In a resounding declaration against over 50 years of genocide of the most defenseless among us, the Arizona Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling, firmly upholding a state law that safeguards the sanctity of life. The case of Planned Parenthood v. Mayes marked a pivotal moment in Arizona’s battle against the slaughter of innocent unborn children.
At its core, the court’s ruling represents a stand against the vile forces that seek to devalue and discard human life at its earliest stages. The law, A.R.S. § 13-3603, explicitly prohibits abortion at any stage, “unless it is necessary to save [the woman’s] life [emphasis added].”
The Arizona Supreme Court’s ruling serves as a powerful reminderthat every human being, from the moment of conception, possesses inherent dignity no matter the size or age. That’s something we should all be celebrating today, and it’s something we should be ready to defend at every given moment.
Right now, those who advocate for the continuation of this mass genocide, including proponents of the Arizona Abortion Access Amendment, are seeking to amend the state constitution to permit abortion up until birth. Their obstinate refusal to acknowledge the humanity of the unborn is an indictment of their souls and a stain on the conscience of our society. That’s why we should be ready to meet them with the truth at every turn that every human life is precious—and abortion destroys that precious life.
As we celebrate this monumental victory, let us recommit ourselves to the cause of life with renewed vigor and determination. Let us continue to fight against the culture of death that seeks to extinguish the most vulnerable among us. And may we remember that while this victory is significant, the battle is far from over.
We must build on this momentum to protect life by stopping the Arizona Abortion Access Amendment. We must decline to sign the petition to put this horrific amendment on the ballot and actively oppose any efforts that threaten to undermine the progress we’ve made in safeguarding the rights of the unborn. And our esteemed state legislators must hold firm in an unwavering commitment to uphold the sanctity of life. We cannot be swayed by fear. Abortion is not merely a choice; it is the termination of a precious life. We cannot abandon these unborn babies. Now is the time to be courageous advocates, standing steadfast in defense of those who cannot speak for themselves.
Katarina White serves as Legislative District Co-Chair for Arizona Right to Life. To get involved and stay informed with the “Decline to Sign” initiative, visit the Arizona Right to Life website. Katarina also delves deeper into the proposed amendment through the “Conservative Seoul Show,” where she presents the “Sanctity Unveiled” segment. You can join her as she explores the challenges faced by the sanctity of life in the State of Arizona here.
A judicial decision from Arizona’s high court may have significant political ramifications in the swing state for the 2024 election.
On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court issued its opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Mayes, finding that the state’s near ban on abortion, which was established in 1864 and reaffirmed several times since, was, in fact, the guiding law on the controversial issue. The vote in the State Supreme Court was 4-2, with one justice recusing himself.
The four prevailing justices wrote that they “merely follow[ed] our limited constitutional role and duty to interpret the law as written…. The legislature has demonstrated its consistent design to restrict elective abortion to the degree permitted by the Supremacy Clause and an unwavering intent since 1864 to proscribe elective abortions absent a federal constitutional right – precisely what it intended and accomplished in 36-2322.”
They added, “To date, our legislature has never affirmatively created a right to, or independently authorized, elective abortion. We defer, as we are constitutionally obligated to do, to the legislature’s judgment, which is accountable to, and thus reflects, the mutable will of our citizens.”
The decision from the Arizona Supreme Court ended one chapter of the state’s abortion saga and confirmed the legal theory of former Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, who, soon after the Roe v. Wade reversal from the Supreme Court of the United States, issued a statement about Arizona’s abortion status. In a statement made on June 29, 2022, Brnovich said, “Our office has concluded the Arizona Legislature has made its intentions clear regarding abortion laws. ARS 13-3603 is back in effect and will not be repealed in 90 days by SB 1164. We will soon be asking the court to vacate the injunction which was put in place following Roe v Wade in light of the Dobbs decision earlier this month.”
Our office has concluded the Arizona Legislature has made its intentions clear regarding abortion laws. pic.twitter.com/jvjKXaXKwd
Brnovich went to court in Pima County Superior Court to lift the injunction on the abortion law in question and was successful.
A Pima County judge lifted an injunction that was placed on AZ’s abortion statute. We applaud the court for upholding the will of the legislature and providing clarity and uniformity on this important issue. I have and will continue to protect the most vulnerable Arizonans.
However, the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the ruling from the Superior Court, leading to the consideration from the state’s Supreme Court.
The outraged reaction from Democrats was swift, while the responses from Republicans were mixed.
Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs said, “It is a dark day in Arizona. We are just fourteen days away from of one the most extreme abortion bans in the country. But my message to Arizona women is this: I won’t rest, and I won’t stop fighting until we have secured the right to abortion. That is my promise to you.”
It is a dark day in Arizona. We are just fourteen days away from one of the most extreme abortion bans in the country.
But my message to Arizona women is this: I won't rest, and I won't stop fighting until we have secured the right to abortion.
That is my promise to you.
— Governor Katie Hobbs (@GovernorHobbs) April 9, 2024
Attorney General Kris Mayes, also a Democrat stated, “This is far from the end of the debate on reproductive freedom, and I look forward to the people of Arizona having their say in the matter. And let me be completely clear, as long as I am Attorney General, no woman or doctor will be prosecuted under this draconian law in this state.”
The decision made by the Arizona Supreme Court today is unconscionable and an affront to freedom. pic.twitter.com/swEqJREVVS
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) April 9, 2024
Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma, both Republicans, issued a joint statement, saying, “During this [60-day waiting period], we will be closely reviewing the court’s ruling, talking to our members, and listening to our constituents to determine the best course of action for the legislature.”
Joint statement from Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma on the Arizona Supreme Court abortion ruling.⬇️
The conservative Arizona Freedom Caucus cheered on the Court’s opinion, posting, “Today, the Supreme Court of Arizona made the correct ruling, upheld the intent of the legislature, and preserved the rule of law today by ruling that the pre-Roe law will remain effective. … As Republicans, we should be proud of the fact that today the lives of the preborn are more protected than they have been since SCOTUS’ fatally flawed Roe decision more than a half century ago. As Republicans, we should be unashamed in proclaiming the value of life.”
🚨 STATEMENT ON ARIZONA SUPREME COURT’S PRO-LIFE RULING 🚨
Today, the Supreme Court of Arizona made the correct ruling, upheld the intent of the legislature, and preserved the rule of law today by ruling that the pre-Roe law will remain effective.
— Arizona Freedom Caucus (@AZFreedomCaucus) April 9, 2024
Republican Senator Wendy Rogers also weighed in on the news of the day. She wrote, “Then, as now, LIFE must be upheld in the laws of the land. I will vote against any laws that would dimmish life in Arizona, including any laws that would dilute our existing statutes. Defending life is the right thing to do.”
🚨Late Breaking Statement🚨
In light of the overturn of Roe v Wade by the US Supreme Court, today the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the right to life in Arizona based on existing state law. I stand in support of that decision and of the law itself, because it protects the most…
The Senate Democratic Leadership released a statement after the announcement from the Court, writing, “The Republican-appointed Arizona Supreme Court has decided to criminalize abortion in Arizona by upholding the 1864 territorial abortion ban and end legal abortion in all cases unless necessary to save the life of the mother. It’s a worse-case scenario Democrats predicted and have been preparing for, working to see the future of reproductive freedom in the hands of Arizonans.”
PRESS RELEAS: Senate Democratic Leadership Respond to the Planned Parenthood et al v. Kristin Mayes/Hazelrigg Opinion #azlegpic.twitter.com/OkEc3nd5SX
— Arizona Senate Democrats (@AZSenateDems) April 9, 2024
Arizona for Abortion Access, the group working to plant a constitutional amendment on abortion on the November ballot, expressed its anger over the judicial opinion. It said, “Today, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled to uphold a devasting near-total ban on abortion from 1864, a territorial law in place before Arizona became a state. This means Arizona now has one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the nation.”
🚨 Today, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled to uphold a devastating near-total ban on abortion from 1864, a territorial law in place before Arizona became a state. This means Arizona now has one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the nation. pic.twitter.com/CaOnxlJciv
— Arizona for Abortion Access (@azforaccess) April 9, 2024
The group revealed that it had over 500,000 signatures from Arizona voters – well over the threshold needed to qualify for the ballot.
The Arizona for Abortion Access campaign has already gathered well over 500,000 Arizona voter signatures. Approximately 384,000 valid voter signatures are required by July 3. The campaign will continue collecting signatures statewide until signatures are due on July 3, 2024.
— Arizona for Abortion Access (@azforaccess) April 9, 2024
Last 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 from pro-abortion interests, 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.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
When you’re hired to do a job, it stands to reason that you should actually do the job you’ve been hired to do. Think about it. If a company hired you to be a writer, and you never did any writing for the company, you probably wouldn’t keep your job too long. That is, of course, unless you work for the government.
For quite some time now, federal, state, and local governments across the country—including right here in Arizona—have been engaging in the practice of “release time.” If you’re unfamiliar with this term, it means that certain people are hired to do a specific job for the government, but instead of doing that job, they are “released” to work full-time for their union. This could be someone like a teacher, for example, who instead of teaching students, spends all his or her time doing work for the teachers’ union. But here’s the thing, even though these employees don’t actually work for the government, they still get a paycheck from the government—all funded by your tax dollars.
Is this practice unfair? Yes. Is it unconstitutional? Absolutely.
That’s why the Goldwater Institute has been challenging this practice in our state in a case that has made its way to the Arizona Supreme Court…
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.
If someone in the private sector illegally took money that didn’t belong to them and then refused to return it, what do you think would happen? They could be heavily punished with fines. They could face sanctions. They could even end up in jail, depending on the offense.
But for about a year and a half, Pinal County has been allowed to drag its feet in refunding $80 million that it illegally collected from taxpayers. It’s just another example of government officials who think they are above the law.
This all started back in 2016 when Pinal County officials proposed a $640 million transit tax hike to voters in order to fund a wide array of transportation projects throughout the region. But after unveiling the plan, the county faced strong opposition from retailers, home builders, auto dealers, and multiple taxpayer watchdog groups.
This should’ve been enough for county officials to recognize that the community didn’t support their proposal. But they were too committed to their scheme. So, what did they do?
