(C) Arizona Mirror
This story was originally published by Arizona Mirror and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



AZ Supreme Court justice recuses in abortion ballot measure lawsuit where his wife is a defendant • Arizona Mirror [1]

['Gloria Rebecca Gomez', 'Jim Small', 'Jacob Fischler', 'Caitlin Sievers', 'More From Author', '- August', '.Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Coauthors.Is-Layout-Flow', 'Class', 'Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus', 'Display Inline']

Date: 2024-08

An Arizona Supreme Court justice whose wife was on the legislative panel being sued for using “unborn human being” to describe the Arizona Abortion Access Act in a voter information pamphlet has decided to step away from the case.

In a Wednesday court order, Justice Clint Bolick agreed to recuse himself from the lawsuit, which centers around whether a GOP majority legislative panel’s decision to include the contested phrase in a legal summary of the abortion rights initiative is impartial. One of the eight lawmakers who voted for that phrase and have defended it as legally neutral in court is Phoenix Republican Shawnna Bolick.

Dawn Penich, a spokeswoman for the Arizona for Abortion Access campaign, said that Bolick’s recusal was the right move to ensure due process.

“Like anyone else, we want to be able to trust that our arguments are heard in a fair way by an unbiased court,” she said in an emailed statement.

Last month, a trial court judge ruled that the phrase is “packed with emotional and partisan meaning” and ordered lawmakers to remove it from the publicity pamphlet that will be sent to voters before the November election. Arizona law mandates that the descriptions of every ballot measure in the pamphlet be “impartial” and the courts have long concluded that using “provocative” language violates that standard.

GOP lawmakers argued that the phrase merely quotes the state’s current 15-week gestational ban while lawyers for the abortion rights initiative called for it to be replaced with the medically accurate and less politically loaded term “fetus.” Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Christopher Whitten sided with the initiative backers, writing in his ruling that legislators aren’t required to use neutral language when crafting state laws like that found in the 15-week gestational ban.

The Republican legislators who approved the phrase, including Shawnna Bolick, have since appealed Whitten’s ruling to the Arizona Supreme Court in a last-chance bid to preserve its inclusion in the publicity pamphlet.

Clint Bolick will be replaced by retired Justice John Pelander in the case, which has been put on an expedited schedule to ensure the matter is resolved before the Aug. 29 pamphlet printing deadline.

Bolick’s recusal is the second high-profile recusal from the high court in a lawsuit revolving around abortion. Last year, Justice Bill Montgomery withdrew from a case in which Planned Parenthood Arizona was the key defendant against an effort to reinstate a near-total abortion ban from 1864. Montgomery drew public criticism and calls for his recusal after previous comments he made accusing Planned Parenthood of committing “genocide” resurfaced.

Montgomery hasn’t indicated whether he will recuse himself from the lawsuit concerning the publicity pamphlet summary of the abortion rights initiative or a separate challenge against it launched by the Arizona Right to Life that is still in the trial court stage. The initiative has strong ties to Planned Parenthood Arizona, which helped craft its language, was involved in funding and signature gathering efforts and is one of several reproductive rights groups that make up the campaign behind it.

Alberto Rodriguez, a spokesman for the justices, declined to comment on Montgomery’s involvement in either of the two cases, saying that the Court doesn’t comment on issues pending before it or likely to arise in the future.

The Arizona Abortion Access Act seeks to enshrine abortion as a fundamental right in the state Constitution up to fetal viability, generally regarded to be around 24 weeks of gestation. If passed, it would nullify many of the state’s anti-abortion laws, including the 15-week gestational ban, and prohibit lawmakers from enacting restrictions around the procedure that aren’t intended to safeguard the patient’s health or safety. The proposal also includes an exception for procedures performed beyond fetal viability if a health care provider deems an abortion is necessary to preserve a woman’s life, physical or mental health.

The initiative is widely expected to appear on the November ballot. The campaign behind it turned in a record-breaking number of signatures to qualify last month, more than doubling its requirement of 383,923.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://azmirror.com/briefs/az-supreme-court-clint-bolick-recuses-in-abortion-ballot-measure-lawsuit-where-his-wife-is-a-defendant/

Published and (C) by Arizona Mirror
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/azmirror/

You are viewing proxied material from magical.fish. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.