Lawsuit Challenges Arizona Transgender Ballot Measure, Says Lawmakers Concealed its Full Scope

A group of Arizona faith leaders and a political committee are asking a Maricopa County judge to block a proposed constitutional amendment targeting transgender people from reaching voters, arguing state lawmakers violated the Arizona Constitution's "single subject" rule by packaging multiple policies into a single ballot referral, while giving it a title they say obscures its full scope.

The lawsuit, first reported by the Phoenix New Times, was filed Monday in Maricopa County Superior Court, and challenges House Concurrent Resolution 2003, titled the "Protect Girls' Sports in Arizona Act."

Plaintiffs argue the measure violates the Arizona Constitution's single-subject rule because it combines restrictions on transgender student athletes with broader limits on who can use school restrooms, locker rooms and changing facilities.

The plaintiffs — Rev. Sarah Oglesby-Dunegan, Rev. James "Jay" Deskins and the political committee Will of the People — also argue the measure's title is misleading because it references only student athletics despite including provisions affecting access to private facilities.

"We are facing a moment in our country, and in this state, where we are faced with making decisions that will either expand or limit human flourishing," Oglesby-Dunegan, a Unitarian Universalist minister and plaintiff, said in a statement. "Our kids are smart — when they see us bully someone, they wonder when they will be next. We all do."

If approved by voters, HCR 2003 would require public and private schools to designate athletic teams based on a student's biological sex listed on their original birth certificate, barring transgender girls from participating on girls' teams.

The measure would also require schools and athletic organizations to restrict access to restrooms, locker rooms and changing areas based on biological sex. According to the lawsuit, the proposal contains no exceptions for single-occupancy or gender-neutral facilities.

The plaintiffs argue lawmakers violated the constitutional requirement that ballot measures address only one subject because the proposal regulates both student athletics and access to school facilities.

They also contend the title creates a "substantial danger of fraud" by focusing exclusively on girls' sports while omitting provisions that would affect non-athletes and access to school facilities.

Alison Marciniak, executive director of Progress Arizona, criticized the proposal as a political distraction, accusing lawmakers of using transgender Arizonans to divide voters instead of addressing other issues facing the state.

The lawsuit asks the court to declare HCR 2003 legally insufficient and prevent Secretary of State Adrian Fontes from certifying it for the November 2026 ballot. If the court agrees, voters would not see the measure in the general election.