When an Arizona attorney general states a legal opinion, judges listen but they don’t always heed it.

At the same time, an attorney general’s opinion can provide legal protection for public employees who request it and follow its advice, current and former top lawyers for the state said.

The Arizona Supreme Court said in a 1998 ruling that an attorney general’s opinion is advisory only and not binding on courts. “However the reasoned opinion of a state attorney general should be accorded respectful consideration,” the Supreme Court’s ruling stated.

The limits of how far that consideration goes were illustrated by the state high court’s ruling in the 1998 case. Ruling on a ballot measure to make English Arizona’s official language, the court went against former Attorney General Bob Corbin’s opinion that the measure was constitutional.

On the other hand, the Supreme Court in 1999 agreed with then-Attorney General Janet Napolitano’s opinion that a pay raise for legislators could stand though it was illegal for voters to limit lawmakers’ expense money.

“They can have considerable weight given they’re usually well-researched and well-documented,” said Tim Delaney, a Phoenix attorney who worked in the administrations of three former attorneys general, including four years as solicitor general.

Unless and until a court rules otherwise, an opinion provides state employees and officers with guidance, attorneys said.

State law says public officers and employees can’t be held personally liable for acts done in good-faith reliance on an attorney general’s written opinion. Written opinions by county or municipal attorneys afford similar protection for local government employees.

Attorney general opinions can be requested by state legislators, state agency directors and county attorneys. Most requests are public documents, and all opinions issued are public documents.

Solicitor General Mary O’Grady said Attorney General Terry Goddard, who took office in 2003, has continued the practice of having a committee of lawyers research and draft opinions.

Ms. O’Grady declined to discuss details of how the Proposition 200 opinion evolved, including whether Mr. Goddard accepted the committee’s recommendation.

However, she said Mr. Goddard usually accepts the committee’s conclusions and that the Proposition 200 opinion got expedited treatment.

“We were very aware we need to get something done to get some people guidance,” Ms. O’Grady said. “We’re aware that every public law office, because of the scope of Proposition 200, is wrestling with these same problems.” —