(LifeSiteNews) — The Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that an informational pamphlet for voters on an upcoming ballot initiative to embed a “fundamental right” to abortion in the Arizona Constitution may refer to an embryo or fetus as an “unborn human being,” siding with Republican drafters who argued the description was accurate over opponents who insisted it was “biased.”
The amendment, backed by the pro-abortion coalition “Arizona for Abortion Access,” would establish a so-called “fundamental right to abortion that the state of Arizona may not interfere with before the point of fetal viability (defined as the point of pregnancy when there is significant chance of the survival of the fetus outside of the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures) unless justified by a compelling state interest (defined as a law or regulation enacted for the limited purpose of improving or maintaining the health of the individual seeking abortion care [sic] that does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision making).”
After viability, abortion bans would still need to allow abortion in cases where abortion, “in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional, is necessary to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual,” although abortion is never ethically justifiable and both pro-life doctors and former abortionists affirm that direct abortion is never medically necessary, whereas the language gives abortionists the discretion to justify any abortion, rendering any future pro-life laws effectively meaningless.
The Associated Press reports that Arizona for Abortion Access challenged the informational language drafted by the state legislative council, which will be mailed to voters but not appear on the ballot itself. A lower court agreed that it was “packed with emotion and partisan meaning,” but the state’s highest court has now reversed that ruling. The Court did not elaborate, but said a full written opinion would be coming later.
“Unborn human being” is objectively accurate terminology for what abortion destroys. Long-settled biological criteria, mainstream medical textbooks, overwhelming consensus, and even many abortionists themselves agree that a living human being, structurally and genetically distinct from his or her mother, is created upon fertilization and is present throughout the entirety of pregnancy – regardless of whether that embryonic human is being artificially sustained outside of the womb.
In May, Arizona repealed a near-total abortion ban that was set to take effect, leaving abortions legal until 15 weeks. Meanwhile, Republican state Rep. Barbara Parker has filed an amicus brief challenging “the initiative’s vague and misleading language,” which “conceals its true impact: stripping Arizona courts of their power to apply traditional legal standards to abortion legislation.”
The abortion lobby has had great success using false claims that pro-life laws are dangerous to stoke fear about the issue among the general public, most visibly in the area of state constitutional amendments establishing “rights” to abortion immune from future legislation. Pro-lifers have either failed to enact pro-life amendments or stop pro-abortion ones in California, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Vermont, and Ohio, prompting much conversation among pro-lifers about the need to develop new strategies to protect life at the ballot box.
This year there are a total of eight abortion-related ballot initiatives slated for the November elections, with as many as four more that could be approved for consideration as well.