Attorney General Kris Mayes reaffirmed her pledge to never prosecute abortionists, regardless of state law.
Mayes made the remarks during a press conference following the Arizona Supreme Court oral arguments in Planned Parenthood v. Mayes on Tuesday. The attorney general said that other issues were more important to her, like prosecuting drug dealers giving fentanyl to minors.
“No, we will not be doing abortion prosecutions in Arizona while I’m attorney general, ever,” said Mayes. “We have much more important issues to decide and work on in this state.”
Earlier this summer, Gov. Katie Hobbs issued an executive order that took away all prosecutorial power from the 15 county attorneys concerning abortion law, and gave it to Mayes. That move effectively nullified the possibility for prosecutions of abortionists.
Mayes opted to not dispute the court of appeals ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Mayes from last year, which determined that the 2022 law restricting abortions to 15 weeks’ gestation was to be implemented, and not the near-total abortion ban dating back to Arizona’s territorial days.
Instead, Mayes has backed efforts to expand abortion access in Arizona and other states.
On Wednesday, Mayes joined 10 other attorneys general to issue a statement of condemnation to the Texas Supreme Court. That court overturned an injunction on the state’s abortion ban awarded to a Texas woman seeking to abort her daughter.
Mayes claimed that the health and life of the Texas woman, Kate Cox, were at risk due to the Trisomy 18 diagnosis of her unborn child. Texas abortion law enables abortions in pregnancies that are considered life-threatening or presenting a risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function. Per Texas law, medical professionals determine which pregnancies qualify for that exception.
“No one should be forced to fight in court and leave their home state just to receive the health care they need,” read the statement. “As this case shows, abortion bans pose dangerous health and safety threats wherever they are enacted. Decisions about abortion care should be made between patients and their doctors, not politicians.”
I join my fellow attorneys general in condemning the Texas Supreme Court's decision to deny abortion access to Kate Cox, a pregnant woman whose health & life were at risk as a result of a lethal fetal diagnosis. She was forced to travel out of state to receive abortion care. pic.twitter.com/DltGxPuVAq
The Texas Supreme Court overturned the injunction because Cox’s doctor couldn’t declare that her pregnancy threatened Cox’s life or major bodily functions.
“A woman who meets the medical-necessity exception need not seek a court order to obtain an abortion. Under the law, it is a doctor who must decide that a woman is suffering from a life-threatening condition during a pregnancy, raising the necessity for an abortion to save her life or to prevent impairment of a major bodily function. The law leaves to physicians — not judges — both the discretion and the responsibility to exercise their reasonable medical judgment, given the unique facts and circumstances of each patient,” stated the court. “[Cox’s doctor] asked a court to pre-authorize the abortion yet she could not, or at least did not, attest to the court that Ms. Cox’s condition poses the risk the exception requires.”
In August, Mayes joined a coalition of 20 attorneys general to challenge Idaho’s ban on minors traveling to other states to obtain an abortion. In May, Mayes joined an amicus brief challenging a Texas ruling blocking federal approval of the controversial abortion drug mifepristone.
Since taking office, Mayes has encouraged major pharmacy chains to continue to offer mifepristone regardless of legal challenges.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court held oral arguments on the state’s two conflicting abortion bans in the case Planned Parenthood et al v. Kristin Mayes/Hazelrigg.
The court is determining the fate of two conflicting laws: the total abortion ban outlawing all but life-saving abortions, in existence prior to Arizona achieving statehood with versions dating back to Arizona’s first laws as a territory in 1864, and the 2022 ban restricting abortions to 15 weeks’ gestation except in cases of medical emergency. The latter law was codified just months before the Supreme Court overturnedRoe v. Wade in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, who has refused to defend the pre-statehood ban, declared the day before the oral arguments that the ban would relegate Arizonans to a lesser, premodern society.
“Arizonans cannot be shoved back to the 1860s,” said Mayes.
Tomorrow, the Arizona Supreme Court will hear arguments on the harmonization of two conflicting statutes on abortion. The consequences of this case are huge. Arizonans cannot be shoved back to the 1860s. https://t.co/rrfc7wI5AJ
Gov. Katie Hobbs encouraged voters to sign the ballot petition to legalize all abortion up to birth.
If you’re as outraged as I am that there’s a possibility for a Civil War-era abortion ban to go into effect in 2023, then take action right now and sign the petition to put a right to abortion on Arizona’s ballot next November by going to https://t.co/ZYodddLbWGpic.twitter.com/9NqlGdl3fX
Stepping up to defend the pre-statehood ban in Mayes’ stead and first to speak during Tuesday’s oral arguments was Jake Warner, an attorney with the Scottsdale-based conservative Christian legal organization, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF).
Warner proposed that a certain continuity exists between the pre-statehood ban, which the court referred to as the “territorial law,” and the 2022 ban limiting abortions to 15 weeks’ gestation.
Per Warner, the pre-statehood ban imposes a certain authority on the 2022 statute: all abortions prior to 15 weeks must be life-saving, and that abortions after 15 weeks must not only be life-saving but based on a medical emergency. Warner said that the language of the 2022 statute gave express direction to give deference to the pre-statehood ban.
Chief Justice Robert Brutinel and Vice Chief Justice Ann Timmer didn’t appear convinced of the argument. The pair indicated that physicians would be confused by the two statutes.
"Arizona’s law affirms that life is a human right. I am hopeful that the court will uphold this life-saving principle." – ADF's Jake Warner pic.twitter.com/YmlmnV4zvy
On the subject of ectopic pregnancies — an oft-referenced terminal condition in the abortion debate — Warner said that physicians wouldn’t be punished for their removal, since ectopic pregnancies constitute a medical emergency and their removal constitutes a life-saving measure.
Warner said that the 2022 restriction doesn’t repeal the pre-statehood abortion ban, because it created no new right to an abortion. Brutinel posited that the legislative intent with the newer law was to legalize abortion up to 15 weeks’ gestation. Warner countered that the legislature’s intent with its 2022 restriction was to ensure that it protected unborn life to the greatest extent possible.
Justice Clint Bolick questioned how the current law doesn’t conflict with the territorial ban, challenging the implication that something that wasn’t able to be prosecuted prior to Dobbs could now be prosecuted. Likewise, Brutinel said that a physician couldn’t have been prosecuted for conducting abortions under the new law. Warner responded that the language of the 2022 statute only purports to regulate terminations after 15 weeks, not before.
Counsel for Planned Parenthood Arizona, Andy Gaona, argued that the state legislature has displayed a progressive permissiveness when it comes to allowable abortions. Gaona stopped short of declaring the existence of a right to abortion at the outset of his arguments, but did declare, repeatedly, that abortion constituted a form of health care in closing.
“We have never maintained the right to an abortion exists,” said Gaona. “Abortion is health care. I’m not sure anyone has ever said that in this courtroom.”
Planned Parenthood counsel closing remarks before the Arizona Supreme Court: "Abortion is health care. I'm not sure anyone has ever said that in this courtroom." pic.twitter.com/NKh4O6fD6v
Contrary to what Warner posited, Gaona argued that the 2022 law allows abortions up to 15 weeks without prosecutions, citing the previous court of appeals decision. Timmer asked whether the state legislature would need to declare a right to an abortion in order to permit that interpretation; Gaona responded that the legislature only needs to regulate criminal conduct to do so, arguing that criminal laws allow that which they don’t criminalize.
Bolick pointed out the 2022 law specifically referenced the territorial law in its construction:
“This act does not […] Repeal, by implication or otherwise, section 13-3603, Arizona Revised Statutes, or any other applicable state law regulating or restricting abortion,” stated the provision.
Gaona disagreed. He said that the court of appeals’ harmonization of the statutes didn’t repeal the pre-statehood law, even by removing prosecution, because the 2022 law now qualifies as the criminal prohibition for elective abortions. Gaona clarified that a physician couldn’t be prosecuted under the territorial statute, but could under the 2022 law if they conduct abortions after 15 weeks.
Gaona argued that a series of statutes that aren’t self-referential or fail to include language repealing an old statute qualify as an implied repeal. Gaona said that if the legislature’s intent was to resurrect the pre-statehood ban, it should’ve stated that clearly “and it clearly didn’t do that.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The abortion lobby has made it clear. It wants to erase every pro-life law and enshrine abortion up to birth in the Arizona Constitution. If it’s successful, that would mean:
No more requirement to inform women of the risks of abortion.
No requirement to inform women of options other than abortion.
No requirement for ultrasounds prior to abortion.
No 24-hour waiting period.
No requirement for parental consent for minors.
That last one is particularly shocking. It would open the door for sex traffickers, sex abusers, and other sexual predators to force women and underage girls into abortions. This is the terrifying reality that could be facing our state.
Right now in Arizona, the abortion industry is hard at work to collect the 383,923 valid signatures they need to put this constitutional amendment on the General Election ballot next November. While this may seem like a daunting task, they are well organized and well-funded, receiving support from the likes of Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and NARAL. Perhaps you’ve seen them at libraries, coffee shops, or the dollar stores asking you to help “protect women’s healthcare” or “support the right for women to make their own decisions about healthcare.” But here’s an interesting fact. The initiative never mentions “women.” It only mentions “pregnant individuals.” So, what are they really pushing?
It’s important to make the distinction between the old abortion debate that’s been raging for the last 50 years and the fight we face today. In the old abortion debate, everyone had a place on the spectrum regarding when it’s ok to take the life of a baby during pregnancy—from the moment of conception all the way up to birth. Both sides were in a constant battle to determine the inflection point where their side had the most support.
But this fight is completely different.
In this ballot measure, Arizona for Abortion Access (the group seeking this constitutional amendment) has drawn the inflection point for allowable abortion right up to the child’s birthday. That means anyone who signs this measure is actively supporting the end of a baby’s life right up until the moment that he or she is born.
Based on polls across the country, a vast majority of the population is not okay with abortion up to the moment of birth and should reject this initiative. But that’s why it’s so important that the general public know what they are being asked to sign.
This initiative is written with intentionally vague language which will allow “healthcare professionals” to use loopholes to perform abortions right up to the moment of birth. But don’t just take it from me. Look at the initiative petition itself, which says that the state cannot act in a manner that:
DENIES, RESTRICTS OR INTERFERES WITH AN ABORTION AFTER FETAL VIABILITY THAT, IN THE GOOD FAITH JUDGMENT OF A TREATING HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONAL, IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE LIFE OR PHYSICAL OR MENTAL HEALTH OF THE PREGNANT INDIVIDUAL.
“…in the good faith judgment of a treating healthcare professional…”? Who gets to define “healthcare professional”?
“…is necessary to protect physical or mental health…”? What about pregnancy could be so dangerous to a mother’s mental health that it could be used to justify abortion up to birth? You can see where this is heading…
There once was a time when Planned Parenthood and the abortion lobby repeated the slogan that “abortion should be safe, legal, and rare”? But this is where they were always heading—abortion up to birth and for practically any reason.
Arizona, it’s time to wake up and show up. We need to educate our friends and relatives with the truth about the abortion initiative petition. We need to wake up our church communities, so that our congregations can be properly informed. And we need to stand up anytime we see abortion activists collecting signatures for this petition to let potential signers know that their signature could allow abortion up to birth. (To get an information packet about this effort to share with your pastor, you can email AZdeclinetosign@gmail.com.)
This is literally a matter of life and death. Which side will you choose?
Ed Steele is a husband, father, grandfather, and Mesa resident who is helping to lead the Decline to Sign – AZ Abortion Act Movement. You can find out the latest by following this movement on X (Twitter) @declineabortion.
Arizona’s leading Democrat continues to push for a constitutional amendment to allow abortion in the state.
On Tuesday, Governor Katie Hobbs took to her personal “X” account to announce that she had signed a petition to send an abortion initiative to the 2024 ballot.
Today, I joined Arizonans across the political spectrum and added my name to support the ballot measure to enshrine a right to abortion in our state’s constitution. As a domestic violence advocate, as a mother, and as governor, I will always defend Arizonans’ freedoms pic.twitter.com/eaj6K9dwTI
Hobbs said, “Today, I joined Arizonans across the political spectrum and added my name to support the ballot measure to enshrine a right to abortion in our state’s constitution. As a domestic violence advocate, as a mother, and as governor, I will always defend Arizonans’ freedoms.”
The governor then shared a link to the group’s (Arizona for Abortion Access) page to garner more awareness for increased signatures across the state.
This wasn’t the first time that Hobbs had weighed in to support the initiative. Back in August, she posted, “As a lifelong advocate for Arizonans’ reproductive freedom, I’m thrilled that we will have the opportunity to make our voices heard next November. Once and for all, we will make clear that the government should not have a say in women’s personal healthcare decisions.”
As a lifelong advocate for Arizonans’ reproductive freedom, I’m thrilled that we will have the opportunity to make our voices heard next November. Once and for all, we will make clear that the government should not have a say in women's personal healthcare decisions.…
Arizona for Abortion Access has until July 3, 2024, to gather 383,923 valid signatures to refer this initiative to the November 2024 ballot. If successful, the initiative would amend the state’s constitution to install abortion as a right in Arizona.
Earlier this year, one of Arizona’s top pro-life leaders, Cathi Herrod from the Center for Arizona Policy, came out in fierce opposition to these efforts, alerting her followers that this measure “would tear down virtually all pro-life precautions and make it nearly impossible to regulate abortion.” Herrod also explained how, if passed, the constitutional amendment would likely allow the likelihood of abortion at all stages of life in the womb, stating, “The broad exemption of ‘mental health’ of the mother after viability is widely understood, even in the courts, to mean virtually anything the abortion provider wants it to mean, including stress or anxiety. Even barbaric partial-birth abortion is legal under this exemption.”
Arizona for Abortion Access lists endorsements from the ACLU of Arizona, Affirm Sexual and Reproductive Health, Healthcare Rising Arizona, Arizona List, NARAL Arizona, and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona, on its website.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The transition in Arizona’s statewide leadership party credentials continues to manifest itself in the fight to defend innocent life in the womb.
Last week, Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs announced that she had “filed an amicus brief in support of Planned Parenthood, opposing the reinstatement of a total abortion ban.” The legal filing was transmitted to the Arizona Supreme Court in Planned Parenthood v. Mayes. The case was previously initiated under the prior Attorney General’s, Republican Mark Brnovich, administration. Attorney General Kris Mayes, a Democrat, has made no secret of her opposition to the pro-life law in dispute, despite her office named as one of the defendants.
Yesterday, I filed an amicus brief in support of Planned Parenthood, opposing the reinstatement of a total abortion ban.
I’m fighting against extremists who want to jail doctors and bring an end to reproductive freedom in Arizona.
In the Hobbs’ amicus brief, she argues that “Abortion access is critical to the health, safety, and wellbeing of Arizonans, and implicates significant liberty interests,” that “failure to harmonize the Territorial Ban with Title 36 and returning to a near-total ban on abortion raises serious questions under the Arizona Constitution,” and that “the constitutional avoidance canon further supports affirming the Court of Appeals’ decision.”
The governor highlighted her battle “against extremists who want to jail doctors and bring an end to reproductive freedom in Arizona.” She noted the stories of two women in the state “who have relied on access to abortion care,” writing, “Erika who sought reproductive healthcare after a previous pregnancy threatened her life. She now lives happily with her daughter & husband in Sedona. And Jasmine, who struggled to provide for her two children when she discovered she was pregnant. Abortion access allowed her to graduate from college & pursue full-time work.”
One of Arizona’s premier pro-life organizations, the Center for Arizona Policy, also filed its own amicus brief at the state’s Supreme Court. The Center’s President, Cathi Herrod issued a statement about the brief and the importance of the case, writing, “The brief pushes back against claims from abortion activists suggesting that because Arizona lawmakers only passed pro-life laws within the constraints of Roe, that they never wanted to further restrict abortion. That is clearly false. In anticipation of the eventual fall of Roe, the Arizona Legislature consistently showed its dedication to preserving the rights of the unborn by keeping the pre-Roe law on the books, which reflects Arizona’s strong pro-life position.”
The brief from Center for Arizona Policy argues that the “Respondents’ focus on legislative inaction is incomplete and unavailing,” that “the legislature’s express instruction to retain 13-3603 and to interpret Arizona law to protect unborn children should be respected – especially given the unique circumstances here,” and that “overlap in laws protecting unborn children is a feature, not a flaw, where legal challenges are an ever-present threat.”
The case will be before the Arizona Supreme Court in December.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
