2022: Mesnard Co-Sponsored A Bill To Ban Abortions After 15 Weeks, With No Exceptions For Rape Or Incest. Mesnard was a co-sponsor of SB 1164, which, according to NPR, “The Arizona Legislature on Thursday joined the growing list of Republican-led states to pass aggressive anti-abortion legislation as the conservative U.S. Supreme Court is considering ratcheting back abortion rights that have been in place for nearly 50 years. The House voted on party lines to outlaw abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, mirroring a Mississippi law now being considered by the nation's high court. The bill explicitly says it does not overrule a state law in place for more than 100 years that would ban abortion outright if the Supreme Court overrules Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case that enshrined the right to abortion in law. […] Barto's bill would make it a crime for a doctor to perform an abortion after 15 weeks but would prohibit the prosecution of pregnant people for receiving one. Doctors could face felony charges and lose their license to practice medicine. There is an exception for cases when the mother is at risk of death or serious permanent injury, but not for instances of rape or incest.” [SB 1164, passed 2/15/22; NPR, 3/24/22]
Mesnard Supported “Prohibiting Abortion Except When It Is Necessary To Prevent The Death Of The Mother.” In a response to the Center for Arizona Policy’s 2018 candidate survey, Mesnard said he supported “Prohibiting abortion except when it is necessary to prevent the death of the mother.” [Center for Arizona Policy, 2018]
December 2016: Mesnard Said Most Legislators Were In A “Wait-And-See” Approach To Abortion Restrictions Based On Pending Opinions In The 9th Circuit. According to the Associated Press, “Q: We see legislation every year adding more abortion restrictions. They generally pass, although some are blocked by the courts. What's coming this year?
A: I think a lot of folks, not just on the abortion issue but a number of issues, are in wait and see mode with the feds - we really don't know what's going to be happening at the federal level. So I'm not sure that there will be much. And obviously we have gone about as far as you can go within the context of the 9th Circuit and their opinions, and the U.S. Supreme Court.” [Associated Press, 12/27/16]
January 2017: Mesnard Applauded President Trump For Reinstating The Mexico City Policy. According to the Yellow Sheet Report, “Arizona Speaker of the House J.D. Mesnard (R-17) today applauded President Trump for reinstating the ban on federal funds going to international non-governmental organizations that perform or promote abortions, commonly referred to as the Mexico City Policy. The policy was first implemented by President Reagan in 1984 and has been reinstated by every Republican president since then. It was lifted by President Obama in 2009 but reinstated today by President Trump through executive order. ‘By reinstating the Mexico City Policy in one of his first official acts, President Trump has made it clear that he puts the interests of life and taxpayers ahead of those like abortion giant, International Planned Parenthood Federation,’ said Speaker Mesnard. ‘That the Mexico City Policy has been reinstated just a day after the anniversary of Roe v. Wade should give hope to those of us in the pro-life community regarding the future fate of the unborn.’” [Yellow Sheet Report, 1/24/17]
May 2017: Mesnard Said That President Trump’s Order Allowing States To Deny Title X Funds To Planned Parenthood Allowed Arizona To Defund The Organization In The Budget. According to the Sun, “Republican legislative leaders are using a provision buried in the state budget in their latest attempt to defund Planned Parenthood. The measure requires the state Department of Health Services to apply to the federal government for Title 10 dollars. Those are family planning funds which now are given directly by the feds to health care agencies. As crafted, it requires health officials to argue that the state ‘is best suited to receive and distribute’ these dollars to eligible agencies. But there’s something else in the measure: It says if the health department does get all the money, it cannot redistribute any to any family planning agency that also does abortions, even if none of those family planning dollars actually are used to terminate pregnancies. The move drew a sharp reaction from Bryan Howard, president of Planned Parenthood Arizona. ‘There is one and only one reason that this is in the budget,’ he said. ‘And it’s for Gov. (Doug) Ducey to continue to double-down on his determination to expunge Planned Parenthood from the landscape.’ Earlier this year President Trump signed a resolution which overturned an Obama administration rule which prohibited states from denying Title 10 funds to any organization that is capable of providing family planning services. […] So Trump’s order, by itself, had no effect on Title 10 dollars coming in to Arizona. But House Speaker J.D. Mesnard, a perennial foe of Planned Parenthood, said the presidential resolution essentially gave the state a roadmap: Get the dollars directly and then give them out as you will -- but not to Planned Parenthood. ‘It’s been no secret that the legislature, the Republicans here, are not fans of funding the No. 1 abortion provider in the country,’ he said. The speaker said the desire to defund Planned Parenthood would exist even if that organization were to be able to segregate out the dollars it uses for abortions from what it spends on family planning. Mesnard also said the provision was not purposely buried in the budget instead of being debated as a stand-alone bill. He said the action by the president came only recently, after it was too late to introduce new legislation. Howard, however, said this goes beyond opposition to abortion. ‘The state has regarded family planning health care as somewhere between a triviality and a mortal sin,’ he said.” [The Sun, 5/3/17]
May 2017: Mesnard Said He Did Not Want To Give Money To The “Number One Abortion Provider. “ According to the Associated Press, “Republican House Speaker J.D. Mesnard said in an interview that he pushed to get the provision into the budget because he opposes abortion services Planned Parenthood provides. ‘It’s obviously been the policy of this place that we don’t want to send any more resources to the No. 1 abortion provider than we have to,’ Mesnard said. ‘Obviously there’s been some challenges at the federal level. Some changes to the federal level though more in our direction have facilitated this possibility.’ Mesnard was referring to past efforts by the Legislature to bar Planned Parenthood from providing non-abortion services to state Medicaid patients that have been blocked by the courts. Medicaid law has a choice of provider provision that bars states from blocking patients from seeing otherwise qualified providers just because they also provide abortion services.” [Associated Press, 5/4/17]
January 2013: Americans United For Life Filed An Amicus Brief On Behalf Of Legislators Including Mesnard In Support Of An Arizona Law Prohibiting Family Planning Dollars From Going To Abortion Providers. According to an AUL Press Release, “In an effort to protect the rights of states to decide the allocation of tax dollars in regard to medical care, Americans United for Life filed an amicus curiae brief in the Ninth Circuit case, Planned Parenthood v. Betlach this morning. The case is a legal challenge filed by the abortion giant after the State of Arizona enacted a law in 2011 prohibiting the allocation of family planning dollars toward abortion providers. Under current law, family planning dollars are directed towards comprehensive healthcare providers such as community health clinics rather than abortion clinics. ‘We support the right of state leaders to direct healthcare dollars towards medical facilities and not abortion clinics,’ said AUL President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest. She continued, ‘States should retain the right to direct funds towards medical facilities that provide health care instead of abortion, rather than supporting Planned Parenthood, which is the nation’s largest abortion provider, and an organization whose annual revenue is nearly $1 billion and which already receives $363 million in annual tax subsidies.’ AUL’s brief, filed on behalf of 29 Arizona legislators and legislators-elect, argues that Arizona’s limitation on public funding for abortion providers like Planned Parenthood is constitutional and supported by the State’s strong pro-life public policy. AUL filed the amicus brief, available here, on behalf of […] J.D. Mesnard.” [Press release, Americans United for Life, 1/3/13]
March 2018: Mesnard Was Asked By Democratic Legislators To Refer An Abortion Bill To The Health Committee Which He Denied, Instead Assigning It To Judiciary, Calling It A “Constitutional Issue.” According to the Capitol Times, “A House committee struck a controversial provision from a bill that expands the amount of information abortion providers must report to the state. The amendment, introduced by Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, removed a provision from SB1394 that would have required providers to ask women more specific reasons why they’re seeking an abortion. Approved by the Senate, 17-13, on a party-line vote, the bill spelled out possible reasons for why a women got an abortion, such as for economic reasons, whether the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest, or because the pregnancy resulted in fetal anomalies. Under current Arizona law enacted in 20, hospitals and physicians are only required to report to the Arizona Department of Health Services whether an abortion performed was elective or if it was done for the health and safety of the mother or fetus. Farnsworth’s amendment reinstates that requirement. He did not provide an explanation for why he amended the bill. […] Democratic Reps. Athena Salman, Rebecca Rios, Engel and Gonzales also called on House Speaker J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler, to assign the bill to the Health Committee, arguing that it was a health and not a judicial issue. Salman told the Arizona Capitol Times that she met with Mesnard on March 12 to discuss reassigning the bill or assigning it to both committees. However, her pleas weren’t heeded. She added that Mesnard told her the bill was assigned to Judiciary and Public Safety because abortion is a constitutional issue.” [Capitol Times, 3/16/18]