Read the full stored bill text
HB2209 - 572R - I Ver
PREFILED��� JAN 09 2026
REFERENCE TITLE:
health boards; retaliation; prohibition
State of Arizona
House of Representatives
Fifty-seventh Legislature
Second Regular Session
2026
HB 2209
Introduced by
Representative
Gress: Senator Werner
AN
ACT
Amending title 32, chapter 32, article 1,
Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding section 32-3230.03; relating to
health profession regulatory boards.
(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 32, chapter 32, article 1,
Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 32-3230.03, to read:
START_STATUTE
32-3230.03.
Retaliatory actions; prohibition; burden of proof; enforcement;
remedies; confidentiality; definitions
A. A health profession regulatory
board may not take or threaten retaliatory action against a protected
individual for:
1. Making or attempting to make a
protected disclosure.
2. Providing information to or
participating in any investigation, hearing, audit or inquiry conducted by a
governmental entity.
3. Refusing to participate in conduct
the protected individual reasonably believes violates the law or constitutes an
abuse of regulatory authority.
4. Seeking legal counsel or
representation concerning regulatory misconduct.
5. Assisting another protected
individual in making a protected disclosure.
B. A protected individual establishes
a prima facie case that the health profession regulatory board took or
threatened to take retaliatory action by showing both:
1. that The protected individual made
a protected disclosure.
2. that A retaliatory action was
taken within two years after the protected disclosure OCCURRED.
C. If a prima facie case is
established pursuant to subsection B of this section, the health profession
regulatory board shall demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the
action the protected individual alleges is retaliatory action would have been
taken even in the absence of the protected disclosure.
D. Evidence of inconsistent
enforcement, deviation from standard procedures or unexplained escalation of
regulatory activity creates an inference of
retaliatory action.
E. The attorney general and each
county attorney have concurrent authority to:
1. Investigate complaints alleging
violations of this section.
2. Subpoena documents, witnesses and
records that are relevant to an investigation.
3. File civil actions to enforce
compliance with this section.
F. A protected individual may request
the attorney general or the county attorney in the county where the alleged
retaliatory action occurred to conduct an investigation.� If the attorney
general has a conflict of interest, the county attorney in the county where the
alleged retaliatory action occurred shall investigate the complaint and take
any action necessary pursuant to this section.� A health profession regulatory
board may not impede, interfere with or retaliate against any person who cooperates
with an investigation conducted pursuant to this subsection.
G. Notwithstanding any other law to
the contrary, a protected individual may bring a civil action in superior court
against a health profession regulatory board for a violation of this section.�
In an action brought pursuant to this subsection, the available remedies
include the following:
1. the Reinstatement or restoration
of licensure or certification.
2. the Removal, sealing or correction
of retaliatory investigative or disciplinary records.
3. Injunctive relief, including
halting retaliatory investigations.
4. an award of Actual damages,
including lost earnings.
5. an award of Civil penalties up to
$25,000 per violation.
6. an award of Compensatory damages,
including emotional distress and reputational harm.
7. an award of Reasonable attorney
fees and costs.
8. an award of Interest on all
monetary awards.
9. an award of Punitive damages for
wilful or malicious retaliation.
H. A civil action brought pursuant to
subsection G of this section must be filed within three years after the
retaliatory action occurred or the protected individual knew or should have
known of the retaliatory action.
I. A health profession regulatory
board shall maintain the confidentiality of a protected individual's identity
unless either:
1. The protected individual consents
to the disclosure in writing.
2. A court determines disclosure is
essential to an enforcement action.
J. For the purposes of this section:
1. "Good faith" means that
the protected individual reasonably believes the information disclosed is true
at the time of disclosure.
2. "Protected disclosure"
means any good faith communication, whether oral or written, that a protected
individual reasonably believes evidences:
(
a
) A violation
of federal, state or local law, rule or regulation.
(
b
) any Misuse,
abuse or misapplication of regulatory authority.
(
c
) Fraud,
waste, mismanagement or unethical conduct.
(
d
) any
Retaliatory, discriminatory or politically or ideologically motivated
enforcement action.
(
e
) Conduct
that endangers patient health or public safety.
(
f
) any Effort
to impede, conceal, obstruct or interfere with investigations or oversight
activities.
3. "Protected individual"
means a health professional, an applicant for licensure or certification as a
health professional, a resident, fellow or clinical trainee of a health
profession or any individual acting on behalf of or assisting a health
professional in making a protected disclosure.
4. "Retaliatory action"
includes:
(
a
) A licensing
or certification delay, denial, suspension or revocation or the imposition of
any condition on a license or certification.
(
b
) The
initiation or expansion of an investigation.
(
c
) An
assessment of fines, sanctions or costs.
(
d
) a Referral
to any federal or interstate disciplinary system.
(
e
) Public
dissemination of allegations or investigations.
(
f
) Harassment,
intimidation, coercion or discrimination.
(
g
) Any action
that would dissuade a reasonable person from making a protected disclosure.
END_STATUTE