Wednesday Reads: Abortion Politics: Be Enraged!

Good Day!!

6098cb972261cec19aaa6a49a5ac1491I’m sure you’ve heard about the latest outrage from the woman-hating Arizona Supreme Court. If this law takes effect, women in the state will not be able to get an abortion unless they are at death’s door. If that means you can’t ever get pregnant again, too fucking bad. If you’re 12 years old and you’ve been raped and impregnated by your stepfather, tough shit. You’re carrying that fetus to term young lady, and you’d better not complain about it. Welcome to the post-Dobbs world. Never forget: Trump did this. For now, Republicans are pretending to have problems with this decision, but if Trump is elected and Republicans control Congress, this will likely be the law of the land.

The New York Times: Arizona Reinstates 160-Year-Old Abortion Ban.

Arizona’s highest court on Tuesday upheld an 1864 law that bans nearly all abortions, a decision that could have far-reaching consequences for women’s health care and election-year politics in a critical battleground state.

“Physicians are now on notice that all abortions, except those necessary to save a woman’s life, are illegal,” the court said in a 4-to-2 decision.

But the court, whose justices are all Republican appointees, also put its ruling on hold for the moment and sent the matter back to a lower court for additional arguments about the law’s constitutionality. Abortion providers said they expected to continue performing abortions through May as their lawyers and Democratic lawmakers searched for new legal arguments and additional tactics to delay the ruling.

The ruling immediately set off a political earthquake. Democrats condemned it as a “stain” on Arizona that would put women’s lives at risk. Several Republicans, sensing political peril, also criticized the ruling and called for the Republican-controlled Legislature to repeal it.

The decision from the Arizona Supreme Court concerned a law that was on the books long before Arizona achieved statehood. It outlaws abortion from the moment of conception, except when necessary to save the life of the mother, and it makes no exceptions for rape or incest. Doctors prosecuted under the law could face fines and prison terms of two to five years.

Planned Parenthood Arizona, the plaintiff, and other abortion-rights supporters argued that the 1864 ban, which had sat dormant for decades, had essentially been overtaken by years of subsequent Arizona laws regulating and limiting abortion — primarily, a 2022 law banning abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy.

But the territorial-era ban was never repealed. And the Arizona Supreme Court said Arizona’s Legislature had not created a right to abortion when it passed the 15-week ban. Because the federal right to abortion in Roe v. Wade had now been overturned, nothing in federal or state law prevented Arizona from enforcing the near-total ban, the court wrote.

“Because the federal constitutional right to abortion that overrode § 13-3603 no longer exists, the statute is now enforceable,” the court’s four-person majority wrote, using the statutory number of the 1864 ban.

Republicans are in trouble.

The Washington Post: ‘Catastrophic,’ ‘a shock’: Arizona’s abortion ruling threatens to upend 2024 races.

A near-total abortion ban slated to go into effect in the coming weeks in Arizona is expected to have a seismic impact on the politics of the battleground state, testing the limits of Republican support for abortion restrictions and putting the issue front and center in November’s election.

Arizona’s conservative Supreme Court on Tuesday revived a near-total ban on abortion, invoking an 1864 law that forbids the procedure except to save a mother’s life and punishes providers with prison time. The decision supersedes Arizona’s previous rule, which permitted abortions up to 15 weeks.

Elisabetta Sirani, Timoclea Killing Her Rapist, 1659

Elisabetta Sirani, Timoclea Killing Her Rapist, 1659

Arizonans are poised to consider the issue in November, now that the groups working to amend the state’s constitution to enshrine abortion rights — which include the ACLU of Arizona and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona — say that they have acquired enough signatures to establish a ballot measure, according to the Arizona Republic. Meanwhile, Republicans in the state are asking Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs (D) and the Republican-led state legislature to come up with a solution.

The developments in Arizona are part of a wave of state actions to reckon with the future of access to reproductive care after the U.S. Supreme Court, with a conservative majority installed during Donald Trump’s presidency, overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022While several states enacted abortion restrictions as a result of overturning Roe, protecting access to reproductive care has broadly been a winning issue for Democratic candidates and for ballot measures that protect abortion access in the elections since the 2022 ruling.

As a battleground state, there is a lot on the line in Arizona’s looming elections. President Biden is running for reelection after winning the state in 2020 by fewer than 11,000 votes, and the race for a Senate seat in the state could prove crucial in determining which party controls the body next year. The balance of the statehouse is at stake this election cycle, too, with Republicans holding a one-vote majority in each chamber.

Polls show that abortion is a motivating issue for Arizona voters.

All of a sudden, Arizona Republicans are not so sure they like what’s happening, now that they got their wish to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The Guardian: Arizona Republicans denounce revived 1864 abortion ban in sudden reversal.

Hours after Arizona’s supreme court declared on Tuesday that a 160-year-old abortion ban is now enforceable, Republicans in the state took a surprising stance for a party that has historically championed abortion restrictions – they denounced the decision.

“This decision cannot stand,” said Matt Gress, a Republican state representative. “I categorically reject rolling back the clock to a time when slavery was still legal and we could lock up women and doctors because of an abortion.” [….]

“Today’s Arizona supreme court decision reinstating an Arizona territorial-era ban on all abortions from more than 150 years ago is disappointing to say the least,” said TJ Shope, a Republican state senator.

“I oppose today’s ruling,” added Kari Lake, a Republican running to represent Arizona in the US Senate and a Donald Trump loyalist. Lake called on the state legislature to “come up with an immediate commonsense solution that Arizonans can support”.

Lake has made multiple statements in support of the 1864 law, as Ron Filipkowski has been documenting on Twitter. Back to the Guardian article:

Since the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, leading the GOP to stumble in the 2022 midterms and abortion rights supporters to win a string of ballot measures, including in purple and red states, Republicans have struggled to find a way to talk about abortion without turning off voters. But their response to the ruling on the 1864 ban may mark their fastest and strongest rebuke of abortion bans since Roe fell.

scowling woman by Hope Gangloff

Scowling woman, by Hope Gangloff

“This is an earthquake that has never been seen in Arizona politics,” said Barrett Marson, a Republican consultant in Arizona, of the decision. “This will shake the ground under every Republican candidate, even those in safe legislative or congressional seats.” [….]

Some of the criticisms of the Tuesday ruling came from politicians who had previously supported the 1864 ban or cheered the end of Roe v Wade. Lake previously called the ban a “great law”, according to PolitiFact. David Schweikert, an Arizona congressman who is facing one of the most competitive House races in the country this November, said on Tuesday that he does not support the ruling and wants the state legislature to “address this issue immediately”, but in 2022 said the fall of Roe “pleased” him.

The speaker of the Arizona state house and the president of the state senate, who are both Republicans, also released a joint statement saying that they would be “listening to our constituents to determine the best course of action for the legislature”. In contrast, on the day Roe fell, the Republican-controlled state senate released a statement declaring that the 1864 ban was in effect immediately. That statement unleashed confusion and chaos among abortion providers in Arizona, prompting them to stop offering the procedure out of an abundance of caution.

Here’s an example of what goes on in the Arizona Senate. This happened the day before the Supreme Court ruling came out.

Arizona Central: Arizona lawmaker leads prayer circle on state seal at Capitol building, sparking backlash.

Arizona Sen. Anthony Kern invited a prayer group to the Senate floor on Monday.

Seen in a video filmed by an anonymous attendee, Kern led the group, who spoke in tongues, through a prayer as they knelt over the state seal.

This public display comes a day before the Arizona Supreme Court upheld an 160-year-old law that bans nearly all abortions on Tuesday.

“Let it be so, Father God,” Kern said. “Lord, right now, we ask thee to release the presence of the lord in the senate chamber.”

The video of the senator and his group was originally shared on TikTok by Tony Cani and reposted on many social media platforms. Jeanne Casteen, the executive director of Secular Arizona, a nonprofit advocacy organization that promotes the separation of church and state in Arizona, called attention to the video on X, formerly known as Twitter.

In her replies, many users were baffled by the senator’s behavior, citing First Amendment violations and false practices of Christianity….

However, Kern doubled down on his actions as he responded to critics in an X post.

“Looks like our prayer team stirred up some god-haters … Not to worry though…prayer over our state at the State Senate is way more powerful,” he wrote.

The Washington Post’s Dan Baltz on the political fallout from the Arizona decision: The Arizona Supreme Court just upended Trump’s gambit on abortion.

It took little more than a day for Donald Trump’s political gambit on abortion to come undone.

On Monday, the former president declined to support any new national law setting limits on abortions. Going against the views of many abortion opponents in his Republican Party, Trump was looking for a way to neutralize or at least muddy a galvanizingissue that has fueled Democratic victories for nearly two years. He hoped to keep it mostly out of the conversation ahead of the November elections.

Auguste Toulmouche’s 1866 painting The Hesitant Fiancée2

Auguste Toulmouche’s 1866 painting The Hesitant Fiancée

On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court showed just how difficult it will be to do that. The court resurrected an 1864 law that bans nearly all abortions, except to save the life of the mother. The law also imposes penalties on abortion providers.

Trump had said let the states handle the issue. The Arizona court showed the full implications of that states’ rights strategy.

The Arizona ruling came in a state that will be especially crucial in deciding the outcome of the presidential election, a state that President Biden won by fewer than 11,000 votes and that Trump’s campaign team has eyed as one of the best opportunities for a pickup. It is likely that a referendum to protect abortion rights will be on Arizona’s ballot in November. The court ruling only heightens the significance of the issue for the rest of the campaign year.

But the court ruling reverberated far beyond Arizona’s borders. The Biden-Harris campaign and other Democrats pounced on the ruling in an effort to further their argument that Trump and Republicans are a threat to freedoms.

All abortion politics are national, not local. Abortion developments — new laws, new restrictions, new stories of women caught up in heart-wrenching and sometimes life-threatening decisions — are no longer confined to the geography where they take place. They are instantly part of the larger debate.

Joyce Vance had some choice words about the Arizona situation at Civil Discourse: Welcome to 1864.

When the Supreme Court decided Dobbs, it opened up Pandora’s Box, undoing fifty years of protection for abortion rights under Roe v. Wade. In the wake of that decision, states pulled lots of horribles out of the box and used them to prevent women from making their own choices about reproductive health care. In some cases, those decisions involved their ability to conceive and carry to term in the future and even their lives. Arizona now seems intent on joining them.

This is Dobbs in action, which leaves it up to each state to decide whether women have abortion rights and, if so, to what extent. Your gerrymandered state legislature is now in charge of your healthcare and the lives of people you love….

In a couple of weeks, virtually all abortions will be a felony event in Arizona. Doctors and providers, including people who help others obtain abortions, can be prosecuted and sentenced to two to five years in prison if convicted. There are no exceptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. As we’ve seen in other states, the mere threat of consequences like this is enough to shut down abortion procedures across the state. Welcome back to 1864.

Arizona women can still travel to nearby California, New Mexico, or Colorado, where abortion is accessible, at least for now. But the distances can be long, travel prohibitively expensive for some women, and impractical for those with jobs or with children and/or parents to care for.

Arizona is leaning into the national trend. The Guttmacher Institute tracks abortion laws across the country. As of this week, only two states, Vermont and Oregon, provide what they characterize as the “most protection” for abortion. Fifteen states are in the “most restrictive” category, which includes measures like the complete ban with very limited exceptions in Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, and South Carolina. We can add Arizona to that list after today’s decision. Guttmacher categorizes six additional states as “very restrictive,” (this is where Arizona used to be) and another seven states as “restrictive”. The map is stark and getting worse.

Read the rest at Civil Discourse.

Three more pieces on Trump and his waffling on abortion politics.

Jessica Valenti at Abortion, Every Day:

If you missed Donald Trump’s abortion ‘announcement’ yesterday, the short version is that he’s trying to wash his hands of the issue by saying abortion should be up to the states. He knows abortion is a loser for the GOP—and if there’s anything Trump hates, it’s losing.

CNN notes that the disgraced former president has been waffling behind the scenes for months, and The Washington Post reports that anti-abortion advisors like Kellyanne Conway and Sen. Lindsey Graham tried to talk Trump out of yesterday’s announcement.

Blue Monday, by Annie Lee

Blue Monday, by Annie Lee

They not only told him that his stance meant he’d be supporting the states that allow ‘abortions up until birth’, but that he’d also be implicitly supporting the states whose bans he thinks are too restrictive—like Florida’s and Arizona’s.

Indeed, a Biden campaign spokesperson didn’t waste any time before tweeting that Trump was “endorsing every single abortion ban in the states, including abortion bans with no exceptions…and he’s bragging about his role in creating this hellscape.”

The response from anti-abortion groups and other Republicans has been mixed. While groups like Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America made clear that they’re focused on defeating President Joe Biden, they also took a couple of hits at Trump. SBA president Marjorie Dannenfelser, for example, said the group is “deeply disappointed.” Sen. Lindsey Graham also spoke up, saying he “respectfully” disagrees and that he’s going to push ahead with federal legislation. (Because Trump takes criticism so well, he lashed out at the pair in a series of posts on Truth Social.)

Former vice president Mike Pence, who has said he’s not endorsing Trumpcalled Trump’s stance a “slap in the face to millions of pro-life Americans.”

Others, however, aren’t so worried. Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, for example, told The Washington Post that he was confident that Trump would still sign a federal ban: “I take the president’s statement with a comma, not a period.”

David R. Lurie at Public Notice: Trump’s deeply misogynist lie about moms killing babies.

On Monday, Donald Trump released a video announcing his much heralded abortion “policy.” The statement was typically garbled, deliberately vague, and chock full of absurd assertions.

For example, Trump bizarrely asserted that that “both sides wanted and, in fact, demanded” that Roe v. Wade be “ended.” His suggestion is that the entire nation was clamoring for the end of reproductive rights that he engineered with his Supreme Court nominations, when in fact national polling shows that a solid majority supports legal abortion. (If you can stomach it, you can watch Trump’s entire video statement below.)

As has long been typical, many in the press misreported the gist of the statement. A New York Times headline declared that Trump had said “Abortion Restrictions Should Be Left to the States.” This is incorrect, and gives Trump undeserved credit for his typical, and deliberate, ambiguity.

Trump did not say he would refuse to sign a federal abortion ban into law, and his record is to the contrary. He supported a federal 20-week ban when he was in the White House and said was “disappoint[ed]” when it was filibustered in the Senate.

But the headlines not only misstated what Trump said, they also omitted the most repugnant and revealing portion of his presentation — his repulsive lie that women have been “execut[ing]” their own children “after birth,” with the assistance of doctors.

Trump said:

“It must be remembered that the Democrats are the radical ones on this position because they support abortion up to and even beyond the ninth month. The concept of having an abortion in the later months and even execution after birth. And that’s exactly what it is. The baby is born, the baby is executed after birth is unacceptable. And almost everyone agrees with that.”

The claim is a grotesque derivation of the “partial birth” abortion smear GOP politicians have employed for years as a cover for their agenda to wholly, or near wholly, ban abortion care, which they have succeeded in doing in large swaths of the nation since SCOTUS ended federal abortion rights in June 2022.

Trump’s version of this familiar lie is not only over the top, but it reveals his deep affinity with the Christian right. It’s an affinity rooted not in a shared faith with right-wing Christians, but rather in a deeply shared fear of women’s empowerment, with the policy goal of taking it away.

1-angry-woman-van-winslow

Angry Woman, by Van Winslow

Kimberly Leonard and Arik Sarkissian at Politico: Trump’s abortion stance could put Florida Republicans in a bind.

MIAMI — There’s no state that will need to navigate Donald Trump’s abortion stance quite like Florida, which has authorized one of the strictest abortion bans in the country but also could broadly enshrine abortion rights protections in the state constitution through a ballot measure in November.

The Republican Party of Florida and key conservative lawmakers, including Gov. Ron DeSantis, consider Florida’s ballot initiative “extreme” and want voters to oppose it. But they’re not calling on Trump to pick up a megaphone over the cause. They generally support his stance to leave one of the most politically treacherous issues for Republicans up to states to decide — even as abortion rights supporters in Arizona, a key battleground state, also are trying to put a similar initiative on the ballot.

“I’ve always believed this is a states’ issue,” said Evan Power, the Republican Party of Florida chair. “That is why we will fight to oppose the Florida constitutional amendment because the people’s representatives here in Florida have adopted a Florida constitutionally-sound approach.”

State Sen. Joe Gruters, a longtime Trump ally and an RNC national committee member, agreed with Power’s assessment about state decision-making and called the former president’s statement “perfect.” Asked whether he wanted Trump’s help on getting the word out about the referendum, Gruters replied that DeSantis — someone he has clashed with in the past — could keep championing the issue.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, a Florida Republican who has drawn several Democratic challengers, also said this is a “states rights issue.”

“He’s doing exactly what he’s supposed to be doing,” she said of Trump.

Florida Republicans have good reason to tread lightly around Trump. The former president attacked one of his close allies, Sen. Lindsey Graham, after the South Carolina Republican broke with the president over abortion. One of the nation’s most influential anti-abortion groups, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, also stated it was “deeply disappointed” by Trump’s decision. Marjorie Dannenfelser, the group’s president, later reiterated the organization’s support of Trump.

Read the rest at Politico.

That’s all I have for you today, because women’s reproductive freedom is all I can think about right now. I’m hoping other angry women and men around the country will react by voting for Democrats in November.


8 Comments on “Wednesday Reads: Abortion Politics: Be Enraged!”

  1. bostonboomer's avatar bostonboomer says:

    Take care, Sky Dancers!

  2. darthvelma's avatar darthvelma says:

    So just to be clear, Republicans are not ok with Arizona reinstating an abortion ban from the 1860s. But they were perfectly ok with the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade based on laws and jurisprudence from as far back as the 13th century.

    I know, asking for any kind of internal consistency from Republicans is a pointless waste of time. But damn…

  3. bostonboomer's avatar bostonboomer says:

    • Unknown's avatar Anonymous says:

      Except for climate crisis, there is no other issue of such importance. Taking control of someone else’s body to get the benefit of it has a name. Slavery.

      I try to forget most history that I learned since so much of it is so grim. But wasn’t “states’ rights” the same rallying cry the last time a bunch of slaveholders wanted to hang on to their chattel?

    • Unknown's avatar Anonymous says:

      Luckovich is right on the nose, as always.

    • quixote's avatar quixote says:

      Except for climate crisis, there is no other issue of such importance. Taking control of someone else’s body to get the benefit of it has a name. Slavery.

      I try to forget most history that I learned since so much of it is so grim. But wasn’t “states’ rights” the same rallying cry the last time a bunch of slaveholders wanted to hang on to their chattel?

    • quixote's avatar quixote says:

      Luckovich is right on the nose, as always.