{"id":1119605,"date":"2021-12-14T21:44:15","date_gmt":"2021-12-15T02:44:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1119605"},"modified":"2021-12-14T21:44:18","modified_gmt":"2021-12-15T02:44:18","slug":"arizona-asks-scotus-to-weigh-in-on-law-banning-abortions-over-genetic-abnormalities","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/arizona-asks-scotus-to-weigh-in-on-law-banning-abortions-over-genetic-abnormalities\/","title":{"rendered":"Arizona Asks SCOTUS To Weigh In On Law Banning Abortions Over Genetic Abnormalities"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"float:left\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">26<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Farizona-asks-scotus-to-weigh-in-on-law-banning-abortions-over-genetic-abnormalities%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1119605&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p class=\"p1\">On Tuesday, Arizona requested that the U.S. Supreme Court weigh in on its pro-life law that prohibits abortions because of genetic abnormalities.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">As <a href=\"https:\/\/www.foxnews.com\/politics\/arizona-asks-supreme-court-to-allow-law-barring-abortions-for-fetal-abnormalities\">reported<\/a> by Fox News, \u201cIn an emergency request to the justices by Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, the state is requesting that the court allow the law to resume after it was&nbsp;blocked by a federal judge&nbsp;in September.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">In April, Republican Governor of Arizona Doug Ducey signed the measure into law, saying at the time, per his official <a href=\"https:\/\/azgovernor.gov\/governor\/news\/2021\/04\/governor-ducey-signs-legislation-protect-preborn-children\">website<\/a>, \u201cThere\u2019s immeasurable value in every single life \u2014 regardless of genetic makeup.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">According to the website, the law \u201cmakes it a Class 6 felony to perform an abortion solely because of a genetic abnormality, use force or threat to intimidate a person to have an abortion because of a genetic abnormality of the child, or accept or solicit money to finance an abortion because of a genetic abnormality of the child.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">It also notably \u201cdoes not apply to cases where the child has a lethal fetal condition and does not prohibit abortion sought for other reasons allowed by law, including the life and health of the mother.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">\u201cThe law prompted legal action from a group of doctors and abortion rights advocates ahead of the scheduled September effective date,\u201d The Hill <a href=\"https:\/\/thehill.com\/regulation\/court-battles\/585823-arizona-asks-supreme-court-to-permit-ban-on-abortion-for-genetic?rl=1\">reported<\/a>.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">In September, a federal judge out of Arizona put a temporary halt to the measure while the legal action continues. \u201cU.S. District Judge Douglas Rayes, an Obama appointee, ruled that the law likely places an unconstitutional burden on the right to abortion prior to fetal viability, typically around 24 weeks, that the Supreme Court recognized in Roe and subsequent rulings,\u201d The Hill noted.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">The outlet noted that last month, a federal appeals court in San Francisco did not get rid of the judge\u2019s decision, which reportedly led to Brnovich going to the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<p>The Associated Press <a href=\"https:\/\/apnews.com\/article\/us-supreme-court-business-health-arizona-down-syndrome-46ad284dcd535f221c496cb3414ac8f7\">reported<\/a>:<\/p>\n<p class=\"Component-root-0-2-54 Component-p-0-2-45\"><em>Brnovich argued in court papers that the law furthers Arizona\u2019s interest in protecting the disability community from discrimination. He also wrote that it\u2019s not right to call the law an abortion ban. A woman still could obtain an abortion in such circumstances if she doesn\u2019t say why she wants one or makes a decision independent of a fetal abnormality, among other reasons, he wrote.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"Component-root-0-2-54 Component-p-0-2-45\"><em>The case goes first to Justice Elena Kagan, who handles emergency requests from Arizona.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">The action comes after the Supreme Court recently <a href=\"https:\/\/www.dailywire.com\/news\/scotus-rules-in-texas-pro-life-cases-abortion-providers-can-sue-state-doj-challenge-dismissed-law-can-remain-in-effect\">issued a ruling<\/a> on two cases regarding a Texas pro-life law, which were&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.dailywire.com\/news\/supreme-court-hears-arguments-on-two-challenges-to-texas-pro-life-law\">brought<\/a> before the Supreme Court last month. The high court had declined to halt the Texas law but agreed to give the two cases an expedited review.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Texas\u2019 Heartbeat Act effectively outlaws abortion after the sixth week of pregnancy, when fetal cardiac activity can be detected. As The Daily Wire previously&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.dailywire.com\/news\/supreme-court-rejects-abortion-providers-request-to-stay-texas-heartbeat-law\">reported<\/a>, \u201cThe Texas law allows citizens to sue abortion providers and those who \u2018aid and abet\u2019 illegal procedures for a financial reward if the lawsuit is successful.\u201d&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">On Friday, the high court&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.foxnews.com\/politics\/supreme-court-texas-abortion-lawsuit-may-proceed\">decided<\/a> to allow abortion providers to continue with a lawsuit against the state. Still, it is allowing the legislation to stay in effect as the legal battles continue. \u201cThe ruling is procedural and will not be the final word on the law\u2019s constitutionality,\u201d Fox News&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.foxnews.com\/politics\/supreme-court-texas-abortion-lawsuit-may-proceed\">reported<\/a>.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">As Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the court\u2019s&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/21pdf\/21-463_3ebh.pdf\">opinion<\/a>&nbsp;for the&nbsp;Whole Woman\u2019s Health v. Jackson&nbsp;case, \u201cThe Court concludes that the petitioners may pursue a pre-enforcement challenge against certain of the named defendants but not others.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">The Supreme Court got rid of a challenge brought by the Department of Justice against the Texas pro-life measure, as well.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">The Supreme Court also recently heard arguments regarding a case out of Mississippi over a law in the state that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">When the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Mississippi case, it said it would consider the&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/qp\/19-01392qp.pdf\">question<\/a> of \u201cWhether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional,\u201d meaning that with this decision, it could rule that states can make their own laws regarding abortion again \u2014 even possibly banning it up to the point of conception. The high court could give power back to the states to restrict abortion like they were able to do before the 1973 Roe v. Wade&nbsp;ruling.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">There are currently at least 21&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.guttmacher.org\/article\/2021\/10\/26-states-are-certain-or-likely-ban-abortion-without-roe-heres-which-ones-and-why\">states<\/a> with pro-life laws or constitutional amendments that would make them highly likely to prohibit almost all abortions in their states if Roe&nbsp;is overturned.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">An additional five states would probably prohibit abortion as soon as they could. According to the Guttmacher Institute, these states include Florida, Indiana, Montana, Nebraska, and Wyoming.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">The Daily Wire is one of America\u2019s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.dailywire.com\/subscribe\">member<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>On Tuesday, Arizona requested that the U.S. Supreme Court weigh in on its pro-life law that prohibits abortions because of genetic abnormalities.\u00a0As reported by Fox News, \u201cIn an emergency request to the justices by Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, the state is requesting that the court allow the law to resume after it was\u00a0blocked by a federal judge\u00a0in September.\u201dIn April, Republican Governor of Arizona Doug Ducey signed the measure into law, saying at the time, per his official website, \u201cThere\u2019s immeasurable value in every single life \u2014 regardless of genetic makeup.\u201dAccording to the website, the law \u201cmakes it a Class 6 felony to perform an abortion solely because of a genetic abnormality, use force or threat to intimidate a person to have an abortion because of a genetic abnormality of the child, or accept or solicit money to finance an abortion because of a genetic abnormality of the child.\u201dIt also notably \u201cdoes not apply to cases where the child has a lethal fetal condition and does not prohibit abortion sought for other reasons allowed by law, including the life and health of the mother.\u201d\u201cThe law prompted legal action from a group of doctors and abortion rights advocates ahead of the scheduled September effective date,\u201d The Hill reported.\u00a0In September, a federal judge out of Arizona put a temporary halt to the measure while the legal action continues. \u201cU.S. District Judge Douglas Rayes, an Obama appointee, ruled that the law likely places an unconstitutional burden on the right to abortion prior to fetal viability, typically around 24 weeks, that the Supreme Court recognized in Roe and subsequent rulings,\u201d The Hill noted.\u00a0The outlet noted that last month, a federal appeals court in San Francisco did not get rid of the judge\u2019s decision, which reportedly led to Brnovich going to the Supreme Court.The Associated Press reported:Brnovich argued in court papers that the law furthers Arizona\u2019s interest in protecting the disability community from discrimination. He also wrote that it\u2019s not right to call the law an abortion ban. A woman still could obtain an abortion in such circumstances if she doesn\u2019t say why she wants one or makes a decision independent of a fetal abnormality, among other reasons, he wrote.The case goes first to Justice Elena Kagan, who handles emergency requests from Arizona.The action comes after the Supreme Court recently issued a ruling on two cases regarding a Texas pro-life law, which were\u00a0brought before the Supreme Court last month. The high court had declined to halt the Texas law but agreed to give the two cases an expedited review.Texas\u2019 Heartbeat Act effectively outlaws abortion after the sixth week of pregnancy, when fetal cardiac activity can be detected. As The Daily Wire previously\u00a0reported, \u201cThe Texas law allows citizens to sue abortion providers and those who \u2018aid and abet\u2019 illegal procedures for a financial reward if the lawsuit is successful.\u201d\u00a0On Friday, the high court\u00a0decided to allow abortion providers to continue with a lawsuit against the state. Still, it is allowing the legislation to stay in effect as the legal battles continue. \u201cThe ruling is procedural and will not be the final word on the law\u2019s constitutionality,\u201d Fox News\u00a0reported.\u00a0As Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the court\u2019s\u00a0opinion\u00a0for the\u00a0Whole Woman\u2019s Health v. Jackson\u00a0case, \u201cThe Court concludes that the petitioners may pursue a pre-enforcement challenge against certain of the named defendants but not others.\u201dThe Supreme Court got rid of a challenge brought by the Department of Justice against the Texas pro-life measure, as well.The Supreme Court also recently heard arguments regarding a case out of Mississippi over a law in the state that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.When the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Mississippi case, it said it would consider the\u00a0question of \u201cWhether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional,\u201d meaning that with this decision, it could rule that states can make their own laws regarding abortion again \u2014 even possibly banning it up to the point of conception. The high court could give power back to the states to restrict abortion like they were able to do before the 1973 Roe v. Wade\u00a0ruling.\u00a0There are currently at least 21\u00a0states with pro-life laws or constitutional amendments that would make them highly likely to prohibit almost all abortions in their states if Roe\u00a0is overturned.\u00a0An additional five states would probably prohibit abortion as soon as they could. According to the Guttmacher Institute, these states include Florida, Indiana, Montana, Nebraska, and Wyoming.\u00a0The Daily Wire is one of America\u2019s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":95,"featured_media":2315279,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1119605","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1119605","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/95"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1119605"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1119605\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2315279"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1119605"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1119605"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1119605"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}