Official Summary Text
HB2371 - 572R - Senate Fact Sheet
Assigned to
FFL������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� AS
PASSED BY COMMITTEE
ARIZONA STATE SENATE
Fifty-Seventh
Legislature, Second Regular Session
AMENDED
FACT SHEET FOR
H.B. 2371
arbitration;
divorce proceedings; artificial intelligence
Purpose
Allows parties to a divorce proceeding to use artificial
intelligence-assisted arbitration
(AI-assisted arbitration) if outlined circumstances are met and prescribes
requirements for a binding determination issued in an AI-assisted arbitration.
Prohibits a court from ordering a parent's attendance or payment for any type
of therapeutic intervention or similar service without the consent of both
parents.
Background
Arbitration
Either
party to a marriage may initiate a proceeding for dissolution of marriage,
annulment or legal separation. The petitioner must allege that the marriage is
irretrievably broken, that one or both parties desire to live separate and
apart and, in the case of a covenant marriage, that statutorily prescribed
requirements for the dissolution or separation have been met (
A.R.S.
� 25-314
).
The
superior court must: 1) establish a jurisdictional limit up to $65,000 for
submission of disputes to arbitration; and 2) require arbitration in all cases
in which the court finds, or the parties agree, that the amount in controversy
does not exceed the jurisdictional limit. The superior court may waive the
arbitration requirement on a showing of good cause if all parties file a
written stipulation waiving the arbitration requirement. The superior court
must also maintain a list of qualified persons within its jurisdiction who have
agreed to serve as arbitrators, subject to the right of each person to refuse
to serve in a particular assigned case and subject further to the right of any
party to show good cause why an appointed arbitrator should not serve in a
particular assigned case. Each arbitrator must be paid a reasonable sum, up to
$150 per day and paid by the county from general revenues, for each day
necessarily expended by the arbitrator in the hearing and determination of the
case (
A.R.S. � 12-133
).
Legal
Decision-Making and Parenting Time
The
court must determine legal decision-making and parenting time in accordance
with the best interests of the child. In a contested legal decision-making or
parenting time case, the court must make specific findings on the record about
all relevant factors and the reasons for which the decision is in the best
interests of the child. The court may interview the child to determine the
child's wishes relating to custodianship and parenting time. In so doing, the
court may seek advice from professional personnel, who may be employed by the
court on a regular basis. Any advice given must be in writing and made
available to counsel on request, under such terms as the court determines. The
court may also order an investigation and report concerning such arrangements
for the child. If an investigation and report are ordered, the court must
allocate costs based on the financial circumstances of both parties. The report
must include a written affirmation that the person conducting the investigation
meets outlined training requirements, including: 1) six initial hours of
training on domestic violence; 2) six initial hours of child abuse training;
and 3) four subsequent hours of training every two years on domestic violence
and child abuse (
A.R.S.
Title 25, Chapter 4
).
There is no anticipated fiscal impact to the state
General Fund associated with this legislation.
Provisions
AI-assisted Arbitration
1.
Allows parties to a divorce proceeding
to use AI-assisted arbitration, only if:
a)
both parties provide written consent to
the AI-assisted arbitration and to whether the proceeding will result in a
recommendation or a binding determination; and
b)
the parties do not share minor
children.
2.
Allows either party to withdraw consent
for AI-assisted arbitration at any time before the issuance of a recommendation
or binding determination.
3.
Allows a binding determination that is
issued in an AI-assisted arbitration to be entered by any court having
jurisdiction of the matter.
4.
Determines that a binding determination
that is issued in an AI-assisted arbitration is appealable to the superior
court that would otherwise have jurisdiction over the matter by filing a notice
of appeal within 20 judicial days after the issuance of the recommendation or
binding determination.
5.
Requires the superior court, on appeal,
to adjudicate the case, de novo, as to both the law and the facts and without
consideration of the proceedings in the AI-assisted arbitration.
6.
Specifies that a binding determination
issued by an AI-assisted arbitration does not limit any right to further
appeal.
Therapeutic Intervention
7.
Prohibits the court, in any legal
decision-making or parenting time proceeding, from ordering any type of
therapeutic intervention or a paid service without the consent of both parents.
8.
Prohibits
the court from
ordering one parent to pay for any type of therapeutic intervention or other
paid service without the consent of both parents.
9.
Allows either parent to revoke that
parent's consent at any time.
10.
Allows expert testimony
related to therapeutic intervention or any other paid service, child
development, mental or physical health, domestic violence or substance abuse to
be admissible in any legal decision-making or parenting time proceeding only if
the expert:
a)
has
specialized expertise in child development and substantial clinical experience
with children in a therapeutic setting; and
b)
has
an opinion that is supported by the canons of the expert's profession, adheres
to the guidelines of the expert's licensing board and does not rely on theories
that are not clinically established as a standard of care.
11.
Stipulates that a person
must meet the prescribed qualifications for therapeutic intervention testimony
before offering expert testimony, conducting an investigation or evaluation or
submitting a report or recommendation to the court relating to legal decision-making
or parenting time.
Miscellaneous
12.
Defines
AI-assisted arbitration
as a computational
system that:
a)
applies governing laws to disclosed
facts;
b)
generates recommendations or binding
determinations regarding divorce-related issues; and
c)
is not a legal person and does not
exercise independent legal authority.
13.
Defines
paid service
as any service that is provided
in exchange for any form of compensation.
14.
Defines
therapeutic intervention
as:
a)
any therapy, treatment or counseling
program that is designed to improve or maintain the parent-child relationship
or parent-parent relationship, or both; and
b)
includes court-ordered behavioral
intervention.
15.
Becomes effective on the general effective date.
Amendments Adopted by Committee
1.
Prohibits a court from ordering therapeutic intervention without the
consent of both parents.
2.
Outlines requirements for expert testimony relating to therapeutic
intervention.
3.
Defines terms.
House Action
����������������������������������������������������������
Senate
Action
JUD���������������� 1/22/26����� W/D������������������������������ FFL���������������� 3/23/26����� DPA���������� 4-3-0
AII����������������� 2/12/26����� DP������ 7-0-0-0
3
rd
Read��������� 3/10/26����������������� 42-13-4-0-1
Prepared by Senate Research
March 27, 2026
AN/TR/ci
Current Bill Text
Read the full stored bill text
HB2371 - 572R - H Ver
House Engrossed
arbitration; divorce
proceedings; artificial intelligence
State of Arizona
House of Representatives
Fifty-seventh Legislature
Second Regular Session
2026
HOUSE BILL 2371
AN
ACT
amending title 25, chapter 3, article 2,
Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding section 25-332; relating to
dissolution of marriage.
(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
Be it
enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 25, chapter 3, article 2,
Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 25-332, to read:
START_STATUTE
25-332.
Divorce proceedings; artificial intelligence-assisted
arbitration; appeal; definition
A. Parties to a divorce proceeding
may use artificial intelligence-assisted arbitration only if both of the
following apply:
1. Both parties provide written
consent to the artificial intelligence-assisted arbitration and to
WHETHER the proceeding will result in a recommendation or a BINDING
determination.
2. The parties do not share minor
children.
B. Either party may withdraw the
consent described in subsection A, paragraph 1 of this section at any time
before the issuance of a recommendation or binding determination.
C. A binding determination that is
issued in an artificial intelligence-assisted arbitration is appealable
to the superior court that would otherwise have jurisdiction over the matter by
filing a notice of appeal within twenty judicial days after the issuance of the
recommendation or binding determination.� On appeal, the superior court shall
adjudicate the case, de novo, as to both the law and the facts, and without
consideration of the proceedings in the artificial intelligence-assisted
arbitration.� This subsection does not limit any right to further appeal.
D. A binding determination that is
issued in an artificial intelligence-assisted arbitration may be entered
by any court having jurisdiction of the matter.
E. For the purposes of this section,
"artificial intelligence-assisted arbitration" means a
computational system that:
1. Applies governing laws to
disclosed facts.
2. Generates recommendations or
binding determinations regarding divorce-related issues.
3. Is not a legal person and does not
exercise independent legal authority.
END_STATUTE