People's Vote vs. Legislation: The Ongoing Abortion Rights Struggle

In June 2022, the Supreme Court ruled in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, overturning Roe v. Wade and reinstating abortion regulation to individual states after nearly five decades of federal protection. This landmark decision sparked a countrywide rush as states began to craft their own abortion rules using a variety of legislative and ballot measure tactics.

During the most recent election cycle, voters in seven states approved ballot measures safeguarding abortion rights. Notable wins include:

• Arizona: Proposition 139 passed with 61% voter support, enshrining abortion rights through fetal viability in the state constitution
• New Mexico: Successfully added abortion rights protections to the state constitution
• Nevada: Voters decisively approved constitutional protections for abortion rights

The ballot measure victories have not brought an end to the political debate over abortion access. In recent months, lawmakers in 10 states have introduced at least 168 measures, ranging from those that expand access to those imposing additional restrictions.

The 15-week ban has been temporarily lifted, while the 1864 total abortion ban has been removed. Abortion-related legislation is currently being debated, but significant changes are unlikely to occur this session. The Arizona legislative session is expected to end on June 30, 2025.

Democratic legislators in states with successful pro-choice ballot measures have pushed to increase abortion access in a variety of ways.

Despite Proposition 139's approval, Democratic lawmakers face massive obstacles in the Republican-controlled legislature. State Representative Stephanie Stahl Hamilton of Tucson has sponsored legislation to eliminate abortion advertising laws and limits on online medical care prescriptions for abortion medication, which is used in almost two-thirds of all abortions in the United States. Both initiatives are stuck in committee, with little chance of moving forward by the June 30 session deadline.

Republican lawmakers have pursued different strategies to limit abortion access despite voter-approved protections:

• New Mexico: Despite constitutional protections, Republican legislators have introduced measures attempting to create new procedural hurdles for abortion access.
• Nevada: Even with strong voter approval for abortion rights, Republican legislators have introduced bills attempting to impose new parental consent requirements and facility regulations.

In New Mexico, Republicans are attempting to establish administrative limitations to abortion access, despite constitutional protections. Legislators have submitted proposals demanding additional licensing and required waiting periods, which advocates claim are intended to limit access through bureaucratic barriers.

While Nevada has strong statewide protections through voter-approved measures, Republican legislators have focused on enacting new regulatory requirements, such as enhanced parental consent laws and stricter facility licensing standards, which advocates argue are intended to create barriers to access.

Rather than immediately contesting Proposition 139, Arizona Republicans are focusing on legislative amendments that could indirectly restrict abortion access.

Representative Lupe Diaz of Benson admits that the ballot proposal "ties legislative hands" and will be tough to reverse immediately. Instead, he is pushing legislation that would prevent state and local government funding for any clinic that performs abortions, including those that provide additional services.

Diaz characterizes this approach as fiscal rather than moral, noting that "We're not prohibiting anybody from getting anything, any services, nothing. All we're saying is that we're not going to fund it with state dollars. You have to go to the free market to be able to do that."

Arizona already has restrictions on public funding for abortion treatment, including bans on Medicaid and state-provided insurance plans that cover abortion services. The proposed legislation would apply similar financing limits to institutions that provide abortions in addition to other medical services.

As Representative Stahl Hamilton noted regarding Arizona's situation, "We still have miles to go, but I think we've been able to, for now, accomplish as much as our colleagues across the aisle have the political will to stomach." 

This sentiment is representative of the greater national situation, in which voter-approved abortion rights protections comply with continual legislative assaults and creative loopholes by opposition lawmakers.