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:
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.