[Political Junkie Too]

I don't know the details, but I would suppose that the legislature didn't know about the 1864 law or it would have included language in the 2022 law to repeal the 1864 law?

In the case of two conflicting laws, which one has precedence: the older law or the newer law? I guess the court decided it was the original law, but I don't know the details.

-PJ

[desertsolitaire]

Thanks.

[MMusson]

This actually sounds like a ruling on Law rather than a ruling on Abortion. The Abortion restriction kept getting included in the updated codified Arizona statues and was just ignored until Roe V. Wade was repealed. No one objected at the time and now it’s a problem.

[House Atreides]

“ In the case of two conflicting laws, which one has precedence: the older law or the newer law? I guess the court decided it was the original law, but I don’t know the details.
************************************************************

Without having read the actual language of the two laws I’m assuming the two laws don’t actually contradict each other. The old one says abortions are illegal throughout pregnancy. The new law says abortions are illegal after the 15th week of pregnancy.

So abortions in the first 15 weeks of pregnancy violate ONLY THE OLD LAW. Abortions after the 15th week violate BOTH LAWS. An upthread poster had it right… the 21st century legislators were guilty of poorly written legislation. I suspect some already knew that but kept their mouths shut hoping for the current outcome and its aftermath,