Skip to content
The COVID Project
  1. Library
  2. Standing duties: Arizona
  3. DUT-AZ-007

Ex. DUT-AZ-007 Standing duty Primary source read

Statute

Violation; classification

Arizona Legislature (Arizona Revised Statutes, title 26, ch. 2, art. 1) · Arizona (State)

The COVID Project

The record

Jurisdiction
Arizona
Level
State
Authority
Ariz. Const. art. IV
Effective
in force throughout 2020 Q2 to 2021 Q3
End
standing (read as 2021-09-30)
In force
Standing (a statutory duty; in force throughout the six quarters)
Quarters
2020 Q22020 Q32020 Q42021 Q12021 Q22021 Q3
Limitation types
Stay-at-homeBusiness closureWorkplace rulesStanding duty
Addressees
  • persons generally, including businesses and their owners and managers
Character
order penalty
Collection
Standing duties: Arizona DUT-AZ

Operative words

Any person who violates any provision of this chapter or who knowingly fails or refuses to obey any lawful order or regulation issued as provided in this chapter shall be guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor. This provision does not apply to the refusal of any private organization or member thereof to participate in a local emergency or state of emergency as defined by this chapter.

Penalty

class 1 misdemeanor; Snell & Wilmer stated the exposure contemporaneously as 'up to six months in jail and fines that, for a business, go as high as $20,000' (Ex. DUT-AZ-020, verified_secondary as to amounts)

What it required

Made every person's obedience to the Governor's emergency orders, and to the orders of counties, cities and towns issued under title 26, ch. 2, a legal duty enforced by criminal sanction.

Retrieval note

Recited in EO 2020-18 para. 14 ('Prior to any enforcement action being taken to enforce this order in accordance with A.R.S. 26-317, a person shall be notified and given an opportunity to comply') (Ex. AZ-010) and in EO 2020-33 (Ex. AZ-016). Applied: a Scottsdale restaurant owner was cited and arrested under this section on April 11, 2020 for on-site dining in violation of EO 2020-09, after warnings on March 27 and 28, 2020; the Ninth Circuit held the officer had probable cause (Miller v. City of Scottsdale, No. 22-16004 (9th Cir. Dec. 8, 2023), Ex. DUT-AZ-019).