Arizona’s “legislative immunity” has shielded lawmakers from traffic violations for decades, but that could soon change. A new Republican-led proposal aims to close this loophole and make legislators accountable to the same rules as everyday citizens.
Did most people even know that this was the case?
At a Glance
- Arizona Rep. Quang Nguyen is spearheading a bill to abolish “legislative immunity” for traffic violations
- Current law shields legislators from arrest for minor infractions during legislative sessions
- Multiple lawmakers have recently used immunity to avoid speeding tickets
- The bill has passed the judiciary committee but faces opposition from some Republicans
- If approved by the legislature, voters will decide the measure’s fate on the 2026 ballot
Republicans Lead Charge to End Special Treatment for Lawmakers
Republican State Representative Quang Nguyen is leading an effort to end special treatment for Arizona lawmakers who use constitutional protections to avoid traffic tickets.
It’s something most people didn’t even know was going on!
The proposed bill, HCR 2053, aims to eliminate a constitutional provision that shields legislators from arrest for minor infractions during legislative sessions and the 15 days preceding them.
“I represent people. Why is there an exception for me when I speed or make an illegal left turn,” Rep. Nguyen said.
The bill has already cleared the judiciary committee and represents a refreshing example of a lawmaker seeking to hold his own colleagues accountable rather than protecting entrenched privileges. Nguyen’s proposal would specifically target immunity for traffic violations while maintaining protections against arrest for legislative duties.
The push for reform comes after several high-profile incidents where Arizona lawmakers invoked their special status to escape consequences. Arizona State Senator Jake Hoffman and Representative Mark Finchem have both reportedly avoided speeding tickets by claiming legislative immunity, highlighting the practical problems with the current system.
“We are lawmakers. So, number one, we shouldn’t break laws,” Nguyen added.
The constitutional provision in question currently protects lawmakers from arrest except in cases of “treason, felony, or breach of the peace” – language that has been interpreted to allow immunity from minor traffic violations. Nguyen’s bill would classify traffic infractions as falling outside these protected categories.
Some Republicans Defend Legislative Immunity
Not all Republicans are on board with Nguyen’s reform effort, however. Representatives David Marshall, Khyl Powell, and Alexander Kolodin voted against the bill in committee, arguing that legislative immunity serves an important purpose in protecting lawmakers from potential political persecution.
“Recent history of this state and frankly, this Legislature has shown that the executive branch continues to use its ability to enforce the law as a weapon against legislators that it does not like or care for. This is a time to be strengthening legislative immunity,” Alexander Kolodin said.
When pressed about lawmakers using immunity to escape speeding tickets, Kolodin suggested voters should be the ultimate check on bad behavior.
“At the end of the day the accountability mechanism is our constituents. If our constituents agree with how we use legislative immunity, they’ll continue to vote us in office. If our constituents think we abuse our powers, abuse our privileges, there’s an election every two years.”
Because legislative immunity is enshrined in the Arizona constitution, any changes require voter approval. If Nguyen’s bill passes the full legislature, it will appear on the 2026 ballot, giving citizens the chance to decide whether their representatives should face the same consequences for traffic violations as everyone else.
Doesn’t it make common sense that politicians should be subject to the same laws as everyone else?
