Arizona Supreme Court says voter pamphlet may call a fetus an ‘unborn human being’

PHOENIX —  An informational pamphlet for Arizona voters, who will decide in the fall whether to guarantee a constitutional right to an abortion, can refer to an embryo or fetus as an “unborn human being,” the state’s highest court ruled this week.

Arizona Supreme Court justices sided with Republican lawmakers, who drafted the language to be sent to all voters in the state, over proponents of the ballot measure on abortion rights.

Abortion foes have long worked to give embryos and fetuses the same legal and constitutional protections as those of the women carrying them.

The issue was highlighted recently when the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are legally protected children, forcing lawmakers to scramble to enact protections for in vitro fertilization.

Democrats have made abortion rights a central message since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade in 2022, and it is a key part of their efforts in this year’s elections. They hope the ballot measure in Arizona, one of several battleground states that will determine which party controls the presidency and Congress, will drive sympathetic voters to cast a ballot.

The ruling drew swift criticism from the ballot measure’s backers, who argued that the phrase “unborn human being” is neither impartial nor objective. They said they were concerned that voters would be subjected to biased and politically charged words.

“We are deeply disappointed in this ruling, but will not be deterred from doing everything in our power to communicate to voters the truth of the Arizona Abortion Access Act and why it’s critical to vote YES to restore and protect access to abortion care this fall,” the group, Arizona for Abortion Access, said in a statement.

The ballot measure would allow abortions until an embryo or fetus could survive outside the womb, typically around 24 weeks, with exceptions allowing later-term abortions to save the woman’s life or to protect her physical or mental health. It would restrict the state from adopting or enforcing any law that would prohibit access to the procedure.

Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma, a Republican who co-chairs the legislative council that drafted the disputed language, said it’s intended to help voters understand the current law.

“The Arizona Supreme Court’s ruling is correct,” Toma said.

Arizona for Abortion Access had sued the majority-Republican council for including the wording.

The Superior Court agreed with the activist group, finding that the GOP-favored language was “packed with emotion and partisan meaning.”

The high court that overturned that ruling this week is made up of seven justices, all appointed by Republican governors.

The brief ruling, signed by Vice Chief Justice John Lopez, did not explain the justices’ rationale, saying a full opinion would be released later. Justice Clint Bolick, whose wife is a Republican lawmaker on the legislative council, recused himself from the case.

The language describing an embryo or fetus as an “unborn human being” will go in a pamphlet that gives voters information on candidates and ballot measures to help inform their choices.

The Arizona secretary of state’s office, which determines what gets printed on the ballot, said “unborn human being” would not appear there.

The secretary of state’s office said Monday that it had certified 577,971 signatures, far above the number required to put the question before voters.

As antiabortion groups and GOP allies around the U.S. reel from a string of defeats at the ballot box, they’re trying an array of strategies to keep abortion measures off ballots, including months-long legal battles over initiative language.

In Missouri, for example, Republican Atty. Gen. Andrew Bailey stonewalled the abortion rights campaign for months before the secretary of state, Republican Jay Ashcroft, tried to describe the proposal to voters as allowing “dangerous and unregulated abortions until live birth.” A state appeals court ruled last year that Ashcroft’s wording was politically partisan and tossed it out.

In Florida, language was at the center of attempts by the state’s Republican attorney general to keep a proposed abortion rights amendment off the ballot. Many of these strategies build off those used last year in Ohio, where voters overwhelmingly passed a state constitutional amendment protecting abortion rights.

Other tactics to thwart abortion ballot measure efforts have included attempts to remove signatures from petitions, legislative pushes for competing ballot measures that could confuse voters, and attempts to raise the thresholds for ballot initiatives or ban residents from placing abortion initiatives on the statewide ballot altogether.

Govindarao writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Christine Fernando and Kimberlee Kruesi contributed to this report.