Share kit
Ready-to-use copy for texting, posting, and talking to people who have not thought about this measure at all. Take it, change it, put your own name on it.
Everything below is free to copy, edit, and reuse. No attribution needed.
The 15-second version
For a text message
Arizona Prop 318 is on the November ballot. Arizona already banned trans girls from school sports in 2022 – this goes further, into club leagues, private schools, colleges and locker rooms, and lets a competitor sue the school. A no vote changes nothing about current law. no318.vote
Social posts
Post 1 -- the scale of it
Prop 318 creates a new lawsuit against every school and youth league in Arizona.
It’s aimed at a group of kids that neither the measure nor Arizona’s own official analysis of it ever counts.
Seven million voters. An unknown number of children. no318.vote
Post 2 -- the status quo
Arizona already banned trans girls from school sports. That’s been law since 2022.
So what does Prop 318 actually add? Club leagues. Private schools. Colleges. Locker rooms. And a lawsuit any competitor can file.
A no vote changes nothing about current law. It just stops the next part. no318.vote
Post 3 -- the birth certificate
Prop 318 decides who counts as female using your ORIGINAL birth certificate.
Not a current one. Not an accurate one.
Birth certificates get corrected for more than one reason. Some kids are trans. Some are intersex, and the entry made at birth turned out to be wrong.
Prop 318 disregards the correction either way. You can hold a valid Arizona birth certificate and this law will ignore it. no318.vote
Post 4 -- for youth sports families
If you run or volunteer for a youth league in Arizona, Prop 318 makes your league a potential defendant. Attorney fees included.
Your realistic options become: demand documents from every family at registration, fold girls’ divisions into coed, or stop running programs.
Church league basketball did not need this. no318.vote
Post 5 -- the asymmetry
Under Prop 318, a school that excludes a kid can’t even be investigated for it.
A school that includes one gets sued.
That’s not a rule about fairness in sports. It’s a thumb on the scale, and every district in Arizona will feel it. no318.vote
Talking points
Use two, not seven. People remember two.
- Arizona already has this law for school sports. Prop 318 is about club leagues, private schools, colleges, and locker rooms. Voting no changes nothing about the current ban.
- No official document says how many kids this is about. Not the measure, not the state’s own impartial analysis of it. An enormous legal apparatus for an unknown handful of children.
- It defines sex by a document from the day you were born, and makes a lawfully corrected birth certificate irrelevant – whether it was corrected because a kid is trans or because they are intersex and the original entry was wrong.
- Excluding a kid is legally free. Including one is not. Schools respond to that the way anyone would.
- It pays people who object and win. Damages plus attorney fees for an athlete who prevails on a claim of direct or indirect harm.
- Volunteer leagues become potential defendants. Nobody running a rec league asked for this.
When someone pushes back
“It’s just about fairness in sports.” Then it would stop at sports. It covers locker rooms, colleges, and volunteer rec leagues, and it hands out attorney fees. Arizona settled school sports in 2022.
“This protects my daughter.” From what, specifically? Neither the measure nor Arizona’s official analysis of it says how many children this is about. Meanwhile it makes her club team a potential defendant.
“It’s a small thing, why do you care?” It creates a cause of action against every school and youth league in the state and reaches into college intramurals. That is not a small thing. It is just pointed at people you are not being asked to think about.
“Trans kids shouldn’t be in girls’ locker rooms.” That is an argument about school policy, and Arizona already made that choice in 2022. Prop 318 is asking for something else: a definition keyed to a birth document, a lawsuit for any competitor who objects, and immunity for institutions that exclude. That definition also reaches intersex kids. Same statute, same document, same lawsuit. You can hold your view on the first question and still notice that the second one is a badly built law.