A Scottsdale-based law firm hopes to restore a near-total abortion ban from 1864, bring the action on Wednesday to overturn a court ruling that restricted access to proceedings.
Alliance Defending Freedom decided to the Arizona Supreme Court, State Court of Appeal Decision
It passed a 2022 law outlawing selective abortion after the 15-week mark superseded a near-total ban first written in 1864.
Among their claims is that the state’s history of Republican electoral victory shows that both Congress and citizens want to support the 1864 law and almost completely abolish abortion in Arizona. That’s enough evidence.
“Arizonans deserve full enforcement of the law. They raised their voices at the ballot box — they elected Congress after Congress to save lives as much as possible. ” wrote the lawyer.
brief summary
Shortly after the constitutional right to abortion was abolished, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Last year, then-Attorney General Mark Brunovich went to court to revoke an injunction blocking the state’s territorial-era abortion ban. A Pima County judge found the injunction no longer relevant.egg
But her decision to reinstate the near-total ban was overturned in December by a three-judge appeals panel that restored access to abortions for up to 15 weeks.
Brnovich argued in court that the provisions of the 2022 law do not rescind previous restrictions that meant that the 1864 law should rule supreme, but his supporters argued that The logic, he pointed out, also implied the last 50 years of legislation that tightly regulates procedures. Conservation — means that the abortion should stay in some form.
The appellate judges pointed out that had Congress passed the 2022 law intended to abolish abortion altogether rather than merely limit it, they would have said so more clearly, pro-abortion They concluded that it would be “meaningless” to repeal the 2022 Act on the basis that it would not be repealed.
Before the ruling was clear, states were at odds as state leaders fought over which of the two prohibitions was the law of the land, and doctors refused to provide services for fear of mandatory prison sentences. I was reeling from the messages and the closed clinic. to the Act of 1864.
The state appeals court’s decision was widely seen as the final say, especially after voters elected Democrats to state leadership in the November midterm elections. Current Attorney General Chris Mays has repeatedly refused to take his predecessor’s hardline stance on abortion. .
However, Alliance Defending Freedom appealed on behalf of Dr. Eric Hazelrigg, medical director of the Choices Pregnancy Center, a chain of anti-abortion clinics.hazel rig allowed to intervene on behalf of the state’s fetus — A position added to the case in 1973 when the Civil War-era ban was first brought to court.
what does the appeal say?
Attorneys for Alliance Defending Freedom allege that the Court of Appeals misinterpreted Congress’ intent. Decades of abortion restrictions dating back to the state’s territorial days hardly mean that legislators have approved the procedure. It was the result of trying to ban abortion care as much as possible under the shackles. eggThe 1864 law and the 15-week limit passed in 2022 both made abortion illegal, and the appeals court’s conclusion that abortions were allowed to some extent was illogical, lawyers said.
“Multiple restrictions do not create contradiction, much less contradiction. To give permission It is a doubly reprehensible act,” reads the brief.
The appellate judge’s greatest concern was the risk of arbitrary prosecution under two laws with vastly different penalties.
An 1864 law requires a doctor who performs an abortion that was not offered because the mother’s life was in danger to imprisonment from two to five years, but a non-emergency procedure , the 15-week limit would be a class 6 felony. outside that time parameter. A Class 6 felony is the least serious felony and can result in fines, probation, or four months’ imprisonment.
Neither law contains exceptions for rape or incest pregnancies.
The judge was concerned that prosecutorial discretion could lead to uneven punishment across the state, but attorneys countered on appeal that it was an unfounded concern. Other crimes, such as, are governed by multiple laws and have never been a problem before. Importantly, both laws fundamentally prohibit abortion. Details will be resolved on a case-by-case basis. If a doctor performed an elective abortion, he could be prosecuted under the 1864 near-total ban, and if that abortion occurred 15 weeks after him, he could be held liable under the 2022 Act. may be questioned.
“The law is clear: no one should have an abortion unless it saves the life of the mother. And doctors have no right to limit the menu of charges they may face,” the lawyer said. I am writing.
the other side speaks
The Planned Parenthood of Arizona, which ran four of Arizona’s nine abortion clinics and fought in court to stop the 1864 ban, is an extremist ideology that ignores what’s best for Arizonas. denounced the appeal as a “last-ditch effort” from those with .
“This archaic Alliance Defending Freedom is trying to revive is cruel, harmful, and unpopular with the majority of Arizonans,” said Brittany Fonteno, the organization’s president and CEO. issued a statement by email. “This Civil War-era law should not define our reproductive freedom or how we live today.”
Fonteno said he was grateful that Mays’ involvement did not strengthen his appeal because, unlike his predecessor, Democrats are staunch supporters of abortion. , Arizona Planned Parenthood beat it and promised to work to protect access to abortion.
“This harmful ban will not work in Arizona. We will not stop fighting for our patients until true reproductive freedom is achieved in our state,” she said. .
Amy Fitch-Heacock is the co-founder of Arizonans for Reproductive Freedom. Voting Initiative for the 2024 Election It asks voters to enshrine access to abortion in their state constitutions.
Fitch-Heacock has vowed to continue those efforts, accusing the ADF of not being in line with public consensus in Arizona. In his February 2022 survey conducted by NARAL Pro-Choice America, 90% of his Arizonans agreed that family planning should not be interfered with by the government, and 80% said the procedure the patient requested. It turns out that he is against punishing doctors for
“(This is) just the latest attempt to undermine the wishes of Arizona’s voting majority and endanger pregnant people,” said Fitch-Heacock. Working with our partners in freedom, we will ensure that Arizona voters, not extremist groups, decide our reproductive future.”
zoom out
ever since Dobbs While Arizona returned abortion regulations to the state last year, Arizona has been dealing with an ever-changing reproductive health landscape characterized by the threat of additional restrictions. For now, women in Arizona can have elective abortions up to 15 weeks’ gestation, but that access is increasingly cut off and presents new challenges in the near future.
In January Federal judge reinstated
Prohibition of abortion due to genetic abnormalities in the fetus. That ban is part of a 2021 law that includes fetal personality claims that are now blocked. However, state legislative GOP leaders, with the help of Alliance Defending Freedom, requested intervention.
The law firm also represents the Physicians Against Abortion Association. Seeking to revoke FDA approval of abortion drug mifepristone A Texas lawsuit defending fear would be successful.
Access in Arizona has long been hampered by a myriad of laws regulating the process. Dobbs It just adds to the burden. At one of nine abortion clinics in the state, he facing closure
After months of intermittent service, and others, are struggling to meet the increasing demand from local and out-of-state women. Growing wave of women in need My clinic is strained or closed.
