State supreme courts are deciding the fate of multiple pro-life laws

• Several state supreme courts heard oral arguments in abortion cases this week, as a result of the fallout from the US Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade last year.
• The cases revolve around two laws from the 1800s, as well as legislation passed after Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Center.
• “Consistent with this clear reaffirmation of life, we urge the Arizona Supreme Court to allow the state's pro-life law to once again protect the lives of countless innocent unborn children,” said Jake Warner , senior attorney at Alliance Defending Freedom. a press release.

Three state supreme courts heard oral arguments in abortion cases this week and are expected to weigh in on several pro-life laws that were passed after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022.

After the Supreme Court ruled that abortion was not a constitutional right under Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Center decisionmany states have begun to pass both pro-the abortion and pro-life lawsresulting in a crowd of lawsuits over the last year and a half. Three abortion access cases in New Mexico, Arizona and Wyoming finished oral arguments in state Supreme Courts this week and now await a verdict.

Several New Mexico counties passed ordinances in late 2022 and earlier this year citing the Comstock Law passed by Congress in 1873, which made it illegal to mail anything “obscene, lewd, lascivious,” including “any drug or medicine … for the prevention of contraception or for causing an unlawful abortion “. seconds at Source NM, a local media outlet. The New Mexico legislature responded by passing HB 7 which prohibits the state from blocking access to reproductive health services, including abortions.

In April, the city of Eunice, New Mexico filed a lawsuit against Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and Attorney General Raúl Torrez, arguing that the Comstock Act, as a federal statute, is the “Supreme Law of the land”. seconds on KRQE, a local media outlet. In response, Torrez filed an additional briefing with the state Supreme Court in May to address the city's arguments, calling the act “antiquated federal law.” seconds to a press release.

“Access to health care throughout the state is not determined by cities and counties. All New Mexicans deserve equal access to health care, including abortion services, regardless of where they live in the state,” Torrez said. “Our response reiterates that the petition is based on violations of the New Mexico Constitution by the cities and counties. We will continue to fight any local New Mexico government that exceeds its legal authority.”

The state's top court heard oral arguments for an hour Wednesday and appeared likely to rule in favor of blocking the ordinances, but did not favor the attorney general's argument that abortion is a constitutional right. seconds to Reuters.

The Arizona state Supreme Court on Tuesday heard a case over another 1800 law that makes it illegal to perform abortions in the state except to save the life of the mother, seconds in the AZ Mirror, a local media outlet. Before the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs, so did the state past a 15 week ban March, which notes that the new legislation is not intended to replace any previous law on the matter.

Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich appealed to the state Supreme Court in July 2022, asking that the 1864 law be reinstated in addition to the 15-week ban. seconds in The Associated Press. Dr. Eric Hazelrigg, obstetrician and medical director of Choices Pregnancy Center in Arizona, was named by the court in September as a defendant in place of Brnovich, who was succeeded by Democrat Kris Mayes in January.

Jake Warner, senior attorney for Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Hazelrigg, said before oral arguments that the law “has protected unborn children for over 100 years.” seconds to a press release.

“Consistent with this clear reaffirmation of life, we urge the Arizona Supreme Court to allow the state's pro-life law to once again protect the lives of countless innocent unborn children,” Warner said in a statement

Dr. Jill Gibson, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood Arizona, which is suing under the law, said in a press release after oral arguments, that allowing it to take effect “would be catastrophic.”

“Arizonians deserve the freedom to make their own decisions about their reproductive health,” Gibson said. “The Arizona Supreme Court has an opportunity to reject this bleak future and reject this egregious threat to reproductive health care. Our community deserves better: we deserve the right to make our own decisions about the our body and our health”.

In Wyoming, the Supreme Court is considering whether to allow several Republican state representatives to join a lawsuit over the state's status quo. Life is a law of human rightswhich prohibits abortion with limited exceptions for rape and incest or to save the life of the mother, seconds in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle. Tim Garrison, lead attorney for ADF, argued on behalf of state Reps. Rachel Rodriguez-Williams and Chip Niemann and Right to Life Wyoming on Tuesday, saying the law allows parties with an “established interest in the lawsuit” to intervene “.

Teton County District Judge Melissa Owens previously ruled that the parties could not be joined in the lawsuit, prompting ADF's request for a superior court ruling, according to the Wyoming Tribune Eagle. Owens presides over the case on state law and another prohibition which would prohibit the distribution or use of chemical abortion pills in the state, seconds in the Casper Star Tribune.

Oral arguments in the case took place Thursday, and Owens did not indicate when he would issue his decision, according to the Casper Star Tribune. Both sides are expected to appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court.

The Texas Supreme Court recently governed against a pregnant woman on December 9, who sought an exemption so she could abort her child despite the state's near-total ban on the procedure. The US Supreme Court too announced this week that it would take up a case over the Food and Drug Administration's approval of the chemical abortion pill mifepristone, marking the first time the court has taken on a major abortion case since Dobbs.

The attorney for the Eunice City Council office and AG Torrez did not respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Latest messages from Kate Anderson (see everything)

We have zero tolerance for comments that contain violence, racism, profanity, profanity, doxing, or rude behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it, click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for engaging with us in a fruitful conversation.

JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and good conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-enter your email address for this. The public won't see it and we won't share it.