Highlights
- Supporters of Prop. 145 have appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court after a Maricopa County judge ruled the measure unconstitutional.
- The measure would permanently protect vouchers for military families and void any law — including Prop. 212 — that undermines that right.
- Judge Joseph Kreamer found the two provisions cannot be combined into a single take-it-or-leave-it proposal.
- No date has been set for the Supreme Court to take up the case.
Supporters of Proposition 145, the GOP-backed ballot measure that would shield Empowerment Scholarship Account vouchers for military families and simultaneously void competing reform efforts, have asked the Arizona Supreme Court to reverse a lower-court ruling that threw the measure off the November ballot.
Attorney Thomas Basile, who represents House Speaker Steve Montenegro and Senate President Warren Petersen, is asking the justices to overturn Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Joseph Kreamer's ruling that the measure is constitutionally flawed. Basile does not dispute that Prop. 145 contains two separate provisions: one permanently protecting vouchers for children in military families and allowing those families to bank unused voucher money for college, and a second declaring void any law that undermines that right.
That second provision targets Proposition 212, a citizen initiative that would restrict what voucher funds can purchase, cap eligibility at families earning under $150,000 a year, and end the ability to carry over unused funds. Prop. 212's changes would apply to all voucher recipients, not just military families.
Basile argued the entire purpose of Prop. 145 is to protect scholarship accounts for military families, and that combining the two provisions into one measure is legally sound. "So even if HCR 2048 would effectively preempt all ESA regulations, HCR 2048 still would comprise a unified pronouncement on the state's constitutional understanding of parents' and students' rights with respect to school choice funding," Basile said, using the measure's legislative designation.
Kreamer disagreed, ruling that GOP lawmakers cannot combine the two provisions into a single take-it-or-leave-it proposal. The judge also found that Prop. 145's language would force courts to void entire otherwise-legal measures approved by voters, and that it affects constitutional provisions dealing with judicial review and the separation of powers between branches. Basile countered that courts use severability as an interpretive tool rather than an exercise of independent authority, and that Prop. 145's voiding language does not run afoul of the law.
The AZ Mirror and Tucson.com both reported on Kreamer's original ruling last month. No date has been set for the justices to take up the appeal.
Sources
Every factual claim in this article traces to one of the sources below. See how we work for the editorial process.
- azcapitoltimes.com retrieved 10/08/2026 23:45
Authored by The Scottsdale Signal. Drafted by AI from primary-source material under our beat-specific editorial guides; reviewed by humans before publish under our five-gate process. Sources retrieved at 10/08/2026 23:45. Every claim traces to a source.
