The moment you get the immoral Roe vs Wade decision struck down, this law in AZ will become unimportant. Children will be protected in the womb from the moment of conception.
And if this law itself is struck down for not being Constitutional, then the Roe vs Wade decision will have been sidelined by history. The new X vs Y decision (whomever X and Y turn out to be) will dominate abortion jurisprudence from then on.
And in the meantime: some children in the womb are being protected BY THIS LAW from the current murderous misrepresentation of the Constitution.
As an added bonus: the noose can be tightened from here with reduced limits: 10 weeks, 5 weeks, 2 weeks, and so on.
A couple more Conservative judges and this all goes away. But until it does, Arizona is doing what it can to protect its children from murderous Federal overreach. Everything short of secession (though it may yet come to that).
Arizona has not enshrined child-murder into law any more than it is already enshrined in law: moreover Arizona is reducing the scope of the current toxic jurisprudence. This is a good thing.
A siren song we've been hearing for forty years. But it never seems to work out, unsurprisingly.
Simply not true.
It's been happening state by state for a decade now, driven by the unprincipled Romney Republicans at National Right to Life. It's also in the U.S. Code, put there by "pro-life" Republicans and signed into law by a Republican "pro-life" president, at the urging of the Romney Republicans at National Right to Life. Go look up the "Lacey Peterson" law. Like the legislation in question, it recognizes the personhood of the child, and then allows certain disfavored classes of said persons to be butchered by the abortionists. Immoral, unconstitutional.
Even the infamous Blackmun, in the majority Roe decision, admitted that if the child is a PERSON, they are "OF COURSE" protected by the explicit provisions of the U.S. Constitution. ALL of them.
-- Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Roe vs. Wade, 1973"The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a 'person' within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment...If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [Fourteenth] Amendment."