The Supreme Court ruling in Arizona has drawn attention to the fact that the state will soon be living under an abortion law that dates back to the frontier territory days of the 1860s. This law, which predates modern advancements such as the light bulb and antibiotics, reflects the type of laws that Justice Samuel Alito referred to in the majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022. The court noted the year the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, which was used in 1973 to create a woman’s constitutional right to obtain an abortion until viability. By citing laws from the Arizona frontier, the court in 2022 took away this national right.
The Supreme Court’s decision was based on the idea that the right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the nation’s history and traditions, pointing to laws from the 1860s before women had gained the right to vote. The Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision replaced Roe v. Wade, shifting the focus from women’s rights to states’ rights. This has resulted in a patchwork of abortion rights states and abortion ban states, with the decision in Arizona being a recent example of this divisive fallout.
Former President Donald Trump endorsed the patchwork approach to abortion access, stating that states should have the authority to decide on abortion laws. He promised to stay out of states’ way if reelected, recognizing that abortion will be a significant political issue in the upcoming presidential election and in states like Arizona. Arizona’s Republican-appointed Supreme Court upheld the old law based on the argument that the state legislature had not affirmatively created a right to elective abortion. The decision was stayed for 14 days following the ruling.
The shift in focus from women’s rights to states’ rights regarding abortion access has led to a divisive and uneven landscape for reproductive rights across the country. The decision in Arizona to uphold a law from the 1860s highlights the complexity of abortion laws and the ongoing legal battles surrounding reproductive rights. The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has set a precedent for states to determine their own abortion laws, leading to a fragmented system of access and restrictions.
The implications of the Supreme Court ruling in Arizona and the broader shift towards state autonomy in determining abortion laws have raised concerns about the future of reproductive rights in the country. The patchwork approach to abortion access created by the Dobbs decision has sparked debate and controversy, with advocates on both sides pushing for changes at the state and federal levels. The impact of these legal battles on women’s health and autonomy remains a key issue in the ongoing debate over abortion rights.
