Proposition 139: Impacts of Arizona’s Ballot Initiative on Abortion Access Unveiled

In November, Arizona voters will face a pivotal choice regarding Proposition 139, a state constitutional amendment aimed at securing abortion access until fetal viability. The current law permits abortions only up to 15 weeks of pregnancy, a timeframe significantly shorter than the viability point, which typically occurs around 24 weeks gestation.

The initiative gained traction thanks to Arizona Abortion Access, which successfully collected 577,971 signatures—well above the 383,923 required to qualify for the ballot. “This essentially restores abortion rights in Arizona to what they were before Roe v. Wade was overturned,” commented Paul Bender, a constitutional law professor at Arizona State University. He emphasized that if the proposition passes, any laws restricting abortion prior to fetal viability would be deemed unconstitutional.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health in 2022 altered the landscape for abortion rights, handing regulatory power back to individual states. Under Prop 139, after viability, abortion would only be permissible in cases of medical emergencies, and the amendment would take effect almost immediately upon approval.

Supporters like Chris Love, spokesperson for Arizona for Abortion Access, argue that the measure aims to return decision-making power to individuals experiencing pregnancy, distancing the Legislature from such personal choices. “We ultimately want to put the decision back into the hands of pregnant people,” Love stated.

However, detractors raise concerns that Prop 139 could undermine critical state regulations designed to safeguard patients. Erica Steinmiller-Perdomo, legal counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom, asserts that the amendment could jeopardize informed consent laws and other clinic regulations, suggesting it threatens to expand access to abortion without adequate safeguards for minors.

If Prop 139 fails, Arizona’s current law, allowing abortions up to 15 weeks without exceptions for rape or incest, would remain in effect. Proponents of abortion rights warn that tighter restrictions could be enacted if the constitutional amendment is not approved, arguing that constitutional protection offers the best defense against potential legislative rollbacks. “We figured enshrining abortion protection into the constitution was the most durable protection,” Love explained.

Even if Prop 139 is approved, Arizona would retain over 40 existing abortion restrictions. These include parental consent for those under 18, mandatory ultrasounds, a waiting period after counseling sessions, and requirements for medical providers to have hospital admitting privileges nearby.

Arizona stands out as the only state with a strict 15-week cutoff for abortion access. Other states have varying limits; for instance, four states enforce a six-week limit, with several others allowing up to 22 weeks or through viability. Love indicated that, contingent upon the successful passage of Prop 139, efforts could commence to repeal some existing restrictions, though political control of the Legislature could complicate those aspirations.

The opposition, led by groups such as Arizona’s Catholic bishops, forewarns of broader implications. “This amendment threatens to enshrine a constitutional right to virtually unrestricted abortion in Arizona,” stated Tucson Bishop Edward Weisenburger, echoing concerns that the measure would enable abortion access throughout the entirety of pregnancy.

Despite these tensions, some logistical realities remain. Abortion care is not covered under Arizona’s Medicaid program, reflecting a nationwide trend influenced by longstanding federal prohibitions on using federal funds for abortion care. Currently, abortion services are available at eight clinics across Arizona, primarily clustered in urban areas like Phoenix and Tucson, serving approximately 75% of the state’s population.

The regulatory landscape surrounding abortion in Arizona has evolved rapidly since the Dobbs ruling. Just three months before the Supreme Court decision, the state legislature passed a 15-week “trigger” ban, which has been in effect since December 2022. A further attempt to enforce an antiquated near-total ban from 1864 was swiftly repealed amid significant public backlash following a campaign led by Governor Katie Hobbs, who signed the repeal into law in May.