PHOENIX — Arizona voters are on the verge of deciding on a significant constitutional amendment that would enshrine women’s right to abortion within the state’s framework. This vote comes at a critical juncture as Arizona has recently encountered challenges regarding abortion rights, including attempts to enforce a near-total abortion ban earlier this year.
Currently, Arizona is one of nine states where abortion is a pivotal issue on the ballot. Advocates for abortion access are optimistic that a successful vote could broaden the limitations on abortion from the existing 15-week threshold to a broader standard based on fetal viability. This term, referenced by health professionals, typically refers to the period when a fetus can potentially survive outside the womb, which generally is understood to be beyond 21 weeks of pregnancy, although there is no specific consensus on this timeline.
Campaigners for the measure are not only focused on ensuring access to abortion but also hope it will galvanize Democratic voters, encouraging them to support candidates across the board. When Republicans in contested races address the ballot initiative, they mostly do not discourage its support, although some, including Senate candidate Kari Lake, have publicly stated their opposition. U.S. Representative Juan Ciscomani, whose district covers Tucson, has even highlighted his rejection of “extreme” positions regarding abortion in his ads.
Arizona’s political landscape has been tumultuous, particularly due to recent legislative and legal skirmishes concerning abortion laws. Earlier this year, the Arizona Supreme Court enabled the enforcement of an 1864 statute that outlawed nearly all abortions, although the Legislature quickly moved to repeal this law.
Aside from the abortion question itself, the outcome may have ramifications for state legislative races and could influence procedures surrounding the retention of state Superior Court judges and Supreme Court justices. The coalition spearheading the ballot measure, Arizona for Abortion Access, has significantly outperformed its opponent, It Goes Too Far, in terms of fundraising. Detractors of the measure argue that its broad exemptions for physical and mental health after the point of viability effectively permit abortions beyond that stage. According to the proposed amendment, post-viability abortions would be permissible if deemed necessary to protect the mother’s life or her physical or mental health.
Since the United States Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022, supporters of abortion rights have achieved victories in all seven related ballot initiatives, including in regions traditionally favoring conservative views. Opinion among voters in Arizona appears divided. Maddy Pennell, a student at Arizona State University, expressed feeling disheartened by the potential for a stringent ban on abortion, which only fortified her resolve to support the upcoming ballot measure. “I feel very strongly about having access to abortion,” she remarked. In contrast, Kyle Lee, an independent voter from Arizona, articulated his opposition to the measure, asserting, “All abortion is pretty much, in my opinion, murder from beginning to end.”
The legacy of the Civil War-era abortion ban has also highlighted several competitive legislative races. Vulnerable Republican incumbents, such as State Sen. Shawnna Bolick and State Rep. Matt Gress, crossed party lines to vote for the repeal, a move that has become a focal point as both parties compete for control of the narrowly Republican-led state Legislature. Both lawmakers faced criticism from some in their party for their bipartisan actions. Gress initiated the repeal effort on the House floor, while Bolick referenced her own challenging pregnancies during a lengthy speech explaining her stance on the repeal.
As Gress embarks on his second year in office, Bolick is campaigning for the first time after her appointment to fill a vacancy earlier in 2023. While she has not heavily promoted her vote on the repeal during her campaign, she emphasizes more traditional conservative values in her messaging. Additionally, another significant item on the ballot concerns the retention elections for state judges, which Republican lawmakers proposed to alter as a strategy to safeguard two justices aligned with the controversial enforcement of the 1864 ban.
At present, voters evaluate the necessity of retaining judges and justices every four to six years. The proposed amendment would remove that decision-making power unless it is triggered by specific severe infractions. One of the justices on the retention ballot, Clint Bolick, is the husband of state lawmaker Shawnna Bolick and was part of the majority that supported the enforcement of the earlier ban. While the campaigners for abortion rights aim to unseat him, the success of the upcoming measure could ensure these justices maintain their positions, despite potential challenges in the retention voting process.