Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: sphinx

>>” ....the Arizona Supreme Court apparently held that an 1864 statute supersedes a 2022 statute on the same matter.”

It appears that way. I’m not sure what legal justification they made for doing so. I’m not a lawyer, but at least on its face it seems to be a very poor legal decision, likely motivated by politics.


68 posted on 04/12/2024 2:19:39 PM PDT by mbrfl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: mbrfl; sphinx

Seems to me the problem with Gov. Doug Ducey’s 15 week abortion ban was that it did not repeal the 1864 law and “is predicated entirely on the existence of a federal constitutional right to an abortion,”

“The old law supersedes Arizona’s 15-week abortion ban, which was passed by the legislature and signed in 2022 by then-Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican. The 2022 ban included exceptions in cases of medical emergencies and restrictions on medication abortion, and it requires an ultrasound before an abortion and parental consent for minors. But the 15-week ban did not repeal the 1864 law, the state Supreme Court found, and “is predicated entirely on the existence of a federal constitutional right to an abortion,” which was struck down with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/arizona-supreme-court-rules-abortion-ban-from-1864-can-be-enforced/ar-BB1llsFQ


122 posted on 04/12/2024 4:44:48 PM PDT by Lakeside Granny (IN GOD WE TRUST with TRUMP WE STAND)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson