Proposition · every Arizona voter

Proposition 318Athletic teams by sex at birth, and private spaces tied to athletics

Law referred by the Legislature: Proposition 318, referred to voters by the Legislature as HCR 2003 (2026), the "Protect Girls' Sports in Arizona Act". Passes with a majority of the votes cast on it, and takes effect when the Governor proclaims the result (Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1 ). The separate 60% rule is for measures that approve a tax, which this proposal does not do.

INCOMPLETE. Still open on this page: (1) The official ballot wording below is copied word for word from the Secretary of State's ballot language, but the YES and NO lines and the summary above it are ours, from the Legislative Council analysis and the pamphlet arguments read through a summary tool, which paraphrases. (2) Passing vote and later changes are now sourced: majority of the votes cast (Arizona Constitution, Article IV, Part 1, Section 1) and the Proposition 105 notice in the 2026 Publicity Pamphlet, which says changes to a voter-approved law must further its purpose and need three-fourths of each chamber, or another vote of the people. (3) The "Today" column is our reading of the official "no" statement ("keeps the current law"), not checked against the current statutes. (4) Cost to the state: no cost estimate found. (5) The reasons for and against are the named arguments printed in the pamphlet; statistics inside them are the writers' claims and we have not checked them. No claim check has been done. (6) Campaign committees and campaign money were not looked up. (7) We did not read the full text of the measure.

Official ballot language (PDF): Secretary of State ballot language (PDF)

In plain words

This changes section 15-120.02 of Arizona law. Public and private schools, colleges and athletic associations would have to label each school team male, female or coed (mixed), and keep males off female teams. "Sex" means a person's biological status as male or female, as recorded on the original birth certificate. Schools and associations also could not let anyone use a private space tied to athletics (restrooms, locker rooms, shower rooms) that is not designated for that person's sex. An athlete could sue a school or association that knowingly breaks the rule. The measure does not limit an athlete's eligibility for a team that matches the athlete's sex or is coed. It is called the "Protect Girls' Sports in Arizona Act". (azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature) )

Before and after

Question	Today (our reading of the official NO statement)	If YES wins
Which schools must label teams male, female or coed	Current student-athletics laws stay	Public schools, private schools and athletic associations
Who may join a female team	Current laws stay	Males may not
Private spaces tied to athletics (restrooms, locker rooms, showers)	Current laws stay	No one may be allowed to use one not designated for their sex at birth
Lawsuits	Current laws stay	Athletes may sue schools and associations that knowingly break the law

From the ballot language, the Legislative Council analysis and the pamphlet: see (azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature) )

Biggest change

Teams run by public and private schools and athletic associations would be labeled male, female or coed by sex at birth, and males would be kept off female teams. source: azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
No one could be allowed to use athletics-related private spaces (restrooms, locker rooms, showers) not designated for their sex at birth. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)
Athletes could sue schools and athletic associations that knowingly break the rule. source: azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

Who it affects most: Student athletes and their schools. The arguments on both sides also name transgender students, girls on school teams, and school staff who would have to follow the rule.

Cost to the state: Unknown. The Legislative Council analysis text we read has no fiscal section. Opponents say lawsuits would cost schools money (their claim).

Our plain-words summary. Every line points to its source.

What your vote means

YES

All public and private schools and athletic associations must label teams male, female or coed by biological sex at birth and keep males off female teams, bar use of private spaces such as locker rooms meant for the other sex, and athletes could sue those that knowingly break the rule.

Nothing changes: current laws on student athletics stay.

Our one-line summary of the official YES and NO statements in the Secretary of State's ballot language; the official statements, word for word, are under "Official ballot wording" below.

Why people want it, and why others object

Why this is on the ballot

The Legislature put this on the ballot.

The bill is House Concurrent Resolution 2003 (2026). It amends section 15-120.02 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. source: azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
The pamphlet's Proposition 105 notice says changes to a voter-approved law must further its purpose and need three-fourths of each chamber, or another vote of the people. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

Why supporters want it

Peter Gentala and Leisa Brug, Center for Arizona Policy: sex-based teams are like weight classes and age groups; they protect roster spots and scholarships. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
State Rep. Selina Bliss, prime sponsor (her own description): all Republican legislators voted to place the measure on the ballot and all Democrats voted against it. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Tom Horne, Superintendent of Public Instruction: including boys on girls' teams goes against the purpose of Title IX and harms girls. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Kaylie Ray, co-chair of Protect Girls Sports in Arizona, a former professional volleyball player: the measure keeps males out of girls' sports and private spaces. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Macy Charles, former NCAA volleyball player: she says she had to compete against a male athlete while being recruited, and the measure protects gains made since Title IX in 1972. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Seventeen arguments for are printed in the pamphlet. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

Why opponents object

Darrell Hill, ACLU of Arizona: a blanket rule ignores age, level of competition and sport, treating kindergarteners the same as college athletes. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Pinny Sheoran, League of Women Voters of Arizona: it affects few students but imposes statewide rules and invites costly lawsuits that divert money from classrooms. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
State Sen. Mitzi Epstein: it betrays Title IX and could subject girls to invasive checks. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
State Reps. Brian Garcia, Anna Abeytia and Patty Contreras (LGBTQ Caucus): they say an inclusion amendment based on factors such as bone density and lung capacity was proposed and rejected. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Timothy Everhard, Arizonans for Freedom: a 2022 law already deals with this, so the measure is a solution looking for a problem. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Thirty-seven arguments against are printed in the pamphlet. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

Who backs each side

For: Center for Arizona Policy, Liberty Counsel Action, Arizona Women of Action and Protect Girls Sports in Arizona sponsor or signed arguments. Campaign committees and campaign money for this proposition were not looked up (INCOMPLETE). source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Against: ACLU of Arizona, League of Women Voters of Arizona, Civic Engagement Beyond Voting, the Arizona House LGBTQ Caucus members and Arizonans for Freedom, among 37 arguments. Campaign committees and campaign money for this proposition were not looked up (INCOMPLETE). source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

In each side's own words where we could find them, quoted or summarized with a link to the source. We don't endorse either side.

What you will see on your ballot

Official ballot wording, word for word (tap to open)

The official ballot title, word for word from the Secretary of State's ballot language file .

REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO STUDENT ATHLETICS
OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING SECTION 15-120.02, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES.
DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
REQUIRES ALL SCHOOLS AND ATHLETIC ASSOCIATIONS TO DESIGNATE ATHLETIC TEAMS AS MALE, FEMALE, OR COED BASED ON THE BIOLOGICAL SEX OF THE ATHLETES AS DEFINED AT BIRTH; PROHIBITS THESE ENTITIES FROM AUTHORIZING USE OF PRIVATE SPACES NOT DESIGNATED FOR A PERSON’S SEX.

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of: (1) requiring private schools, public schools, and athletic associations to designate every athletic team as male, female, or coed/mixed based on sex and to prevent males from joining female teams; existing law imposes this requirement only on public schools and those competing against them; (2) prohibiting schools and athletic associations from authorizing anyone to use private spaces (such as restrooms) not designated for that individual’s sex; (3) defining “sex” as an individual’s biological status as male or female as recorded at birth on an original birth certificate; and (4) authorizing athletes to sue schools and athletic associations that knowingly violate this law.
A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current laws relating to student athletics.

Copied word for word from the Secretary of State's ballot language PDF (2026-Ballot-Language-English-2026-0819.pdf), page 6. The Secretary of State's file has no separate question line; it prints the official title, the descriptive title, and a YES statement and a NO statement, shown here in that order.

Latest news

Recent reporting from a range of outlets, newest first. We link to it; we don't endorse it.

No articles collected yet for this measure.

Full text of the measure

The Secretary of State's ballot language file prints the descriptive title and the YES and NO statements. The full text of the resolution is on the Legislature's website (azleg.gov, HCR 2003, 2026 session); we have not read it. Read it in the Secretary of State ballot language (PDF) .

We link to analysis from several sources; we don't endorse it.