Republican · Arizona's 8th District · 2026
Abraham Hamadeh
Abe Hamadeh remembers his immigrant family's first home near Happy Valley Road and 67th Avenue, in the Arizona district he now represents.
Biography
Abraham “Abe” Hamadeh remembers his immigrant family's first home near Happy Valley Road and 67th Avenue, in the Arizona community he now represents.1 His parents had left the Middle East, and his congressional biography describes that first house as an important family milestone and part of his connection to the district.1
Born in Chicago, Hamadeh earned a bachelor's degree at Arizona State University in 2012 and a law degree at the University of Arizona in 2016.2 His early professional work included the Maricopa County attorney's office from 2017 to 2021 and Army Reserve service from 2016 to 2022.2
He worked as a prosecutor and served as a Reserve captain and intelligence officer, including an overseas assignment.13 Hamadeh entered Congress in January 2025 and serves on the Armed Services and Veterans' Affairs committees, where his office emphasizes military readiness and care for veterans returning home.21
His campaign identifies border security, support for the military and veterans, crime, tax cuts and gun rights among its priorities, and presents him as a supporter of President Donald Trump's agenda.3 He is seeking another term against Democrat Bernadette Greene-Placentia in the Eighth District, a contest between a first term congressman and a former trucking business owner.4
Record and controversies
Election litigation outcomes
KJZZ reported that Arizona's Supreme Court ordered Hamadeh in October 2023 to pay more than $42,000 in legal fees to Kris Mayes and $12,921 to Secretary of State Adrian Fontes.5 The court criticized a misrepresentation about seeking a final trial court order in that special action.5
In separate signature verification litigation, Hamadeh argued that earlier ballot affidavits were not valid signature comparison records and sought to replace Mayes as attorney general.6 The appeals court in October 2024 affirmed dismissal but reversed that case's sanctions, finding relevant legal questions debatable; it expressly distinguished the earlier Supreme Court misrepresentation case.6