Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Hamburger Menu Hamburger Menu
Subscribe Now Free Newsletter

Tag: Katie Hobbs

Hobbs allows expanded use of tax-free diesel for agricultural vehicles

Key Points:
  • Gov. Katie Hobbs is temporarily allowing agricultural vehicles to use “red dye” vehicles off the farm
  • The tax-free gas includes red dye that’s typically only used on farmland
  • The governor’s office said farmers should not have to pay back taxes when the law reverts in 2027

Saying she’s trying to cut costs for Arizonans, Gov. Katie Hobbs late Tuesday ordered state officials to temporarily stop enforcing laws that now bar farmers and ranchers from using cheaper “red dye diesel” in the trucks they use to deliver agricultural products.

“Arizonans are feeling the squeeze at the grocery store, and we are stepping up to deliver relief,” said the Democratic governor in a press release. “By cutting taxes and regulations for our farmers and ranchers, we’re lowering the cost of doing business and helping Arizona families put food on the table in the face of skyrocketing costs due to the war in Iran.”

Hobbs’s executive order also allows heavier vehicles hauling agricultural products to use state highways.

But exactly how all that would work — and whether there actually would be any permanent financial relief — remains unclear.

At the heart of the problem, diesel fuel is running far north of $6 a gallon. That compares, according to AAA, to about $3.64 a gallon a year ago.

John Boelts, president of the Arizona Farm Bureau, said that is driving up costs for food and fiber producers. And that, in turn, is reflected in the costs to consumers.

Farmers and others can already buy and use red-dye fuel for off-road use, from farm equipment and construction bulldozers to backup generators and data center power systems.

The product is virtually chemically the same as diesel sold at fuel pumps — but without that 24.4-cent-a-gallon federal levy and 26-cent state tax.

When fuel is picked up at a distribution hub, they add red dye to show buyers didn’t pay those taxes, based on the promise to use it only off-road. That dye lets state and federal transportation officials determine whether over-the-road trucks are cheating by buying fuel without paying the levy.

The governor’s order will let agricultural operations buy and use that less expensive dyed fuel for all operations, including deliveries, without fear of penalty—at least through the end of the year.

This comes more than a week after President Trump issued his own order allowing all truckers — not just those hauling agricultural products — to buy the specially marked diesel through 2026.

Less clear, however, is whether Trump’s or Hobbs’s actions will actually save farmers and truckers any money in the long run.

Trump acknowledged that all his order does is defer payment of those federal excise taxes — the ones that truckers normally would have to pay for their on-road use — for the remainder of the year, without penalties or interest.

He makes no mention of what happens in January to all those deferred taxes. Instead, the White House says that it wants to “explore pathways to eliminate the obligation to pay the deferred taxes.”

Hobbs is using a different tactic.

Her order tells the Arizona Department of Transportation, which monitors trucks, to “de-prioritize” the enforcement of state laws that prohibit the use of red dye diesel, at least as far as those hauling agricultural products. It specifically directs them to “refrain from initiating inspections, citations, or other enforcement actions based solely upon the presence or use of dyed fuel in such vehicles” through the end of the year.

Gubernatorial press aide Christian Slater said, however, that those entitled to buy tax-free diesel between now and the end of the year won’t later be billed for what they didn’t pay.

Boelts said any help is welcome.

“It’s a temporary reprieve,” said Boelts, who raises green vegetables like iceberg and romaine lettuce, cauliflower and broccoli in the Yuma area. “The hope would be that that deferral is permanent.”

Ultimately, he said, the solution — at least as far as the state diesel levy is concerned — may rest with the Legislature.

However, Boelts said many new diesel fuel manufacturers have told buyers that using red-dye fuel will void the warranty. He said that may convince some farmers that the dollar savings of tax-free fuel aren’t worth the financial risk.

The other key element of the governor’s program is designed to allow more agricultural products to be delivered in a single load.

Under current law, trucks are limited to 80,000 pounds unless owners or operators obtain a special permit for a fee. Hobbs is directing ADOT to charge no fees for trucks weighing up to 90,800 pounds.

In March, as fuel prices soared, Hobbs said she would consider suspending the state gasoline tax. It is 18 cents a gallon, with an additional penny set aside to clean up old fuel tanks.

But that was while she was negotiating a new state budget with the Republican-controlled Legislature. And nothing ever came of that.

Candidate order on Arizona ballots varies by county

PHOENIX — Wondering why Democrats are listed first on your ballot? Or perhaps Republicans?

It’s not a conspiracy or even political intrigue. Instead, it depends on where you live. Lawmakers set it up that way.

But questions remain about whether Arizona’s ballot-order system is fair — and whether those listed first have a small but potentially significant advantage. 

And, as both federal court litigation and state legislation have shown, what people believe about the existence of a statistical difference is linked to whether they think the current system helps or hurts them and their party.

Under the state Election Code, the order candidates appear on the general election ballot is set based on how well that party’s candidate did in each county in the most recent gubernatorial election.

So ballots this year in Apache, Coconino, Maricopa, Pima, and Santa Cruz counties will list Democrat Katie Hobbs, who won in those counties in 2022, ahead of Republican Andy Biggs. For residents of the other 10 counties, the first name they will see in the gubernatorial race is Biggs because Kari Lake outpolled Hobbs there four years ago.

Everyone else on that ballot gets the same preference.

In Pima County, for example, Democrats running for Congress and the Legislature will also get top billing. Ditto the other four counties where Hobbs beat Lake in 2022, regardless of how well other Democrats on the ballot did that year. Conversely, Republicans in the other 10 counties will get top billing.

Does name placement matter?

Democrats certainly thought so in 2019, when they challenged the system in federal court.

At the time, Republican Gov. Doug Ducey’s 2018 victory over Democrat David Garcia meant that Republicans would be listed first in 11 of the state’s 15 counties in the 2020 and 2022 elections. That included Maricopa County, the state’s largest.

National Democratic groups argued that being listed first gives candidates an advantage and asked U.S. District Judge Diane Humetewa to replace the state’s system with one that randomly rotates the ballot order.

They cited research showing that voters tend to choose the candidate listed first in a race, also known as the “primacy effect.” 

John Krosnick, a Stanford University professor, testified that the concept of “order effects” is not unique to ballots. He said this is because people take in information in a certain order.

Consider a menu.

“We typically start reading at the top of the menu and move down,” he told the judge. “When we encounter objects, usually there is a tendency to lean to the first thing we see.”’ 

This also shows up in polling, Krosnick said. If people are asked to rank the importance of issues like education, crime, and the environment, they tend to rank the first one they hear as the most important. Krosnick said that’s why pollsters routinely rotate the order of options when asking such questions.

Mary O’Grady, the attorney for Hobbs when she was secretary of state at the time, countered with testimony from Sean Trende, the senior elections analyst for Real Clear Politics. He questioned the reliability of studies showing any correlation between ballot order and voter choices.

In the end, though, Humetewa dismissed the case because the plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit could not show they had legal standing or had been injured.

As it turned out, Democrats did fairly well in the 2020 race. 

Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in the presidential race. Mark Kelly ousted McSally — she had been appointed by Ducey to fill out the term of John McCain after his death — from the U.S. Senate. Democrats also won five of the nine congressional seats.

And in 2022 Hobbs beat Lake for governor, and Democrats elected Ruben Gallego to the U.S. Senate and took the races for secretary of state and attorney general.

Republicans reconsider name placement law

Rep. Alexander Kolodin, a Scottsdale Republican, concluded last year that Democrats were right to claim it’s not fair to have ballot order determined by who won the last governor’s race.

So he introduced legislation requiring general election ballots to be crafted so that, from precinct to precinct, the order of which party goes first rotates. That would have meant that each party gets an equal chance to be in that first position — essentially what Democrats asked for ahead of the 2020 election.

He convinced colleagues in the House to adopt the rotation plan. But the plan failed when two Republican senators joined with all the Democrats to kill it.

Kolodin, now running for secretary of state, said he remains convinced the current ballot order system needs to be replaced.

“No political party should enjoy an advantage over another merely because of how a ballot is designed,” he said, adding that it “ensures fairness for all Arizonans, regardless of party.”

All this becomes relevant again with the November general election.

In counties where Biggs defeats Hobbs, Republicans will have top billing in the 2028 and 2030 elections. In the counties she wins, Democrats will have top billing in each race for the next two elections.

Record number of women win gubernatorial nominations

The Democratic and Republican parties have nominated 27 women for governor in this year’s midterm elections, a new record, according to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers....

Get 24/7 political news coverage and access to events honoring top political professionals

Mayes won’t charge Hobbs over pay-to-play allegations, but urges reforms

PHOENIX — Attorney General Kris Mayes will not bring criminal charges against Gov. Katie Hobbs in connection with an alleged pay-to-play scheme involving a state contractor.

In a report released Friday, Mayes acknowledged that the state awarded two substantial increases in payments to Sunshine Residential, a company that provides beds for children in foster care.

The investigation also found that Sunshine had contributed significant sums to Hobbs’ inaugural fund and the Arizona Democratic Party, and that Hobbs had a personal friendship with company owner Simon Kottoor.

But Mayes, a Democrat like Hobbs, said her investigation found no evidence of a bribe or that the Department of Child Safety increased Sunshine’s payments because of the company’s political connections to the governor.

“After two years of investigation, consisting of multiple interviews, reviews of campaign-finance records, procurement records, bank documents, and state emails and chats, totaling over one terabyte of data, including more than 100,000 documents, the investigation has not uncovered any evidence of the necessary quid pro quo to support a bribery charge,” Mayes said.

The findings are supported by a report by Nick Klingerman, chief of the attorney general’s criminal division.

“Sunshine’s political contributions and Kottoor’s close relationship with Gov. Hobbs, as discussed in various news articles, is insufficient to support charging an offense without a quid pro quo,” Klingerman wrote.

So why did Sunshine receive such favorable treatment?

Klingerman said the company’s rate increases appear to have resulted not from a bribe, but from its “outsized leverage” over DCS’ congregate care program.

Sunshine provided services the state needed, including finding additional space when DCS was short on beds and housing siblings together, he said.

The company also told DCS that, without a significant increase in the rates it was paid, it would reduce the number of beds available to the agency and instead contract with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which was willing to pay more.

Mayes said the episode exposes problems with the state’s contracting system.

“Declining prosecution is a conclusion about the legal standard for charging a case, but this case shows there is a need for legislative reform,” she said.

“The Legislature and the governor have the power to ensure greater transparency with regard to political donations made by state contractors,” Mayes said. “I am urging them to work together and try again to pass legislation that does so.”

Mayes did not mention that Hobbs twice vetoed legislation that would have required anyone bidding on a state contract to disclose all the donations made in the prior five years to the governor, anyone running for office, and all of their political committees.

Hobbs said the measure crafted by Sen. T.J. Shope, a Coolidge Republican, fell short because it did not include other reforms she sought, such as new restrictions on state legislators.

Shope, however, said that was just an excuse, particularly since the governor’s office –- and agencies under her control –- decide whether to award contracts.

The investigation took longer to complete, in part, because Hobbs would not submit to an interview about her role in the matter. Instead, the governor agreed only to provide two written statements, denying any involvement in the decision to give Sunshine more money.

Friday’s findings do not end the investigation.

The state Auditor General’s Office has its own probe, assisted by Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell, who is a Republican. There is no word on when that will be completed.

Mayes expects ‘pay-to-play’ investigation to wrap before election

PHOENIX — Gov. Katie Hobbs said Tuesday she’s looking forward to the end of Attorney General Kris Mayes’ two-year-long investigation into whether she was involved in a “pay-to-play” scheme.

But the governor still won’t commit to actually sitting down for an interview with Mayes’ investigators about the state’s decision to sharply boost the money it paid to a company housing children in foster care. The company was owned by a major political contributor to Hobbs and the Arizona Democratic Party.

Mayes, a Democrat like Hobbs, said earlier this week she plans to complete the inquiry into the contract with Sunshine Residential before the November general election.

Mayes confirmed four months ago she had asked the governor to answer questions.

Christian Slater, the governor’s press aide, said at the time that the governor’s office had been in contact with Mayes and was “looking forward to this wrapping up.”

“We are in communication with her,” Hobbs said on Tuesday in response to questions from Capitol Media Services. “I look forward to the conclusion of the investigation.”

The governor also repeated her assertion that she was not involved in the Department of Child Safety’s decision to give back-to-back increases in state payments to Sunshine Residential.

“That is all I have to say on that,” the governor responded.

In 2022, Sunshine gave $100,000 to a committee that was seeking donations for the governor’s 2023 inaugural. Only Arizona Public Service, at $250,000, was a larger contributor.

Nearly $1.7 million was raised for the event, which the governor’s office said ultimately cost $207,000. And under the law at that time, everything not spent on the fundraiser could legally be used for political purposes.

Even before the 2022 election, though, Sunshine contributed $200,000 to the Arizona Democratic Party. And there was another $100,000 donation in 2023.

This is relevant because the state was deciding in 2023 whether to increase the amount of money DCS was paying Sunshine for housing of foster children.

Sunshine initially requested more money from DCS in early 2023. Matthew Stewart, the governor’s first pick to head the agency, rejected that.

The governor withdrew his nomination after it became clear the Senate would not confirm him.

But in May, DCS, now led by former state lawmaker David Lujan, agreed to raise the standard rate from $140 per bed to $195, a 30% increase.

Sunshine said unless it got more money, it would make more of its beds available to the federal government, which was looking for places for immigrant children, according to DCS spokesman Darren DaRonco. He said such a move — the feds were paying $225 — would have meant fewer places for DCS to place its foster children.

Then Sunshine got a new contract boosting its rate to $234.

The Arizona Republic reported that Hobbs and her campaign manager had dined with Simon Koottor and other company leadership as the contract was being finalized. But her office has maintained she never influenced the contracting decision. 

Mayes opened her probe in June 2024.

The attorney general was asked earlier this week whether, in refusing to answer questions, Hobbs had decided to ignore the investigation.

“The answer is ‘no,’” Mayes responded.

“You cannot blow off the Attorney General’s Office,” she said. “Full stop. No one can.”

But the attorney general also suggested that she will move ahead on the probe — with or without the governor’s cooperation.

“We are going to get the information that we need,” Mayes said.

“When we have a result, we will make an announcement,” she said. “And we are near the end of the investigation.”

Hobbs on Tuesday said she is confident that Mayes’ inquiry “is going to show exactly what the director (Lujan) said, that I was not involved in the decision … and the department acted in the best interests of foster kids in Arizona.”

Despite the governor’s assurances, the probe has resulted in political fallout.

That includes legislation crafted by Sen. T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, which sought to require anyone seeking a state contract to disclose any money donated to the campaigns of the governor, gubernatorial candidates and any of their committees.

Hobbs vetoed that bill twice calling it a “political stunt” because it was aimed only at candidates for the governor’s office. Shope responded by saying it is the governor’s office and the agencies it oversees that award contracts, not state lawmakers.

Republican gubernatorial hopeful Andy Biggs has keyed in on that.

“Katie Hobbs has shown throughout her term she’s willing to hide donations and veto bills that would shine a light on the contractors and corporations trying to influence her administration,” he said in a statement in June.

The most competitive governor’s races of 2026

In an age of hyperpartisan politics, governors stand apart. Voters see them differently than they view federal candidates: Your governor fixes roads and bridges, funds your local public school, handles issues that don’t break down along the neat lines of party preference.

That makes for a more convoluted set of contested gubernatorial races than the battle for the U.S. House or Senate. A state like Kansas hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since the 1930s — but Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat, is finishing up her second term. A state like Vermont is solidly in the Democratic column — but Gov. Phil Scott, a Republican, is so popular he didn’t even need to run television ads in his last election.

Read more: Rating the 2026 gubernatorial contests, from Alabama to Wyoming

Governor’s races are also unique because it’s exceptionally rare for an incumbent to lose. In fact, it’s getting harder to do so: Re-election rates for incumbent governors have grown to more than 95% in the last two decades, well above those of members of Congress.

Read more: Gov race ratings: Plenty of intrigue in the next tier

This year, only two incumbents make our list of the most competitive races. Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, is seeking re-election in the swing state President Donald Trump carried by the widest margin in 2024. Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo, a Republican who pulled off the rare feat of beating a sitting governor four years ago, faces a well-known attorney general.

The seven other most-competitive races are for open seats, in which incumbents are either retiring or term-limited. Both parties say they are confident their candidates can sweep the board in November.

“Republican governors dominate rankings for wage growth, job creation, affordability and lower energy costs. Meanwhile, Democrat states are riddled with fraud, out-of-control spending and rising crime,” said Kollin Crompton, communications director at the Republican Governors Association. “It’s clear to Americans what’s at stake this election: It’s commonsense versus crazy. If you want your family to thrive and succeed, elect a Republican governor.”

“In battleground and red state races for governor this year, Democratic candidates are going on offense on the economy and running on plans to lower costs, while forcing their Republican opponents to own the rising cost of groceries, gas, and utility bills, along with major health care cuts,” said Sam Newton, communications director at the Democratic Governors Association.

“Republicans’ close alignment with Donald Trump and the disastrous policies coming out of DC are going to be an especially massive liability for their campaigns. There’s no doubt we have the momentum, but the stakes have never been higher so we’re keeping our foot on the gas to win key flip opportunities like Georgia, Ohio, Nevada and Iowa — and have the winning record to get it done.”

Here are our ratings of the nine most competitive races of the year, in alphabetical order:

ALASKA

The combination of a massive field of candidates and Alaska’s unique primary system — in which the top four candidates advance to a November showdown, regardless of party — make this race the most unpredictable in the nation. Seventeen candidates have filed to run, and while not all of them will formally qualify, that’s still a crowded ballot. At least one candidate, former Democratic state Rep. Jonathan “JKT” Kreiss-Tomkins, is airing ads on television. But, in a measure of how weird this race is, he’s not even the only candidate known by an acronym in the race: Former Angoon City Councilman James “JP4” Parkin IV, a Republican, is also running.

Rating: Tossup

ARIZONA

Gov. Katie Hobbs is the most endangered incumbent Democrat running for re-election. Hobbs won election in 2022 against Kari Lake, the election-denialist Donald Trump ally who proved a flawed candidate, to be generous, by less than a percentage point. Working in her favor: She faces another election-denialist Trump ally in U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs, who has the added baggage of being associated with Washington, D.C. Working in Biggs’s favor: Trump carried the state by nearly 6 points in 2024, his largest winning margin of any swing state.

Rating: Lean Democrat

GEORGIA

Six months ago, Rick Jackson was known in Republican political circles as a big-dollar donor, and that’s it. Today, after dumping $100 million into his first campaign for office, he’s the Republican nominee for governor, beating out three statewide officeholders to win the nod. He faces former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, who romped through the Democratic primary.

Both parties see this as one of the marquee races of the year. Jackson benefits from a bottomless wallet, and he’ll point to Bottoms’s leadership in Atlanta and tenure in the Biden administration. Bottoms benefits from a favorable environment for Democrats, significant primary turnout, and her tight partnership with U.S. Sen. Jon Ossoff, a Democrat running for re-election. Democrats in the state say the two are acting like running mates, and their appeals to different elements of the party’s coalition will help both of them.

Rating: Tossup

IOWA

Both Democrats and Republicans agree there may not be a better candidate running for governor this year than state Auditor Rob Sand, a Democrat who has proven his fundraising chops and his electability in a red state. Sand is the rare Democrat who’s comfortable talking about his faith, love of hunting and connection to his rural roots. He faces investment executive Zach Lahn, the surprise winner of a contested Republican primary. Lahn has his own money, and Iowa hasn’t elected a Democratic governor since Chet Culver won in the 2006 blue wave. The question is whether a similar wave is developing this year — and whether it’s large enough for Sand to overcome Iowa’s increasingly red tilt.

Rating: Tossup

KANSAS

Republicans see Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly’s exit as their best chance to make a pickup this year. The Republican primary features another showdown between the state’s conservative wing — state Senate President Ty Masterson, who has Trump’s endorsement, and Philip Sarnecki, a wealthy financial executive — and the more moderate wing represented by Insurance Commissioner Vicki Schmidt. Most Republicans see Masterson leading the pack, without running away from the rest of the field.

On the other side, Kelly sees state Sen. Ethan Corson as her heir apparent, though Corson faces fellow Sen. Cindy Holscher and Overland Park Mayor Curt Skoog in the Democratic primary.

Rating: Lean Republican

MICHIGAN

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is cruising to the Democratic nomination over Genesee County Sheriff Chris Swanson. She’s likely to face U.S. Rep. John James, who won Trump’s endorsement in the GOP primary, though businessman Perry Johnson is spending heavily out of his own pocket. Democrats are optimistic about Benson, all the more so because the Republican primary turned ugly, early. But Michigan is a swing state, and neither party has elected successive governors since William Milliken followed George Romney in 1970.

Rating: Lean Democrat

NEVADA

Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo was the only challenger to defeat an incumbent in 2022, and he’s the most vulnerable Republican up for re-election this year. Lombardo is a Republican more in the vein of George W. Bush than Trump — which helps in a swing state but puts him on the defensive any time he’s asked to contrast himself with the famously sensitive sitting president.

He faces Attorney General Aaron Ford, who won re-election by a wider margin, and with more votes, than Lombardo did on the same ballot. Count on Ford to tie Lombardo to the president and the economy. And expect this to be one of the most competitive races in the country.

Rating: Lean Republican

OHIO

Former state health director Amy Acton has been the surprise of the cycle, proving herself an able fundraiser and the best shot Democrats have had at the governorship in two decades. She faces entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, the former presidential candidate who has dumped millions into his own campaign. Both parties see this as one of the most competitive races of the year. Ramaswamy will have the cash edge in a state that has trended to the right, but his association with the Department of Government Efficiency and his past work as a healthcare executive give Democrats something to target. Polls show a virtually tied race in spite of Ramaswamy’s early advertising blitz.

Rating: Lean Republican

WISCONSIN

Democrats face the potential for a major disaster in the consummate swing state: The party’s leading gubernatorial contender, Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, dropped out of the race after discovering her campaign manager allegedly misappropriated the TV ad budget. Republicans are meddling in the primary by boosting state Rep. Francesca Hong, a democratic socialist who many Democrats don’t think can win a statewide race, as “too liberal.”

Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley jumped back in the race with Gov. Tony Evers’s support 10 days after quitting and endorsing Rodriguez. And former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes hasn’t been able to catch fire. Democrats are planning to paint the GOP nominee, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, as a Trump acolyte from swampy Washington. Tiffany couldn’t be more pleased at the infighting he’s seeing on the other side of the aisle.

Rating: Tossup

7 govs have banned state employees from prediction market wagering

Key points:
  • Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs is among seven governors to bad state employees from insider trading on prediction markets
  • Trump administration employee on unpaid leave for alleged use of inside information
  • Kalshi has taken action against those deemed to have been wagering with nonpublic info

At least seven governors have banned state employees from using insider information to place bets, as questions around ethics and insider trading continue to hound prediction market operators.

The governors of Arizona, California, Illinois, Maryland, New York, North Carolina and Wisconsin all signed executive orders to ensure no one uses information gleaned from performing their jobs to enrich themselves.

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs’s July 9 order further designates all nonpublic information as confidential.

“All Arizona State executive branch employees are strictly prohibited from disclosing or using any nonpublic information obtained due to their public service to personally profit from, avoid loss from, or assist another person or entity, in profiting or avoiding loss from participation in prediction markets,” Hobbs’s executive order reads.

The moves came before the Commodity Futures Trading Commission investigators reportedly began looking into Gabriel Perez, President Donald Trump teleprompter operator for the past decade, for allegedly using his knowledge of what the president would say to win more than $100,000 on bets on Kalshi.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Perez was placed on unpaid administrative leave. The White House issued a memo in March warning staff against “using nonpublic government information to place wagers.”

Suspicions over government insider trading were raised in January when a Polymarket user appeared to win more than $400,000 by betting that the United States would “invade Venezuela” by Jan. 31. The site refused to pay out the bet, ruling the special operation did not constitute an invasion.

Federal authorities in April arrested a special operations soldier involved in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro for being behind the account. Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, Kathy Hochul of New York, Wes Moore of Maryland, Tony Evers of Wisconsin and Hobbs all cited the incident in their executive orders as an example of why a ban was necessary.

That same month, Kalshi announced it had suspended three accounts belonging to congressional candidates that allegedly bet on their own races. They were all fined and banned from the platform for five years. The company previously fined and banned a long-shot candidate for California governor in February for allegedly wagering on his own race.

Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ann Timmer on Tuesday confirmed in a press release that the policy outlined in Hobbs’s executive order is already in place for state judiciary employees.

Arizona has been in the legal throes with Kalshi, the largest CFTC-regulated prediction market in the United States, since the platform sued the state in March. The Arizona Gaming Commission had sent the company a cease-and-desist order a year prior, but the company preemptively sued after catching wind that the Arizona attorney general was planning to file criminal charges.

The state filed a 20-count criminal indictment against Kalshi on March 17 alleging it was “operating an illegal gambling business” by accepting sports wagers and betting on elections. It was the first time a state filed criminal charges against the platform for violating state gaming laws.

The CFTC later sued the state, arguing it held federal preemption over prediction markets; a federal judge in May sided with the CFTC on the issue of whether the state could bring charges and permanently blocked the state’s criminal case against Kalshi.

Newsom in March became the first governor to ban state employees from participating in insider trading on prediction markets. The order prohibited the use of non-public information for personal profit and expanded the existing statewide insider trading ban for California elected officials to also cover prediction markets.

“Public service should not be a get-rich-quick scheme,” Newsom said in a statement at the time. “At a time when Trump’s Washington is riddled with ethical failures and insider profiteering, California is drawing a bright line: If you serve the public as a political appointee, you serve the public — period. We’re not going to tolerate this kind of corruption in California.”

All but one of the states where an executive order was issued are involved in some form of prediction market litigation. In the one that isn’t, North Carolina, lawmakers passed a provision in the state budget (Senate Bill 257) to formally authorize prediction markets in the state — becoming the first state to do so.

Emma Kinery is a State Affairs national reporter covering state politics and policy out of our Washington, D.C. office. Contact Emma Kineryat ekinery@stateaffairs.comor on X @EmmaKinery.

Hobbs vetoes state contract transparency measure amid GOP ‘pay-to-play’ allegations

Key Points:
  • Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoes financial disclosure measure
  • Measure would have required companies to disclose donations to governor and her allies
  • Hobbs’ veto leaves gaps in laws on contractor donations and transparency

Calling it a “political stunt,” Gov. Katie Hobbs has quashed a financial disclosure measure that was inspired by a state contract controversy within her Department of Child Safety.

The measure crafted by Sen. T.J. Shope would have required any company bidding on state contracts to immediately disclose any donations made to the governor, any campaign committees or inaugural funds, and any entity that “advocates for the election of the governor or for the defeat of an electoral opponent of the governor.” That requirement would extend to a company’s officers, directors and their family members, covering donations made in the prior five years..

The Coolidge Republican first introduced the measure last year after a public disclosure statement proved that Sunshine Residential, which provides group homes to children in the state’s foster care system, had donated $400,000 to Hobbs and the Arizona Democratic Party. It was later awarded a more than 60% increase for the same services — a rate that ultimately climbed from $140 to $234 per bed.

That led to ongoing investigations of what Shope has called a “pay-to-play” scheme by both Attorney General Kris Mayes and Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell.

The governor made no reference to any of that in her veto message.

“This proposal is a political stunt that applies only to one elected official,” the governor wrote in her veto message. “What we really need is real transparency and accountability for all elected officials, campaigns, and affiliated political committees.”

Shope, for his part, told Capitol Media Services that it is the governor who is playing politics.

The proof, he said, was that the governor, with the help of Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan, sought to add new restrictions about donations from those bidding on state contracts — restrictions that would apply not just to state officials but to lawmakers.

“The Legislature, in and of itself, is not involved in procurement,” Shope said. He said decisions on who gets a contract, the terms of the contract and any amendments are strictly within the purview of the Governor’s Office and the department heads who report to her, making any proposals to add verbiage on donations to legislators a diversion.

Even so, Shope said the veto accomplished something.

The veto, he argued, puts the pay-to-play issue squarely before voters in November.

“It is now truly the proverbial political football in the sense that the voters will get their opportunity to weigh in in November,” Shope said.

Hobbs has been on the political defensive since it was first revealed that Sunshine Residential gave $100,000 to her 2023 inaugural fund. Close to $1.7 million was raised for the event, and everything not spent on the fundraiser can legally be used for political purposes, including Hobbs’ efforts to elect Democrats.

It ultimately turned out that Sunshine, owned by Paradise Valley businessman Simon Kottoor, also gave $300,000 to the Arizona Democratic Party.

All this came as the state was deciding whether to increase the amount of money the Department of Child Safety, run at the time by David Lujan, a Hobbs appointee, was paying Sunshine for out-of-home cases for foster children.

An agency spokesman said Sunshine’s initial bid for more money in 2023 was rejected.

Agency spokesman Darren DaRonco said Sunshine threatened to shift beds to house federal immigrant children unless it received more funding — a move that would have reduced placements for Arizona foster children. DCS agreed, raising the rate from $140 to $195 per bed, then later $234 under a new contract.

Hobbs had already vetoed Shope’s first disclosure bill in 2025, but said earlier this year she would consider the issue if the approach were more comprehensive — including a blanket ban on registered lobbyists covering food, beverages, lodging and speaking engagements for state officials, employees and legislators.

Gubernatorial spokesman Christian Slater said Hobbs agreed to scrap that language after Shope showed no interest in including such a blanket ban in contract disclosure legislation.

But he also acknowledged that Shope is not alone among lawmakers in having no particular desire to cut off lobbyist largesse: Not a single Democrat, including Sundareshan, offered a similar proposal this session.

Sundareshan said there may be a time to discuss such a ban. But not now.

Sundareshan, who noted she relies on her $24,000 lawmaker salary, said she finds herself attending lobbyist receptions to help offset expenses — something, she said, a salary hike approved by voters could change.

Still, she was willing to vote for Shope’s original plan for that five-year lookback disclosure — with some additions.

Most significantly, she wants to outright bar any contribution, gift or other item worth more than $50 to any candidate for legislative or statewide office or political action committee from anyone connected with a bidder from the time a bid is submitted through 90 days after the award of a contract. That, said Slater, is far more comprehensive than simple disclosure.

Shope, however, got the Republican-controlled Senate to reject Sundareshan’s addition.

“I look forward to chatting with the sponsor at a future date,” he said. But Shope conceded he never contacted Sundareshan, instead sticking with his original plan which got through the House — unamended — and sent to the governor where he acknowledged it would be rejected.

So, knowing that his plan was headed for yet another veto, why didn’t he reach out?

“I think that that’s a fair question,” Shope acknowledged Monday. But he said that Sundareshan’s amendment “was also equally a political statement” and not an honest effort to come up with an acceptable plan.

The veto leaves intact the gaps in disclosure law that allowed the Sunshine contract increase to go largely unscrutinized — and hands voters a live issue heading into November.

Veto blitz: Hobbs blocks 88 bills before the weekend

Key Points:
  • Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs vetoes 88 bills passed by GOP-controlled Legislature
  • Hobbs rejects bills banning Sharia Law and restricting gender transition hormone therapy for minors
  • Hobbs is still short of her 2025 veto record

Arizonans cited by speed cameras won’t see their fines capped $75.

Teens won’t be able to get a learner’s permit at 15.

There won’t be a new state ban targeting Sharia law.

And there won’t be new restrictions on gender transition hormone therapy for minors.

These are just four of the 88 bills approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature that Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed last Friday. That brings her veto tally up to 151, just short of the 174 vetoes she issued last year.

Whether she has time to break that record is unclear. While the Legislature adjourned a week ago, an aide to the governor said she still has over 40 measures on her desk awaiting action.

Her latest vetoes touch on everything from religious law and immigration to traffic enforcement and teen driving.

Religious laws, bank practices

Among the bills on the governor’s hit list Friday were two measures designed to preclude the use of any religious law in Arizona.

One sponsored by Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, would have specifically barred the use of Sharia Law in Arizona.

Hobbs, in her veto message, noted that the measure had a list of what she called “abhorrent practices” that it would prohibit. That includes honor killings, coerced marriages, female genital mutilation, polygamy, and domestic violence or spousal abuse “that is justified by cultural, religious or family authority.”

Hobbs said those practices are already outlawed under existing federal and state statutes. All this would do, she said, is result in the state defending an unconstitutional measure “that the state of Arizona will lose, costing taxpayers millions of dollars.”

Hobbs also rejected a broader measure that would have made it illegal for judges to rely on any religious sectarian law to influence their decisions.

Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff, built in some exceptions, saying it doesn’t apply to any law “based on Anglo-American legal tradition and principles on which the United States was founded. And courts still could recognize “traditional marriage between a man and a woman” performed by a member of the clergy.

“This bill is a solution in search of a problem and therefore unnecessary,” the governor wrote.

Hobbs also rejected several other proposals from Rogers.

One would have made it illegal for banks, credit unions and even check-cashing services to do business with people who are in this country without legal immigration status. It also would have barred financial institutions from sending any money from those same people to other countries, something Rogers said was designed to reduce the number of people in this country without legal status.

Hobbs didn’t address any of that, saying in her veto message that it would impose “additional red tape” on Arizona financial institutions.”

The governor also vetoed a separate Rogers-sponsored measure which would have required the state and all agencies to provide the federal government with any information it wants about people in Arizona who are undocumented.

Photo radar, learner’s permits 

Sen. David Gowan’s now-vetoed proposal would have capped fines for speeders at $75, far short of the $200 penalty some cities imposed.

More significantly, it would have barred the Motor Vehicle Division from informing insurance companies of those speed violations. And the citations could not be used as “points” to determine when someone has a license suspended.

The final version of the bill limited the protections solely for those exceeding the posted speed limits on streets and highways. It would not aid motorists who were caught on camera running red lights, speeding in school zones, and who were guilty of criminal speeding, which means traveling more than 20 miles an hour over a posted limit. None of that convinced Hobbs to sign.

“This bill undermines cities’ ability to keep communities safe by making their own decisions about law enforcement policies,” the governor wrote in her rejection letter.

Hobbs also decided that 15 is too young to get a learner’s permit.

Current law requires teens to wait until they are 15 1/2. Rep. Nick Kupper, R-Surprise, said this would give youngsters extra time to practice, including additional required time on the road with parents. But foes still said teens that age lack the required discipline to be safe drivers.

Hobbs agreed, pointing out that the current driving age is already below the recommendation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration which suggests waiting until 16.

Nuclear energy and vaccine mandates

Hobbs also said she does not want to override local control when it comes to placing small “modular” nuclear reactors in rural communities.

Supporters said that there is no reason to give county supervisors the power to deny zoning, as these would be going in near large industrial users, presumably data centers. They said it would provide needed economic development in the state’s rural counties.

“Given record power demand growth projections, Arizona must responsibly reduce barriers to developing new energy projects quickly,” Hobbs wrote.

But the governor said while the technology for such modular reactors is “promising,” it is still emerging. And Hobbs also took a swipe at lawmakers for creating special rules citing nuclear reactors but not other forms of energy.

Hobbs also rejected GOP-backed efforts to roll back public-health rules.Also rejected were two bills dealing with vaccinations.

One would have banned state and local governments from requiring vaccinations, masks or other face coverings.

Hobbs said Arizona already has “robust exemptions” to vaccination requirements. That includes allowing opting out of school requirements for medical, religious and even personal reasons.

But she said there’s another issue.

“It’s concerning diseases that were once eliminated are making a comeback in Arizona’s playgrounds and classrooms because of dangerous information,” the governor wrote.

The other bill Hobbs vetoed would have said that businesses cannot refuse to employ or provide services to those who aren’t vaccinated.

Gender transition limitations

Also meeting with the governor’s displeasure were three bills on gender transition.

A 2022 Arizona law, signed by then-Gov. Doug Ducey, already makes gender reassignment surgery on minors illegal.

One bill this year would have enabled minors to file civil suits against those who perform transitions for up to 25 after they reach adults.

Another would have extended that ban on surgery to any form of what proponents call gender-affirming care for minors, including hormone treatments.

And a third would have built on that and said healthcare providers who provide any such care to minors are responsible for the costs of any detransition treatments as well as legal fees and costs.

Hobbs wrapped all three into a single veto, saying that the law against gender reassignment surgery makes the bills “unnecessary.” 

Her veto message focused on the existing surgical ban and did not grapple with the bill’s attempt to extend restrictions to hormone therapy.

Hobbs also rejected a proposal by Rep. Rachel Keshel, D-Tucson, to direct the state Board of Education to develop “age appropriate” programs to teach school children about prenatal development. The governor said instructional requirements “should be left to experts, not politicians trying to force mandates on our teachers.”

 

Other vetoed bills include:

– Barring the state Game and Fish Department from using public monies to transport Mexican wolf pups into Arizona;

– Requiring paid petition circulators for ballot measures to disclose to would-be signers that they are not from Arizona;

– Expanding child neglect statutes to cover women who expose a fetus to prenatal drugs or if a newborn is found to have fetal alcohol syndrome;

– Mandating that ballots have some built-in fraud countermeasures like watermarks, holograms or paper that changes color under heat.

Biggs, Schweikert skip the fireworks in tame GOP governor debate

Key Points:
  • Two Republican frontrunners largely avoided attacking each other on the debate stage
  • Congressman Andy Biggs is the clear GOP favorite and emerged unscathed
  • Congressman David Schweikert maintains he’s the stronger general election candidate

Those tuning in to the Republican gubernatorial primary debate on June 17 expecting to see two frontrunners at each other’s throats likely left disappointed.

Instead, Congressmen Andy Biggs and David Schweikert shared their allotted time courting independent voters, “geeking out” on state budget math and taking shots at incumbent Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs. 

Biggs, who entered the race in early 2025, is expected by many to handily defeat Schweikert in the July 21 Republican primary. Polling numbers, political donations and local endorsements have all leaned in Biggs’ favor, and he also nabbed the coveted blessing from President Donald Trump. 

Political consultants told the Arizona Capitol Times in a post-debate briefing that Schweikert did not do much to shift those tailwinds in his direction.

“Schweikert seems to be content with second place,” said GOP public relations consultant Barrett Marson.

Schweikert continues to run a campaign that vexes political consultants and dedicated GOP voters. Despite polls suggesting otherwise, the congressman maintains that he is the only Republican in the race who can defeat Hobbs in the Nov. 3 general election, even when pressed on the issue by reporters after the debate.

“I do pretty darn well with independents in one of the toughest congressional districts in America, and have election after election after election,” Schweikert said, referring to the 1st Congressional District in northeast Phoenix and Scottsdale. 

Schweikert has lobbed an occasional attack against Biggs, criticizing his relationships with far-right groups and personalities. But he did not come out swinging on the debate the way many expected he might.

“He didn’t swing at all,” Marson said. “Going in, I thought it was going to be a heavyweight bout, I thought it was going to be a little scrappy MMA fight between Schweikert and Biggs, and it wasn’t.”

Schweikert saved his criticism for the end of the debate, instead focusing more on the negative impact of Turning Point USA on Republican politics in Arizona. In contrast, Biggs frequently touts the endorsement of late TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk, and the group’s political action committee has already spent nearly $500,000 to bolster his campaign.

“When you’re wholly owned by Turning Point, and you’ve lost election and lost election and lost election, it puts everything in our future at risk,” Schweikert said in his closing remarks. 

After the debate, Biggs told reporters that “TPUSA and I are not what I would call bedfellows,” but acknowledged that they are significant backers of his bid for the Ninth Floor. 

Biggs has largely avoided going on the attack against Schweikert, with the exception of the occasional quip teasing his fellow congressman for not having a direct line to the president. During the June 17 debate, Biggs spent more time name-dropping Democrats he has worked alongside in Congress than he did his Republican opponent.

“The fact that Biggs is trying to present himself as a bipartisan moderate means he’s that confident he’s getting out of the primary,” said Democratic consultant Stacy Pearson. “He name-checked (U.S. Rep.) Greg Stanton, (former U.S. Sen.) Kyrsten Sinema, (U.S. Rep.) Hakeem Jeffries. I mean, he went through the who’s who of Democrats.”

Biggs also shed more light on his policy goals, some of which were slightly surprising. He pledged to eliminate tax incentives for data centers, expand Arizona’s already-universal school voucher program and use the state land trust to fund education. 

Hobbs secured a three-year moratorium on new data center tax incentives, a compromise that Biggs attributed to legislative Republicans. However, GOP members of the Legislature fought back against repealing the data center tax incentive entirely, arguing it would send the wrong message to investors eyeing the state for development. 

All of the candidates on the debate stage, including long-shot contenders Scott Neely and Ken Miceli, expressed uncertainty about the security and efficacy of Arizona’s mail-in voting system. Biggs pledged to sign the “Florida-style” election reform bill introduced by GOP state lawmakers, while Schweikert claimed his deceased mother received ballots in the mail for several years after her death.

Marson and Pearson criticized Citizens Clean Elections’ debate moderators for not asking the candidates about the results of the 2020 elections. In 2021, Biggs voted against certifying Arizona’s election results, which helped elect former President Joe Biden, while Schweikert voted against certifying Pennsylvania’s election results. 

Hobbs has not yet committed to debating her eventual Republican opponent after skipping the 2022 debate with then-GOP nominee Kari Lake, citing Lake’s promotion of conspiracy theories surrounding the 2020 election. Pearson said Hobbs should skip a debate with Biggs unless he can acknowledge that Biden won in 2020. 

“She owes the voters (an) appearance in front of the voters, she doesn’t owe (participation in) a format that allows for him to sidestep questions,” Pearson said. “They weren’t even asked about the (January 6th) insurrection, which I thought was slightly terrifying.”

Marson argued Hobbs would only stand to lose from participating in a debate with Biggs because he would “destroy” her, which is why she likely won’t agree to face off against him.

Mail-in ballots for the July 21 primary election are set to go out to voters on June 24. 

New law aims to curb squatting in vacant homes

Key Points:
  • A new law should stop squatters faster and allow property owners to get them out in about five days
  • Exact statistics don’t exist for the number of squatter cases per year in Arizona, but law enforcement and real estate agents say it is a problem
  • The new law does not affect rights and remedies under the state’s landlord and tenant act

Goldilocks won’t be squatting for long in any Arizona homes after a new law takes effect. 

Sen. Wendy Rogers made the fairy tale comparison herself at a press conference on June 1 after her Senate Bill 1426 was signed into law by Gov. Katie Hobbs. The new regulations intend to make it easier for property owners to evict squatters faster. 

“It’s like Goldilocks and the Three Bears,” she said. “This is when Goldilocks goes into a home, enters the bears’ home without permission when they’re out. She eats their porridge, sits in and breaks their chairs, sleeps in their beds, making her the classic intruder squatter.”

It’s what happened to D’Andrea Turner and her then-husband Keith. D’Andrea had been traveling back and forth to Michigan to take care of her elderly mother and also recovering from surgery after an aneurysm. Keith was a long-haul trucker on the road and when he came back, he discovered squatters in their home. 

They tried to remove the squatters, but they kept coming back and eventually, the Turners found out their identities were stolen from documents in their home and their home had been fraudulently sold. Affidavits and forms had been notarized and submitted through Maricopa County and the sale wasn’t stopped until the squatters tried to cash the check in the Turner’s names multiple times but were unsuccessful, according to previous media reports. 

Turner said the hardest thing was the identity theft and the property being defrauded, plus losing irreplaceable items in their home, such as photos of her children, a teddy bear and computers. They raised their children and lived in their home for over 12 years, she said. 

“I had many tearful nights, many terrible nights because of this,” she said. “As working class people that’s putting our money into mortgages and things that we think is going to sustain us for when we’re done. We buy properties so that we can leave it for generations.”

Turner said she’s grateful to Rogers for getting the bill passed. In the Turners’ case, two people were eventually charged with identity theft, forgery and fraudulent schemes. Despite that progress, the Turners are still sorting out the mess with their insurance company. 

“I feel very fortunate that someone heard me. It’s like you’re screaming at the top of a mountain and someone can hear you,” she said. “I feel very confident that the senator heard me and she understands that we, as Arizonans, will not accept this.”

A squatter is different from a trespasser. Whereas trespassers usually leave after they’re told, squatters can use tactics to make it look like they live at the property or create a false lease to try to prove they have a rental agreement. 

The law requires the court to issue a writ of restitution immediately after the court signs any judgement against an unauthorized person, according to the bill language. It outlines conditions that constitute an eviction lawsuit, such as an unauthorized person unlawfully occupying the property and the property owner has directed the person to leave. Another condition is the person did not have a prior verbal or written agreement to cohabitate with the property owner at a residential property.

The new law would not apply or modify the rights and remedies available to landlords and tenants as prescribed by the Arizona Residential Landlord Tenant Act. The law will not affect current or former tenants, immediate family members or people who had a verbal or written agreement to live on the property with the owner.

The law will take effect 90 days after it was signed. This was Rogers’ third attempt to get the bill passed. The bill originally came to Rogers from a constituent who is a real estate attorney and told her it’s a prevalent problem. 

“Arizona is sending a clear message. Unlawful occupation of someone else’s property will not be tolerated,” Rogers said. “Our border is secure, but we still have nefarious actors inside our country who would perpetuate this on property owners.”

The game changer this year was an early start in collaboration and most notably, the constables’ support, along with realtors, she said, and added she was pleasantly surprised by the amount of bipartisan support the bill received. 

“That’s the way we should get stuff done,” she said. 

Tim Beaubian, senior director of government affairs at Arizona REALTORS Association, said the bipartisan support of this bill this year shows what an impact this is going to be for the state of Arizona and that private property rights are a bedrock. 

The bill passed with wide bipartisan support in both chambers. Sen. Catherine Miranda cast the lone no vote. She said she understood the need to protect homeowners, but she cited homelessness and a lack of support from the state and the city of Phoenix.

“The state isn’t doing enough to help homelessness,” she said. “I’m not willing to attack any efforts that homeless people are trying to make to survive.”

In October 2025, Hobbs announced $13.5 million in grant funding in the Arizona Promise budget to support eviction prevention, homelessness response and referral efforts across Arizona, according to a news release. At that time, it put the Hobbs Administration’s total investment in services to over $150 million.

Constable Scott Blake, who works in the Hassayampa district in northwest Maricopa County, said the new law should help people remove squatters faster. 

Currently, the law says people have to go through an eviction process, starting with a five-day notice, Blake said. A court summons and complaint is required, in addition to showing the judge the “lease” and showing it’s illegitimate. After another few days of waiting, the judge can order a writ and then a constable can come and do the eviction. That whole process takes over two weeks. 

“The new law shortcuts all of that, you’re going to be able to get into court and say, ok, this person’s going to have to leave and you’re going to get a writ and somebody’s going to come out there and take care of that,” he said. “I think in less than five days you’d be able to remove somebody who is a squatter and unauthorized occupant.”

It will help a small handful of people right now with the possibility of more in the future as things tighten up, he added. 

Blake said another trend he has started to see more often is people squatting on vacant, rural land, which is usually owned by the state or a private property owner. Systemic issues like the increased cost of living will likely keep contributing to people looking for places to live, he added. 

“I’m not sure that we’ve seen the end of financial difficult times,” he said. 

The new law would require a five-day notice to vacate before going to court. If the criteria listed in the law is met, a judge may order the immediate eviction of that tenant, and it gives the property owner a legal hammer too, the spokesperson said.

There’s technically two different types of squatters: ones with an agreement to live at the property for a limited time and those who do not have an agreement with the property owner, a spokesperson for the Maricopa County Justice Courts said. Both types of cases come to justices of the peace. 

The second type is what the new law speaks to and is rare. If there is no written, verbal or implied tenancy agreement, the case can come to court, but a judge may dismiss it and say the court has no jurisdiction because there’s no agreement. Then it would be a trespassing issue for the police to write a citation, which is a different court process, they said.

The data on how many squatter cases happen per year in Arizona does not exist because landlords have to deliver a notice to vacate before they go to the courts. The courts don’t track what type of criminal activity or other breach might have triggered an immediate eviction and essentially, it doesn’t matter once the case reaches court, the spokesperson said.

There is a category of evictions called “immediate,” which usually involves a breach of the lease that is not fixable, such as if criminal activity took place. The landlord has to give notice of the breach and may file the court case the same day. If the tenant is found guilty in court a few days later, the judge can order the immediate eviction, which means they have to be out the day following the court appearance. 

As for statistics on that type of case, landlords brought 84,805 cases to court and 406 of those were immediate evictions in 2025, but it’s likely few to none of those involved squatters, the spokesperson said.

You don't have credit card details available. You will be redirected to update payment method page. Click OK to continue.