The Anatomy of an Accountability Law

In early 2019, a small group of advocates sat across from a state lawmaker in a sparse conference room at the Arizona State Capitol. They presented a simple request: allow an external entity to look inside the state's prison system to ensure people were not dying from neglect. The lawmaker leaned back and delivered a common refrain: "The Department of Corrections tells me they handle their problems internally. Why do we need outsiders?"

Five years later, that same legislature voted to pass Senate Bill 1507. The bill dismantled the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry's long-standing practice of investigating itself. It established a statutory framework for independent oversight.

The distance between that 2019 meeting room and the 2023 legislative victory was not a straight line. It was a grueling, multi-year operation requiring deep research, intense coalition building, strategic setbacks, and a fundamental shift in who was positioned to lead the public conversation. For Praxis Initiative, the fight for SB 1507 represents our core organizational history.

The Pre-2019 Vacuum: How Self-Policing Failed

For decades, Arizona's prison system relied on an internal affairs model. When an incarcerated person died under suspicious circumstances, when staff used excessive force, or when medical care was denied, ADCRR's own Investigative Operations Unit (IOU) handled the case.

This structure contained a fundamental flaw. An agency cannot objectively investigate itself. The structural incentive to hide failure will almost always outweigh the institutional desire to correct it. If an IOU investigation finds systemic medical neglect, that finding reflects poorly on the agency's leadership. If the investigation finds an isolated incident or rules a death "natural," the agency avoids scrutiny, lawsuits, and budget cuts.

Without independent oversight, data becomes opaque. Between 2015 and 2019, families routinely contacted advocates with identical stories. A loved one complained of chest pain, was denied medical attention, and died in a cell. The family requested records. ADCRR provided heavily redacted documents or claimed the records were part of an "ongoing investigation" and could not be released.

2019 to 2020: Building the Coalition and the First Setbacks

Praxis Initiative launched the oversight campaign in mid-2019. The initial phase focused on mapping the political landscape and identifying potential allies. We spent months holding community forums in Phoenix, Tucson, and rural Arizona, speaking with families of those who had died in custody, local pastors, fiscal conservatives concerned about taxpayer liability, and liberal advocates focused on civil liberties.

In 2020, we supported the first iteration of an oversight bill. It was modest — proposing an ombudsman's office with the power to review complaints and access facilities. The bill received a hearing in the Senate. It died in committee. The opposition was immediate and organized. The department's leadership lobbied lawmakers behind closed doors, arguing that external oversight would compromise security. The 2020 defeat taught us a critical lesson: presenting data and legal arguments was necessary, but not sufficient to overcome institutional inertia. We needed to change the political calculus.

"Lawmakers can dismiss a policy memo. They cannot easily dismiss a person who survived the exact conditions the state is refusing to inspect."

The Crucible: COVID-19, Deaths, and Federal Intervention

The campaign's trajectory shifted dramatically in 2020 and 2021 due to two factors: the COVID-19 pandemic and the U.S. Department of Justice. When the pandemic hit ADCRR facilities, the lack of transparency became a public health crisis. In 2020, 314 incarcerated people died in ADCRR custody — a staggering increase from previous years. Then, in November 2021, the DOJ issued its findings: conditions in Arizona's prisons violated the Eighth Amendment, specifically citing excessive force by staff and deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.

The DOJ findings changed the legislative dynamic. It was no longer just advocates making claims; it was the federal government confirming that Arizona's self-policing model had resulted in unconstitutional, lethal conditions. Lawmakers could no longer credibly claim that the department was handling its problems internally.

The Strategic Pivot: Formerly Incarcerated Leadership

The most significant strategic shift was the elevation of formerly incarcerated leaders to the forefront of the campaign. This was not a symbolic gesture. It was a calculated, necessary response to the failures of standard lobbying.

When formerly incarcerated Arizonans took the microphone, the dynamic shifted entirely. They could speak with granular, undeniable specificity about how policies actually functioned on the ground. When department officials testified that incarcerated people had "access" to medical care, a formerly incarcerated advocate could explain the difference between a policy on paper and the reality of submitting a sick call request only to wait weeks while a condition worsened.

Furthermore, formerly incarcerated leadership disrupted the standard narratives used to kill oversight bills. Having articulate, organized leaders who had served their time and returned to their communities shattered stereotypes. It forced lawmakers to confront the humanity of the people inside.

Navigating Institutional and Political Dynamics

Armed with DOJ findings and led by those with lived experience, the coalition entered the 2022 and 2023 legislative sessions with renewed leverage. We commissioned research demonstrating that states with independent oversight bodies often save money in the long term. We framed oversight not as a punitive measure against ADCRR, but as a management tool to help the agency improve. We isolated the prison oversight issue from general law enforcement issues, emphasizing that prisons are unique closed environments where individuals are stripped of their liberty.

Counterarguments and Rebuttals

"We already have internal investigations." Internal investigations lack statutory independence. The Auditor General conducts financial audits, not real-time investigations into civil rights violations. SB 1507 filled a specific gap.

"Oversight will compromise prison security." Transparency does not equal compromised security. Independent oversight bodies do not dictate security protocols. They investigate when protocols are violated. Hiding misconduct behind "security" allows dangerous staff cultures to fester.

"This is an attempt to defund prisons." Independent oversight makes institutions more effective and legally defensible. By identifying failures before they result in constitutional violations, oversight protects the state from federal takeovers that are far more disruptive.

The Breakthrough: Passing SB 1507

In 2023, the strategy culminated in the passage of SB 1507. The bill established a pragmatic, structurally independent office with the authority to receive and investigate complaints, access all ADCRR facilities and records, and publish annual public reports. It passed with bipartisan support. Governor Katie Hobbs signed it into law.

Passing a law is not the finish line. It is the starting pistol for implementation. The history of criminal legal system reform is littered with strong laws that were hollowed out by resistant bureaucracies during the implementation phase. Praxis Initiative remains committed to ensuring SB 1507 is fully realized.