Does the Arizona Deed of Trust Scheme provide good cause for removal of one or more of its provisions under severability?

QUESTION PRESENTED . Curréntly Arizona--uses'-a ‘scheme of statutes to: ; effectuate forced” convéyances’ of residéntial single; . . family property yia a non-judicial foreclosure.’ It: is ; knowh’as thé’ Deed of Trist’ Scheme. Genérally, the _ . ; property is takén from ‘its owner, as here, “by way of ° using the county Yecorder’s officé where the. property is: . located. The process includés a'total of three documents : : . typically all recorded by the lenders substituted in a 90°" . day period afte which time’ the ‘trustee: sells the a . . property at a trustee sale granting the property to the highest bidder at that sale. Arizona ‘Revised Statutes ss : (A.R.S.) § 12-1177(A) states a trustee’s deed is : presumed to comply with Arizona law and under A.R.S. ; 83-11(c) the homeowner waives all defenses to that sale oe once it has occurred. Consequently, any subsequent homeowner claims are mute. See A.R.S. § 12-1177(A) , : er ee 7 : ps : and A.R.S. § 332811(C).where borrower “waives all . defenses and objections to the.sale not raised in. an action that:-results in the issuance. ofa Court order . granting relief...”. Under: these combined. Statutes ) 7 Petitioner “waived”. his claims -agserted-under ARS, § . 39-161. which .or, entity . from oe recording false instruments that. give rise to.fraudulent, : baseless claims of ‘interest in, real property. However, | Petitioner ..clearly, did.,not : “waive”. these. claims. and ; therefore has been, deprived of his.property without due process of law under the fifthamendment. ; In some instances, as here, ‘a constitutional injury ~ arises as a result of two or more statutory provisions . operating together. See, Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, March, 2020 citing, Free Enterprise “Fund, supra, at 509 (stating that the convergence of “a number of statutory provisions” . * produce a ‘constitutional violation). The provision. requiring “good-caiise: vernoval is only: one of [the] statutory provisions that,’ working together, produce a constitvitional Violation.” . mo, , Arizona provides no path for a homeowner ‘0 assert _ | | challenges to the trustee sale after it has occurred and . the Deed of Trust, Scheme is an arrangement of statutes leading to non-judicial forced conveyances without due ° process and is therefore unconstitutionial. . . Thus, the question presented here, Does the . . Arizona Deed of Trust Scheme provide good . . cause for removal of otie or shéie of its provisions under severability? = ne : The answer from this Court is of national importance in. these unprecedented -times of, our. country’s financial uncertainty. Mary homeowner's across the county . currently await these scheduled trustee sales and also | ‘ | ; rely on the ability of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB”) for oversight ‘and to enforce ‘the protections of homeowner's potential excess proveéds after the trustee sale from ‘hese same’ trustees ‘who later represent the lender ‘to’ acquire them from’ the county treasurer. ns _ ; ' [IST OF PARTIES TO PROCEEDING AND ‘ All parties are listed in the caption of the case on the cover of which no party is a corporation. There are no proceedings in other courts directly related to the case in this Court Rule 14.1(b)(iii). ; iii TABLE‘OF AUTHORITIES ~ . . <0) OPINIONS * ® a Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection “3° * . Bureau; March, 2020 a ; Free Enierprise Fund, supra, at 561 U.S., at 509 3,4,14 Booker, 543 U. S., at 316-317 [18 U. S.C] 3,14 §3553(b)(1) ae In re Krohn, 208 Ariz. 205, 208. P.3d 774, 777° 4 : (2002) ee t Lea, Situation Severability, 103 Va. L. Rev..735, © ° 4 773-780 (2017) Obduskey v. McCarthy and Holthus LLP,17.: 6°: ... 1307 Curtis, 186 Ariz. 534, 535 (1996). cee AL Barrionuevo v. Chase Bank, N.A.,.at pp. 973-974 . . 12 |. : ; Little v. CFS Service Corp. (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 12 ; 1354, 1362, 233 Colby v. Title Ins. And Trust Co. (1911) 160 Cal. 13 632, 644, 117 P. 913 Murphy, 584 U. S., (slip op.