A federal judge temporarily blocked a 2021 Arizona law that recognized the “personhood” of a fetus from the moment of conception, siding with abortion providers who argued the measure was too vague and left them open to legal jeopardy.
“A law is unconstitutionally vague if its application is so unclear that people of ordinary intelligence cannot figure out in advance how to comply with it,” U.S. District Judge Douglas Rayes wrote in a ruling Monday. The decision comes after the Supreme Court‘s consequential decision to overturn Roe v. Wade last month, giving states the authority to make their own abortion laws.
The judge also argued that giving an unborn baby the same rights as other people could render an abortion as homicide under the state’s law.
“And that is the problem,” Rayes wrote. “When the punitive and regulatory weight of the entire Arizona code is involved, Plaintiffs should not have to guess at whether their conduct is on the right or the wrong side of the law.”
WHITE HOUSE WON’T CALL OFF, AND CAN’T PLACATE, SUPREME COURT ABORTION PROTESTERS
The Arizona personhood law said all state laws “shall be interpreted and construed to acknowledge, on behalf of an unborn child at every stage of development, all rights, privileges and immunities available to other persons, citizens and residents of this state.”
Additionally, Arizona’s law prohibited women from receiving an abortion for any reason related to the sex, race, or genetic abnormality of the baby.
The judge said there is uncertainty over what impact the decision will have on Arizona following the Supreme Court decision last month that women do not have a constitutional right to abortion. Abortion providers in the state halted nearly all procedures due to a pre-1901 ban on all abortions that could still be in effect, coupled with other laws prohibiting abortion-related practices.
Still, Pima County is the one area of the state where the 1901-era law remains blocked, meaning abortions could be legal, though Attorney General Mark Brnovich has signaled plans to ask a court to lift that order and allow enforcement statewide.
A representative for Brnovich’s office said in a statement to the Washington Examiner that the ruling was “based on an interpretation of Arizona law that our office did not agree with, and we are carefully considering our next steps.”
The U.S. District Court already blocked a part of the law that prohibits abortions sought because an unborn child has a survivable genetic abnormality, though it previously did not choose to place the personhood provision on hold in last year’s decision.
Four other states have similar laws in effect: Alabama, Georgia, Kansas, and Missouri.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Jessica Sklarsky, a lawyer at the Center for Reproductive Rights who argued the case before Rayes, praised the judge’s decision in a statement following the ruling.
“The court made the right decision today by blocking this law from being used to create an unthinkably extreme abortion ban,” Sklarsky said, adding, “The Supreme Court’s catastrophic decision overturning Roe v. Wade has unleashed chaos on the ground, leaving Arizona residents scrambling to figure out if they can get the abortion care they need.”
