Public Records Office / Public Library

Research register

Arizona’s 2024 petition change: correcting the bill-version error

Session law (azleg.gov; bill text)

Read each occurrence in context. Evidence labels below are the labels recorded by the source edition; importing a row does not independently verify it.

Linked patterns

Linked corrections

| AZ-2024-DIRECT-PETITION | 2024 session law (56th Leg., 2nd Reg. Sess., ch. 152, HB 2744) added a "\[SUPERSEDED, Batch 18/D02: this describes the introduced bill HB2744P; the enacted chapter keeps § 36-523(C)(2), filing only by the screening agency, and adds § 36-520(J) applicant notice of denial and reasons. Original wording:\] direct petition for court-ordered evaluation": if the screening agency declines to file, the applicant may petition the court directly; it also gives guardians and agents notice and standing in treatment proceedings | Session law (azleg.gov; bill text) | — | Removes the \[SUPERSEDED, Batch 18/D02 — the enacted law does not remove the gate; ranking withdrawn. Original wording:\] clinical filter between a private complainant and the court; the first US jurisdiction in the record to weaken the professional gate in the 2020s. Arizona now sits beside Korea pre-2016 and the loi de 1838 in initiation design | VERIFIED |

| D02 — AZ-2024-DIRECT-PETITION | HB 2744 (2024 ch. 152) created a "direct petition" letting an applicant go to court when the screening agency declines | The enacted chapter adds § 36-504.01 (guardian/agent rights), a new § 36-520(J) requiring the agency to notify the applicant of a denial and, on request, give reasons, and § 36-523(C)(2): the petition "may be filed only by the screening agency." No direct petition exists in the enacted text; the heading I relied on was in the introduced bill (HB2744P) and was dropped | Chapter 152 text opened in full this batch (azleg.gov) | Row retitled AZ-2024-CH152-APPLICANT-NOTICE; claim reduced to: applicants gain notice of denial and reasons; the clinical gate stands. The "loosest US initiation design" ranking and the comparison to Korea pre-2016 and the loi de 1838 are withdrawn. Batch 13's lesson for the method: an introduced bill is not a session law — version status must be recorded on every statute row |