One of Arizona's U.S. senators, Mark Kelly, is in deep controversy over his participation in the video that reminded troops "you can refuse illegal orders."
The president has accused Kelly, a U.S. Navy veteran, and the five other Democratic members of Congress in the video of sedition, and the secretary of defense is asking for a military investigation of Kelly.
But what about Arizona's other U.S. senator, Ruben Gallego? He is also a combat veteran, of the U.S. Marine Corps, and also a Democrat, but he didn't appear in the video.
Sen. Ruben Gallego, D- Ariz., seen here speaking earlier this month, didn't mince words in his criticism of attacks on Sen. Mark Kelly and other Democratic lawmakers who made a video reminding military members that they should not follow unlawful orders.
When asked why Gallego wasn't in the video, his spokesman, Jacques Petit, texted that Gallego "couldn't make it for scheduling reasons." When the Star followed up and asked if he would have participated in the video if not for the scheduling conflict, Petit answered, "I wouldn't say that. Not one way or the other, just that we couldn't swing it."
However, since the controversy blew up over Kelly's participation, Gallego has been, let's say, much more committal.
"F*** you and your investigation," Gallego said on X, in response to the Defense Department's announcement of an investigation into Kelly. He used the full "F" word though, without the asterisks.
In a separate video post, Gallego went on to call the investigation "f***ing insane," again saying the whole F word.
He added, "Secretary Hegseth, all these guys, f*** you guys. You're not going to be able to scare us. We have a right to defend the Constitution of the United States. We have a right to tell other service members that they have a right to ignore illegal orders."
Bills pile up for county's public records lawsuit
Santa Cruz County has spent around $100,000 on Scottsdale lawyers for their losing lawsuit against people who requested election-related records from the county.
Invoices reviewed by the Star show $109,747.50 in billings by Pierce Coleman PLLC, a law firm based in Scottsdale, from August 2022 to September 2025 for election lawsuits.
The majority of that is likely for Santa Cruz County's lawsuit against AUDIT-USA, a group led by Tucsonan John Brakey, but redactions from the public records make it unclear exactly how much was billed for that particular election suit.
The lawsuit was unusual in that it was filed preemptively by Santa Cruz County against people who had requested public records from the county. AUDIT-USA requested the cast vote record, which is a digital representation of each cast vote, for the 2022 general election.
Santa Cruz County initially planned to provide the requested records, then took the unusual step of suing the requestors instead. That's right, the county sued people who had requested records from them, using private counsel. The idea was to get a court ruling that the requested records are not public.
But the case was muddled by the fact that AUDIT-USA did not formally contest Santa Cruz County's decision not to provide the records.
Pima County Superior Court Judge Casey McGinley threw out the case in December 2022, concluding there was no dispute between the parties since AUDIT-USA did not contest the county's decision.
The county then appealed that decision, still using Pierce Coleman as its attorneys. Thousands more dollars later, in October 2025, the Arizona Court of Appeals upheld the Superior Court decision. A unanimous three-judge panel ruled there was no actual dispute on which a judge could rule.
While the bills have steadily piled up in this losing effort, the ones paid thus far are unlikely to be the last.
AUDIT-USA is appealing the appeals court ruling, in part because it limited the attorneys' fees owed by the county to the group. In a Nov. 19 filing, the group argues that Santa Cruz County's attorney's filed suit "without substantial justification,' (which) means that the claim or defense is groundless and is not made in good faith."
The point, Brakey says, is to "ensure that public agencies cannot use litigation to intimidate citizens who lawfully request public records."
'Executive overreach resolution'
Pima County joined a growing list of local jurisdictions Nov. 18 in passing a resolution against executive overreach by the Trump administration.
The resolution accuses the Trump administration of usurping the powers of the legislative branch and exceeding its powers in measures such as the executive order to end birthright citizenship."
It concludes: "the Pima County Board of Supervisors strongly urges the United States Congressional delegation of the State of Arizona to take the lead in pressing their colleagues to stand up and reclaim their Constitutional duty to be an equal partner in the administration of the U.S. government, to work hand-in-hand with the Judicial Branch to ensure that the U.S. Constitution is not violated by the Executive Branch, and to ensure that illegal or unconstitutional actions that have occurred are overturned."
Pima County Supervisor Jen Allen put the item on the agenda, and it passed by a party-line vote 4-1, with Supervisor Steve Christy, a Republican, opposing. He did not voice the reasons for his opposition.
Polling shows tight governor's race
A Nov. 14 poll by Emerson College suggests the Republican primary election for governor of Arizona could be a runaway race, but the general election may be tight.
Rep. Andy Biggs had the support of 50% of the 381 Republican primary voters polled, as compared to 17% for Karin Taylor Robson and 8% for David Schweikert.
When each of those Republicans was lined up against incumbent Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, the race was close in each pairing, among the 850 voters polled.
Hobbs had 44% to Biggs 43%, she had 43% to Robson's 42% and 44% to Schweikert's 39%. The first two differences are within the margin of error, which was 3.3%.
The Emerson College poll is a respected one with an "A-" grade from Nate Silver's Silver Bulletin.
