarations (Section 1):
"6. Therefore it is resolved that: all children in Arizona public schools shall be taught English as rapidly and effectively as possible.
"7. Under circumstances in which portions of this statute are subject to conflicting interpretations, these Findings and Declarations shall be assumed to contain the governing intent of the statute."
So the purpose of initiative is for children to learn English, and that's explicitly granted interpretive authority as to the people's intent. Plausibly, the state supreme court could rule in favor of Horne. But it could also rule that given research published in the last quarter century strongly in favor of dual-language immersion, the 2019 statute eliminating 4-hour SEI and the 50-50 option approved by the Board of Education does advance Finding/Declaration #6. We just don't know now.
Totally. Idk if he’ll actually win this case. But the fact that the legislature tried multiple times to repeal the law the right way, by sending it to voters, is something of an admission that this workaround was and perhaps not exactly a constitutional one.
From my other life as a union activist in Florida, that idea is important in the construction of collective bargaining agreements: "If you had to ask for it, that means you didn't have it." I suspect that's a less persuasive argument on statutory construction in this case because portions of a legislature aren't the same as parties to a contract. But IANAL, etc.
Voters should never be voting on education policies thay know nothing about. A 55% graduation rate for ELLs tells the story of AZ's nativist policy.
"As of 2023, Arizona remains the only state with English-only education legislation still in effect."
https://immigrationimpact.com/2023/05/05/english-only-education-arizona/