State senators voted Wednesday to repeal the 1864 abortion law, leaving just a procedural move to send it to the governor for her anticipated signature.
The 16-14 vote came after the coalition of all Democrats and two Republicans defeated various procedural motions designed to preclude final action on the measure approved a week earlier by the House on a 32-28 vote.
But even when Hobbs signs the legislation - an aide said that is likely to come Thursday - it still does not mean the law immediately goes away, a move that would leave only a more recent law allowing abortion until the 15th week of pregnancy.
That's because the repeal, like most measures, cannot take effect until the 91st day after the Legislature finally adjourns for this year. But with key issues unresolved, including the budget and additional aid for K-12 education, there are at least several weeks before that is set to occur.
That means the law, which dates to territorial days, would still be in place when there is a final order from the Arizona Supreme Court on its April 9 order declaring the older law trumps the newer 15-week limit.
Attorney General Kris Mayes figures that the Supreme Court ruling that the old law and its ban on abortion except to save the life of the mother trumps a more recent 15-week law is set to take effect on June 27.
Mayes on Wednesday asked the justices to delay the effective date of their ruling for up to an additional 90 days so she can weigh whether there is a legal reason to seek review by the U.S. Supreme Court. But there is no guarantee they will grant her request.
On Wednesday, opponents of the repeal blasted the two Republicans who sided with the Democrats: T.J. Shope of Coolidge and Shawnna Bolick of Phoenix. While not calling them out by name, which is prohibited by Senate rules, Sen. David Farnsworth, R-Mesa, told colleagues and others this is what happens when conservatives fail to hang together.
But Sen. Ken Bennett, R-Prescott, who voted against repeal, said it was improper to criticize the pair for not voting with other Republicans. He said all lawmakers are entitled to vote their conscience.
Bolick, in explaining her vote, read a long prepared statement detailing her three pregnancies, including one of which that ended in the need for a medical abortion. She said her point was to explain that not all pregnancies are the same.
Beyond that, Bolick said she believes that a 15-week ban is a far preferable choice for voters who will go to the polls in November to consider a more far-reaching initiative.
That proposal would allow abortions under all circumstances up to the point of fetal viability, generally considered to be between 22 and 24 weeks. Foes of that measure point out, though, there are exceptions for the procedure beyond that point in cases not only to save the life of the mother but also to preserve the woman's physical or mental health.
Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff, suggested that some Republicans were voting for the measure because it was "politically expedient.'' That is based on concerns that if voters have to go to the ballot to repeal what amounts to a ban on abortion they also will vote against Republicans who support that law.
Rogers said it is true that trying to preserve the old law could result in loss of the Legislature and even the presidency. But she said that is irrelevant in the larger picture when "we will meet our maker.''
"We're pushing this bill because we think it will win the next election,'' echoed Sen. Anthony Kern, R-Glendale.
Bennett said he believes there are flaws in the old law.
For example, he said, there should be exceptions for rape and incest. And he said there should be allowances for situations of severe fetal defects.
But the alternative -- repealing the old law and leaving the law at 15 weeks is unacceptable.
"I think 15 weeks is too long,'' Bennett said.
Copyright © 2024 BridgeTower Media. All Rights Reserved.
Most Popular
Comments / 0