Arizona doctors fight abortion restrictions in court
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Brendan Lynch/Axios
Two Arizona OB-GYNs and the Arizona Medical Association are in court this week arguing that a constitutional amendment passed by state voters last year should negate abortion restrictions like waiting periods and telemedicine bans.
Why it matters: While the crux of the Arizona Abortion Access Act ensures women can seek abortion care up to fetal viability, reproductive rights advocates believe it also calls into question the constitutionality of other state laws that make it more difficult to access care.
- This case is the first big test of their legal theory.
The big picture: Together, the doctors and medical association filed a lawsuit in May challenging more than a dozen state laws, including ones that:
- Make it illegal for doctors to provide abortions if they know a patient's decision is motivated by knowledge of a fetal genetic abnormality;
- Require patients to attend two appointments at least 24 hours apart before obtaining a medical abortion;
- Ban telehealth for abortion and prohibit mailing abortion pills.
The latest: A three-day hearing began Wednesday following a failed attempt by House Speaker Steve Montenegro and Senate President Warren Petersen to quash the suit.
- The hearing is to decide whether to issue a preliminary injunction, which would make the laws in question unenforceable as the case proceeds.
Between the lines: Typically, the attorney general would represent the state, but AG Kris Mayes, who supports abortion rights, has taken a back seat in the case.
- This led Republicans Petersen and Montenegro to intervene in defense of the laws.
The intrigue: In his decision against Montenegro and Petersen, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Greg Como said the constitutional amendment establishes the "fundamental right to abortion," which means "any restrictions on that right are presumptively invalid" and it's up to the government to convince the court otherwise.
- That's what state officials will attempt to do this week.
What they're saying: "These burdensome restrictions have been in place for far too long, so we're going to court to strike them down once and for all. We are carrying out the will of the voters. The public and the constitution are aligned — now it's time for the law to catch up," Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a press statement when the case was filed.
- The center represents some of the plaintiffs.
The other side: "Ahead of the 2024 election, proponents of Proposition 139 assured Arizona voters that the proposed amendment represented a moderate, common-sense measure… [they] now claim that measure has swept away nearly every health-and-safety regulation relating to abortion," attorneys for Montenegro and Petersen said in a court filing.
What's next: A decision is expected sometime after the hearing ends Friday.