(LifeSiteNews) — Maricopa Superior Court Judge Greg Como has struck down three more pro-life measures in Arizona, in the latest consequence of a state-level constitutional amendment that rendered abortion-on-demand nearly untouchable.
In 2024, Arizona voters enacted an amendment backed by the pro-abortion coalition “Arizona for Abortion Access,” establishing a so-called “fundamental right to abortion that the state of Arizona may not interfere with before the point of fetal viability (defined as the point of pregnancy when there is significant chance of the survival of the fetus outside of the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures) unless justified by a compelling state interest (defined as a law or regulation enacted for the limited purpose of improving or maintaining the health of the individual seeking abortion care [sic] that does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision making).”
After viability, abortion bans would still need to allow abortion in cases where abortion, “in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional [i.e., abortionist], is necessary to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual,” despite the fact that abortion is never medically necessary, as both pro-life doctors and former abortionists affirm. The language gives abortionists the discretion to justify any abortion, rendering any future pro-life laws effectively meaningless.
Abortion had been legal in Arizona up to 15 weeks for any reason and forbidden afterward except for “medical emergencies.” In addition to nixing the 15-week ban, the amendment prevents a future legislature from restoring the 1864 near-total abortion ban it repealed in May 2024.
On February 6, Como ruled that the amendment also invalidates state laws that forbade abortion pills from being dispensed via telemedicine, required a 24-hour waiting period and ultrasound before abortions, and banned abortions sought for “discriminatory” reasons (the race, sex, or fetal abnormality of a baby).
“Each of these laws infringe on a woman’s ‘autonomous decision making’ by mandating medical procedures and disclosure of information regardless of the patient’s needs and wishes,” the judge wrote.
Republican state Senate President Warren Petersen said his office would appeal the ruling, but National Right to Life Committee state legislative director Ingrid Duran told the Associated Press she does not expect it to be overturned. Instead, the group will focus on education efforts to “expand our base into more pro-lifers who believe that the unborn child deserves protection.”
Pro-abortion state constitutional amendments have been one of the abortion lobby’s most potent tactics to preserve abortion “access” without Roe v. Wade. Up until 2024, it had consistent success since the overturn of Roe using false claims that pro-life laws are dangerous to stoke fear about the issue among the general public.
After 2020, pro-lifers either failed to enact pro-life amendments or stop pro-abortion ones in California, Kentucky, Michigan, Vermont, Kansas, and Ohio, prompting much conversation among pro-lifers about the need to develop new strategies to protect life at the ballot box as well as consternation within the Republican Party over the political ramifications of continuing to take a clear pro-life position.
Ten states had such amendments on the ballot in November 2024. Pro-lifers defeated pro-abortion ballot initiatives in Florida, Nebraska, and South Dakota, breaking the abortion lobby’s two-year winning streak, but amendments to embed abortion “rights” in state constitutions prevailed in the remaining states.