An Arizona Supreme Court ruling issued Tuesday that gives rise to the use of a law that regulates access to abortion, has unleashed a strong controversy in the state by recovering legal tools from more than a century ago.
The law that would go into effect predates the creation of the state of Arizona, and does not establish exceptions for rape or incest, while allowing abortions only if the mother's life is in danger.
“The way they carry them out is a very cruel and ruthless way, people don't want to talk about it, they want to talk about euphemisms like reproductive rights and health and freedom, but in reality an abortion means dismembering and cutting into pieces a baby in a very cruel way,” argues Rosy Villegas, director of the organization Voces Unidas por la Vida.
With the decision, Arizona's highest court places in the hands of the old 1864 legislation the possibility that doctors can be prosecuted, although the opinion written by the majority of the court does not contemplate it, or at least not explicitly.
At the highest government level at the State level there is complete commitment to returning rights to women.
“I will not stop fighting until we have fully secured the right to reproductive health care in our state,” Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs pledged.
The alarms have not been triggered by chance, the law is clear regarding the prosecution of those involved in the procedure.
Thus, the law mandates the prosecution of “a person who provides, supplies or administers to a pregnant woman, or causes such woman to take any medication, drug or substance, or uses or employs any instrument or other means, with the intention of causing “spontaneous abortion” of such a woman, unless necessary to save her life.
Tuesday's ruling overturned an earlier lower court decision that found doctors could not be charged for performing abortions in the first 15 weeks of pregnancy.
A Tucson court had blocked its application shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling that guaranteed the constitutional right to abortion.
However, the spokesperson for the Planned Parenthood organization, Alejandra Soto, has charged against the legal implementation because she also considers it outdated. “What happens more or less for the next 45 days is that you can continue operating under the 15-week provision, but the archaic law of 1864 will then come into force.”
Citizen activism has moved quickly and the next stop could be at the polls, where plaintiffs will try to take the case through ballots to subject it to public scrutiny.
“The court should not be making these decisions, pregnant patients and their medical provider should be making personal decisions about reproductive health care,” concludes Chris Love of Arizona for Abortion Access.
[Con información de Rubén Pereida, periodista de VOA en Phoenix, Arizona. Contiene además información de Arizona Game and Fish]
Connect with the Voice of America! Subscribe to our channelsYoutube, WhatsApp and to newsletter. Turn on notifications and follow us on Facebook, x and instagram.
