RIO YAMAT
Tue, May 14, 2024 at 10:04 PM MDT·4 min read
415
Arizona Sen. Shawnna Bolick, R-District 2, speaks, Wednesday, May 1, 2024, at the state Capitol in Phoenix. Bolick joined Democrats in the Arizona Senate on Wednesday to vote to repeal an 1864 ban on almost all abortions that her husband, Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick, helped reinstate.
(AP Photo/Matt York, File)
When it was Shawnna Bolick’s turn to speak, the words tumbled out of her for 20 minutes. The conservative lawmaker was in the middle of a heated debate in the Republican-led Arizona Senate on a bill to repeal an 1864 law banning nearly all abortions.
Democrats needed at least one more vote from the right to advance the bill.
Bolick, head hung low and tripping over her words, described her three difficult pregnancies, including one that ended in miscarriage. She said she wouldn't have got through it "without the moral support of my husband.”
Her husband, Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick, was part of the majority that voted in April to restore the near-total ban.
Observers in the gallery jeered as the senator declared herself “pro-life." Only in the final moments of her speech did her intention become clear.
“I am here to protect more babies,” she said. “I vote aye.”
The bill passed and a day later, May 2, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed it into law.
Shawnna Bolick’s vote to repeal the near-total ban her spouse helped reinstate underscores the increasingly chaotic philosophical and legal landscape surrounding abortion access in Arizona, and it reflects national Republicans’ struggle to navigate the politics of abortion during a presidential election year.
This could spell trouble for the judge and the senator. Both declined interview requests from The Associated Press.
Shawnna and Clint Bolick met in Washington at an event hosted by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research institute. They have long been friends with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — a godfather to one of Clint Bolick’s sons — and his conservative political activist wife, Ginni.
Clarence Thomas was part of the majority that overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022 — something he had sought for more than 30 years — and he also pressed his colleagues to reverse rulings protecting same-sex marriage, gay sex and the use of contraceptives.
After the 2020 presidential election, Ginni Thomas sent emails urging Republican lawmakers in Arizona — including Shawnna Bolick — to choose their own electors to undo Joe Biden's victory in the state. Bolick, then a state representative, introduced a bill the following year to rewrite Arizona's election laws to give state lawmakers the power to reject election results “at any time before the presidential inauguration.” Her proposal died before coming to a vote.
Their conservative credentials haven’t shielded them from criticism as Clint Bolick seeks another six-year term on the bench, and his wife, who was appointed last year to represent her northern Phoenix district, faces a primary challenge on July 30.
After the high court published its ruling, calls from the right to repeal the near-total ban quickly surfaced. On social media, U.S. Rep. David Schweikert, a Republican, said the court “legislated from the bench." Former Republican Gov. Doug Ducey said the court's ruling didn't reflect “the will of the people.”
A progressive group also launched a campaign targeting Justices Bolick and Kathryn King — both of them voted to restore the 160-year-old abortion ban and are up for retention election in November.
“Arizonans have a constitutional right to hold judges and justices accountable,” said Abigail Jackson, digital coordinator for Progress Arizona. “So we want to let Arizonans know that these two particular justices will be on the ballot in November and to direct some of their energy towards unseating them.”
Voters rarely deny a sitting judge another term; only six have been unseated since Arizona adopted its judicial retention election system in 1974.
Democrats, meanwhile, have put the abortion ruling at the center of their quest to take control of the state Legislature for the first time in decades. Sen. Bolick, representing one of the most competitive districts in the state, is among their top targets.
Bolick appeared to argue on the floor that a repeal would guard against extreme ballot initiatives to enshrine abortion rights, saying she wanted “to protect our state constitution from unlimited abortions.”
But the Center for Arizona Policy, an anti-abortion advocacy group, blasted her vote to repeal, saying she “voted with pro-abortion activist lawmakers.”
Some Republican colleagues agreed.
“She has confused the pro-life community,” Sen. Jake Hoffman said on the floor after the vote. “Make no mistake, to everybody watching this and hearing my voice right now, and everyone who will hear it, she voted for abortions.”
The repeal bill won’t take effect until 90 days after the state’s legislative session ends, typically in June or July. The Civil War-era ban could meanwhile be enforced, but the high court on Monday issued a stay on its decision, making a 2022 statute banning abortions after 15 weeks Arizona’s prevailing abortion law.
But the legal landscape could change yet again if Arizona voters approve a ballot measure in November to enshrine abortion access up to 24 weeks of pregnancy in the state constitution. Organizers say they’ll submit more than enough signatures by the July 3 deadline.
___
Yamat reported from Las Vegas. Associated Press writers Jonathan J. Cooper and Anita Snow in Phoenix contributed to this report.
Arizona Supreme Court delays enforcement of 1864 abortion ban
When it was Shawnna Bolick’s turn to speak, the words tumbled out of her for 20 minutes. The conservative lawmaker was in the middle of a heated debate in the Republican-led Arizona Senate on a bill to repeal an 1864 law banning nearly all abortions.
Democrats needed at least one more vote from the right to advance the bill.
Bolick, head hung low and tripping over her words, described her three difficult pregnancies, including one that ended in miscarriage. She said she wouldn't have got through it "without the moral support of my husband.”
Her husband, Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick, was part of the majority that voted in April to restore the near-total ban.
Observers in the gallery jeered as the senator declared herself “pro-life." Only in the final moments of her speech did her intention become clear.
“I am here to protect more babies,” she said. “I vote aye.”
The bill passed and a day later, May 2, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed it into law.
Shawnna Bolick’s vote to repeal the near-total ban her spouse helped reinstate underscores the increasingly chaotic philosophical and legal landscape surrounding abortion access in Arizona, and it reflects national Republicans’ struggle to navigate the politics of abortion during a presidential election year.
This could spell trouble for the judge and the senator. Both declined interview requests from The Associated Press.
Shawnna and Clint Bolick met in Washington at an event hosted by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research institute. They have long been friends with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — a godfather to one of Clint Bolick’s sons — and his conservative political activist wife, Ginni.
Clarence Thomas was part of the majority that overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022 — something he had sought for more than 30 years — and he also pressed his colleagues to reverse rulings protecting same-sex marriage, gay sex and the use of contraceptives.
After the 2020 presidential election, Ginni Thomas sent emails urging Republican lawmakers in Arizona — including Shawnna Bolick — to choose their own electors to undo Joe Biden's victory in the state. Bolick, then a state representative, introduced a bill the following year to rewrite Arizona's election laws to give state lawmakers the power to reject election results “at any time before the presidential inauguration.” Her proposal died before coming to a vote.
Their conservative credentials haven’t shielded them from criticism as Clint Bolick seeks another six-year term on the bench, and his wife, who was appointed last year to represent her northern Phoenix district, faces a primary challenge on July 30.
After the high court published its ruling, calls from the right to repeal the near-total ban quickly surfaced. On social media, U.S. Rep. David Schweikert, a Republican, said the court “legislated from the bench." Former Republican Gov. Doug Ducey said the court's ruling didn't reflect “the will of the people.”
A progressive group also launched a campaign targeting Justices Bolick and Kathryn King — both of them voted to restore the 160-year-old abortion ban and are up for retention election in November.
“Arizonans have a constitutional right to hold judges and justices accountable,” said Abigail Jackson, digital coordinator for Progress Arizona. “So we want to let Arizonans know that these two particular justices will be on the ballot in November and to direct some of their energy towards unseating them.”
Voters rarely deny a sitting judge another term; only six have been unseated since Arizona adopted its judicial retention election system in 1974.
Democrats, meanwhile, have put the abortion ruling at the center of their quest to take control of the state Legislature for the first time in decades. Sen. Bolick, representing one of the most competitive districts in the state, is among their top targets.
Bolick appeared to argue on the floor that a repeal would guard against extreme ballot initiatives to enshrine abortion rights, saying she wanted “to protect our state constitution from unlimited abortions.”
But the Center for Arizona Policy, an anti-abortion advocacy group, blasted her vote to repeal, saying she “voted with pro-abortion activist lawmakers.”
Some Republican colleagues agreed.
“She has confused the pro-life community,” Sen. Jake Hoffman said on the floor after the vote. “Make no mistake, to everybody watching this and hearing my voice right now, and everyone who will hear it, she voted for abortions.”
The repeal bill won’t take effect until 90 days after the state’s legislative session ends, typically in June or July. The Civil War-era ban could meanwhile be enforced, but the high court on Monday issued a stay on its decision, making a 2022 statute banning abortions after 15 weeks Arizona’s prevailing abortion law.
But the legal landscape could change yet again if Arizona voters approve a ballot measure in November to enshrine abortion access up to 24 weeks of pregnancy in the state constitution. Organizers say they’ll submit more than enough signatures by the July 3 deadline.
___
Yamat reported from Las Vegas. Associated Press writers Jonathan J. Cooper and Anita Snow in Phoenix contributed to this report.
Arizona Supreme Court delays enforcement of 1864 abortion ban
Taylor Romine, CNN
Tue, May 14, 2024
The Arizona Supreme Court delayed enforcement of the state’s recently revived 1864 abortion ban, according to an order filed Monday. The order allows for a 90-day stay requested by the state’s attorney general.
Arizona Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a repeal of the 1864 abortion ban on May 2, but the repeal will not be in effect until 90 days after the legislative session ends, CNN previously reported. The state’s legislature is currently in session, meaning the Civil War-era abortion ban could come into effect for a brief period.
The stay will be in effect through August 12 so Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes could consider a petition for certiorari to the US Supreme Court, the order said. Another stay could be filed again, according to the order.
Mayes said in a statement she is “grateful” the court stayed the enforcement and said the earliest the 1864 abortion ban can be enforced is September 26, due to an additional 45 days stipulated in a separate case.
“I will do everything I can to ensure that doctors can provide medical care for their patients according to their best judgment, not the beliefs of the men elected to the territorial legislature 160 years ago,” she said.
On Monday, the court also denied a motion from Planned Parenthood Arizona asking the court to stay the 1864 abortion ban until the repeal of that law takes effect.
The repeal of the Civil War-era ban earlier this month was a victory for abortion rights advocates, who have for years tried to overturn the 1864 law that banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy, except to save a mother’s life, and threatened providers with two to five year prison sentences.
CNN’s Rashard Rose and Clay Voytek contributed to this report.
Arizona Supreme Court pushes back enforcement date for 1864 abortion ban
Alex Tabet and Adam Edelman
Mon, May 13, 2024
PHOENIX — The Arizona Supreme Court on Monday granted a request to delay enforcement of the state’s 1864 near-total abortion ban.
The court granted Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes’ request for an additional 90 days before the Civil War-era ban can be enforced.
Even though Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a repeal of the ban on May 2, that measure cannot take effect until 90 days after the state’s legislative session ends — and it is still in session. Monday's court order essentially narrows the window in which the ban could be enforced, if it all.
“I am grateful that the Arizona Supreme Court has stayed enforcement of the 1864 law and granted our motion to stay the mandate in this case for another 90 days,” Mayes said in a statement Monday.
She also said her office "will consider the best legal course of action to take from here,” which could include asking the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.
Previously, Mayes' office said the 1864 ban would go into effect June 27. The court's action Monday pushes that back to Sept. 26, her office said.
The enforcement date hinges heavily on when the state's legislative session ends. Last year, it wrapped up July 31. If legislators were to keep to that timeline, the ban could be enforceable for about a month — from Sept. 26 until late October — under the new projections. But it’s still unclear when this year's session will end.
With the enforcement delay, the state is operating under a 15-week ban on abortions passed in 2022 — signed by the governor at the time, Doug Ducey, a Republican — that makes exceptions for medical emergencies but not for rape or incest.
That law has prompted a coalition of reproductive rights organizations to try to get a constitutional amendment on the state’s ballot in November. The amendment would enshrine the right to an abortion through fetal viability and greatly expand the scope for exceptions.
The coalition, known as Arizona for Abortion Access, is on track to get the referendum on the ballot.
In a statement Monday, a spokesperson for the coalition noted that the state Supreme Court's order does nothing to undo the 2022 law.
“With this order, Arizonans are still subjected to another extreme ban, one that punishes patients experiencing pregnancy complications and survivors of rape and incest,” spokesperson Chris Love said.
Since Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022, abortion rights have been on the ballot in more than a half-dozen states. Each time, including in red states like Kansas and Ohio, abortion-rights advocates have prevailed.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Arizona’s high court is allowing the attorney general 90 more days on her abortion ban strategy
Kenneth Wong
Mon, May 13, 2024
PHOENIX (AP) — Arizona’s highest court on Monday gave the state’s attorney general another 90 days to decide further legal action in the case over a 160-year-old near-total ban on abortion that lawmakers recently voted to repeal.
The Arizona Supreme Court’s order leaves in place for now a more recent law that legalizes abortion up to 15 weeks of pregnancy. It also allows Attorney General Kris Mayes more time to decide whether to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Mayes expressed gratitude for the order, and said the earliest the 1864 law can now take effect is Sept. 26, counting the 90 days just granted, plus another 45 days stipulated in a separate case.
"I will do everything I can to ensure that doctors can provide medical care for their patients according to their best judgment, not the beliefs of the men elected to the territorial legislature 160 years ago," Mayes said.
Arizona’s Supreme Court in April voted to restore the older law that provided no exceptions for rape or incest and allows abortions only if the mother’s life is in jeopardy. The majority opinion suggested doctors could be prosecuted and sentenced to up to five years in prison if convicted.
The Legislature then voted narrowly to repeal the Civil War-era law, but the repeal won’t take effect until 90 days after lawmakers wrap up their current annual session. It has been unclear if there would be a period the older ban could be enforced before the repeal took hold.
The anti-abortion group defending the ban, Alliance Defending Freedom, said that it would keep fighting despite the latest delay.
"Arizona’s pro-life law has protected unborn children for over 100 years," said the group’s senior counsel Jake Warner. "We will continue working to protect unborn children and promote real support and health care for Arizona families."
Planned Parenthood Arizona CEO Angela Florez welcomed the move. She said the organization "will continue to provide abortion care through 15 weeks of pregnancy and we remain focused on ensuring patients have access to abortion care for as long as legally possible."
Arizona for Abortion Access released a statement on this ruling, saying:
"Another day, another ruling, another example of why we must pass the Arizona Abortion Access Act. With this order, Arizonans are still subjected to another extreme ban, one that punishes patients experiencing pregnancy complications and survivors of rape and incest. Arizonans deserve to know our rights are ensured and protected, not constantly in flux based on the whims of politicians or the outcomes of endless lawsuits. Only the Arizona Abortion Access restores and protects Arizona’s right to access abortion care once and for all, and that’s why Arizona voters will turn out to support it in November."
Near-total ban can trace roots back to the 19th century
(U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Joseph Barron)
The law known as A.R.S. 13-3603 can trace its roots back to 1864, a time when Arizona was not even a U.S. state.
A.R.S. 13-3603 states:
"A person who provides, supplies or administers to a pregnant woman, or procures such woman to take any medicine, drugs or substance, or uses or employs any instrument or other means whatever, with intent thereby to procure the miscarriage of such woman, unless it is necessary to save her life, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not less than two years nor more than five years."
A.R.S. 13-3603's repeal means that a statute banning the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy would become Arizona’s prevailing abortion law, when the repeal bill officially takes effect.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
No comments:
Post a Comment