Arizona Voters Endorse Abortion Rights, Yet Outdated Restrictions Linger

Arizonans have decisively voted to establish abortion as a fundamental right in the state. However, reversing the existing 15-week gestational limit and other anti-abortion laws could prove complex. Shortly after the certification of the 2024 election results alongside key state officials, Attorney General Kris Mayes clarified that judicial intervention is necessary to overturn the ban. Though her office considers the passage of Proposition 139, which garnered over 60% of the vote, to be a significant step towards restoring abortion access, some healthcare providers may remain hesitant until legal protections are more firmly in place.

“The position of the state is that the passage of Prop. 139 renders the 15-week ban unconstitutional,” Mayes stated during a press conference celebrating the measure’s success. She emphasized that the newly certified law effectively nullified the previous restrictions as of the moment of the governor’s signature. Still, a gap exists between the law’s new status and the comfort level of healthcare providers regarding the continuation of services past the gestational limit.

The standing law prohibits abortions past 15 weeks unless necessary for preserving the woman’s life or averting significant bodily impairment. Violating this law, enacted by Republican legislators in 2022, can lead to severe penalties for healthcare providers, including suspension of medical licenses and potential felony charges. In contrast, Proposition 139 allows abortions up to fetal viability, typically around 23 to 24 weeks, and ensures protections for providers who perform them for valid medical reasons.

Dr. Paul Isaacson, co-owner of a private abortion clinic in the Valley, anticipates a lawsuit challenging the gestational limit to be filed soon. He has been involved in previous legal battles against Arizona’s anti-abortion statutes. Noting a cautious outlook, he stressed that the future of abortion care in Arizona now hinges on court developments. “The legal advice suggests we will file a viable lawsuit and seek a quick resolution,” he indicated.

Mayes indicated that action against the 15-week law is expected imminently, asserting that Arizona will support those fighting for restored access. However, she acknowledged the lengthy process of dismantling additional anti-abortion statutes could extend for years. Her team is also prepared to combat potential federal attempts to restrict reproductive rights further.

As for the federal landscape, allies of President-elect Donald Trump have discussed reviving 19th-century laws aimed at limiting abortion care nationwide. One such law, the Comstock Act, restricts the distribution of abortifacients and could interfere with abortion medication supplies. In Arizona, medication abortions represent over half of all procedures performed. Trump has also expressed willingness to revoke FDA approval of mifepristone, a common abortion pill.

Mayes, who campaigned on the promise to protect abortion access, vowed to challenge any efforts undermining the will of Arizona’s voters. “We will fight that tooth and nail,” she declared, reinforcing her commitment to safeguarding reproductive rights.

The recent ballot measure’s success has sparked celebrations from state leaders and healthcare providers alike. “Arizonans have shown their discontent with out-of-touch politicians making medical decisions for us. We made our voices heard,” said Governor Hobbs.

In light of rescinded federal protections, concerns have emerged regarding the diminishing number of medical providers in hostile states. Indeed, a review of residency applications indicated that anti-abortion states, including Arizona, are witnessing a significant drop in applications from prospective OB-GYNs and emergency physicians. This year, applications from those pursuing OB-GYN positions in Arizona fell by 26.4%, the worst decline in five years.

Dr. Misha Pangasa, an OB-GYN in Mesa, noted that the early support for Proposition 139 encouraged her to return to Arizona after briefly reconsidering her plans when Roe v. Wade was overturned. She highlighted her uncertainty about practicing in an environment where politics heavily influenced medical decisions.

For Morgan Finkelstein, who faced challenges obtaining abortion care due to restrictive state laws, Proposition 139 is crucial for safeguarding women’s health. She shared her traumatic experience of having to travel out of state for a necessary medical procedure when local providers were unable to accommodate her. “The passage of Prop. 139 means future expectant mothers won’t have to face a situation like mine,” she reflected.