Current:Home > reviewsAn abortion ban enacted in 1864 is under review in the Arizona Supreme Court -RiskWatch
An abortion ban enacted in 1864 is under review in the Arizona Supreme Court
View
Date:2025-04-20 08:30:32
The Arizona Supreme Court grilled lawyers Tuesday over whether a pre-statehood ban on nearly all abortions has been limited or made moot by other statutes enacted over the past 50 years.
The state’s high court is reviewing a lower-court decision that said doctors couldn’t be charged for performing the procedure in the first 15 weeks of pregnancy because other Arizona laws over the years have allowed them to provide abortions.
The 1864 law, which remains on the books, imposes a near total ban on abortions, providing no exceptions for rape or incest but allowing them if a mother’s life is in danger.
Nearly a year ago, the Arizona Court of Appeals concluded that doctors can’t be prosecuted for performing abortions in the first 15 weeks. But it said people who aren’t doctors would still be subject to prosecution under the old law.
Attorneys representing Dr. Eric Hazelrigg, the medical director of anti-abortion counseling centers in metro Phoenix who appealed the decision, had argued the Court of Appeals incorrectly concluded that the law doesn’t apply to doctors. They are asking the state Supreme Court to lift the lower court’s injunction.
Jacob Warner, an attorney representing Hazelrigg, said Arizona’s 15-week abortion law, which took effect in 2022 after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, makes it clear that abortion is only allowed after that time frame to protect the mother’s life “or to prevent significant reversible bodily impairment.”
More on abortion access in America
- The Texas Supreme Court’s rejection of Kate Cox’s request for an exception under the state’s restrictive abortion ban has laid bare the high threshold women in many states must meet to get the procedure.
- Here’s what we know about the legal case of a Kate Cox, a Texas woman denied the right to an immediate abortion.
- In Kentucky, a pregnant woman who filed a lawsuit demanding the right to an abortion has learned her embryo no longer has cardiac activity.
Andrew Gaona, an attorney representing Planned Parenthood Arizona, said that in passing laws regulating abortion over the past 50 years, Arizona lawmakers didn’t “signal any intent that most if not all of these subsequent enactments would become mere empty shells if Roe v. Wade were ever to fall.”
A court had blocked enforcement of the 1864 law shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court issued the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision guaranteeing a constitutional right to an abortion. After the Supreme Court overturned the decision in June 2022, then-Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich succeeded in getting a state judge in Tucson to lift the block. Brnovich’s Democratic successor, Attorney General Kris Mayes, has since urged the state’s high court to reject Hazelrigg’s appeal.
This past summer, abortion rights advocates began a push to ask Arizona voters to create a constitutional right to abortion. If proponents collect enough signatures, Arizona will become the latest state to put the question of reproductive rights directly to voters.
The proposed constitutional amendment would guarantee abortion rights until a fetus could survive outside the womb, typically around 24 weeks of pregnancy. It also would allow later abortions to save the mother’s life or to protect her physical or mental health.
veryGood! (955)
Related
- The city of Chicago is ordered to pay nearly $80M for a police chase that killed a 10
- How Climate Change Influences Temperatures in 1,000 Cities Around the World
- Amazon Prime Day 2023 Tech Deals: Save on Apple Watches, Samsung's Frame TV, Bose Headphones & More
- The U.S. added 209,000 jobs in June, showing that hiring is slowing but still solid
- Opinion: Gianni Infantino, FIFA sell souls and 2034 World Cup for Saudi Arabia's billions
- One Tree Hill’s Bethany Joy Lenz Reveals She Was in a Cult for 10 Years
- Hollywood actors go on strike, say it's time for studio execs to 'wake up'
- New Toolkit of Health Guidance Helps Patients and Care Providers on the Front Lines of Climate Change Prepare for Wildfires
- Can Bill Belichick turn North Carolina into a winner? At 72, he's chasing one last high
- Reddit says new accessibility tools for moderators are coming. Mods are skeptical
Ranking
- Romantasy reigns on spicy BookTok: Recommendations from the internet’s favorite genre
- Vanessa Hudgens' Amazon Prime Day 2023 Picks Will Elevate Your Self-Care Routine
- Pikmin 4 review: tiny tactics, a rescue dog and a fresh face
- Fracking Company to Pay for Public Water System in Rural Pennsylvania Town
- McKinsey to pay $650 million after advising opioid maker on how to 'turbocharge' sales
- 'Fresh Air' hosts Terry Gross and Tonya Mosley talk news, Detroit and psychedelics
- What you need to know about aspartame and cancer
- Pikmin 4 review: tiny tactics, a rescue dog and a fresh face
Recommendation
What do we know about the mysterious drones reported flying over New Jersey?
Why Keke Palmer Is Telling New Moms to “Do You” After Boyfriend Darius Jackson’s Online Drama
Women are returning to the job market in droves, just when the U.S. needs them most
What you need to know about aspartame and cancer
The Grammy nominee you need to hear: Esperanza Spalding
Amazon Prime Day 2023 Alternatives: Shop Target, Walmart, Wayfair, Ulta, Kohl's & More Sales
What you need to know about aspartame and cancer
10 million sign up for Meta's Twitter rival app, Threads