¶ Brnovich Was Opposed To Reproductive Rights
- Brnovich said that he was opposed to abortion and he signed a letter to the Supreme Court asking them to overturn Roe v. Wade.
- Brnovich supported a Mississippi anti-abortion law that banned abortion after 15 weeks, and supported Texas’s restrictive abortion ban that did not include exceptions for rape and incest.
- In 2020, Brnovich supported a move in Kentucky to ban the process of dilation and evacuation, the most common method use for second-trimester pregnancies.
- Brnovich supported Arizona’s law barring abortions on genetic conditions and attempted to enforce it despite a federal court ruling it unconstitutional.
- Brnovich defended Arizona’s TRAP laws and said it was necessary to protect “human beings, not appliances.”
¶ Brnovich Opposed Abortion
Brnovich Said That He Was Opposed To Abortion. According to the Yuma Sun, “Brnovich acknowledged he is opposed to abortion. But he said he will defend the laws approved by the Legislature without regard to his own personal beliefs one way or the other. ‘As the attorney general, the law is what the law is,’ Brnovich said. But he added that also means he will ‘defend us against the overreach of the Obama administration,’ whether on environmental regulations or challenging Arizona’s laws dealing with illegal immigration.” [Yuma Sun, 9/30/14]
Brnovich Said There Was A “Moral Obligation” To Protect The Unborn. According to National Review, “The Little Sisters are a good starting point for understanding Brnovich and his campaign for the Republican nomination for attorney general of Arizona. ‘We have a moral obligation as a society to protect the vulnerable - whether they are unborn, children or adults,’ Brnovich, who has been married for 17 years and has two daughters, said during a recent trip to Washington, D.C.” [National Review, 3/24/14]
In 2014, Brnovich Said He Was The “Only Pro-Life Candidate In the Attorney General Race.” According to the Sierra Vista Herald, “Brnovich, who is not objecting to having Choices become a party to the lawsuit, has made no secret that he is opposed to abortion. In his first campaign in 2014, he boasted that he was endorsed to Arizona Right to Life PAC and ‘name as the only pro-life candidate in the attorney general race.’ ‘We also have an obligation to protect and defend laws that concern the unborn,’ he said in campaign materials at the time.” [Sierra Vista Herald, 11/20/19]
¶ Brnovich Supported Overturning Roe V. Wade
Brnovich Joined A Letter Asking The Supreme Court To Overturn Roe V. Wade. According to the Arizona Republic, “Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey has joined 11 other Republican governors and more than 200 GOP lawmakers and officials from across the country in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the landmark, controversial Roe v. Wade abortion ruling. […] ‘Governor Ducey just said the quiet part out loud. His goal is to overturn Roe v Wade and ban access to safe, legal abortion in Arizona,’ said Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona in a statement. Attorney General Mark Brnovich also signed onto a similar brief along with more than 20 other state attorneys general.” [Arizona Republic, 7/29/21]
Phoenix New Times Headline: Both Ducey and Brnovich Are Openly Asking the U.S. Supreme Court to Overturn Roe v. Wade [Phoenix New Times, 7/29/21]
¶ Brnovich Supported 15-Week Abortion Ban
Brnovich Signed On To An Amicus Brief In Support Of A Mississippi Anti-Abortion Law That Banned Abortion After 15 Weeks. According to the Arizona Republic, “Attorney General Mark Brnovich also signed onto a similar brief along with more than 20 other state attorneys general. ‘General Brnovich has a long record of defending states’ ability to govern themselves, especially when it comes to standing up for those who cannot protect themselves,’ said Katie Conner, spokesperson for the Arizona Attorney General's Office. ‘The unborn are among our society’s most vulnerable.’ […] This case began as a challenge to a state law in Mississippi that banned abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Lower courts struck down that law, finding it conflicted with the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, and the state of Mississippi appealed the ruling.” [Arizona Republic, 7/29/21]
Brnovich Tweeted: “Last Week, I Signed Onto An Amicus Brief In Dobbs V. Jackson Women’s Health. The Brief Supports A Pro-life Law In Mississippi That Limits Abortion After 15 Weeks. I’m Proud To Stand For Life. #Prolife #Standforlife” According to Mark Brnovich’s Twitter, “Last week, I signed onto an amicus brief in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. The brief supports a pro-life law in Mississippi that limits abortion after 15 weeks. I’m proud to stand for life. #prolife #standforlife” [Mark Brnovich For Senate Twitter, 8/1/21]
¶ Brnovich Supported Texas’s Abortion Law
Brnovich Filed An Amicus Brief In Support Of Texas’s Law Banning Most Abortions. According to the Associated Press, “A Texas ban on most abortion is getting a show of support from 18 state attorneys general, including Arizona's. It comes as clinics and the Biden administration on Thursday waited for a ruling to determine whether the most restrictive abortion law in the U.S. can remain in place. Republican state attorneys general from Indiana, Florida, Oklahoma and elsewhere filed an amicus brief arguing the Biden administration overstepped by bringing a lawsuit against Texas in their attempt to stop the restrictions. The Texas law bans abortions once cardiac activity is detected, which is usually around the sixth week of pregnancy. It has been in effect since September.” [Associated Press, 10/14/21]
Brnovich Claimed The Texas Law “Saved Hundreds Of Lives Since It Passed.” Brnovich tweeted, “I’ve always been 100% pro-life. That’s why I joined AGs across the country to argue against Biden’s unconstitutional attempt to undo the Texas heartbeat law that has saved hundreds of lives since it passed.” [Brnovich Campaign Twitter, 10/29/21]
¶ Texas Abortion Law Did Not Include Exceptions And Deputized Private Citizens To Sue Abortion Providers
Texas Abortion Law Banned Most Abortions After About Six Weeks Of Pregnancy. According to the New York Times, “A Texas law banning most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy went into effect on Wednesday, despite the 1973 Supreme Court decision that established a constitutional right to the procedure, making the state the most restrictive in the nation in terms of access to abortion services. Other states have passed similar laws, but those measures face legal challenges. The Texas law is the first to be implemented. On a vote of 5 to 4, the court refused just before midnight on Wednesday to block the law.” [New York Times, 9/1/21]
Texas Abortion Law Did Not Include Exceptions For Pregnancies Resulting From Rape Or Incest. According to the New York Times, “Does the law make exceptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, or to protect the life of the mother? The law does not make exceptions for rape or incest. It does permit abortions for health reasons, but the exceptions are narrowly drawn, allowing a termination only if the pregnancy could endanger the mother’s life or lead to ‘substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function,’ Ms. Nash noted.” [New York Times, 9/1/21]
Texas Abortion Law Deputized Private Citizens To Sue Anyone Who Performs An Abortion Or “Aids And Abets” A Procedure. According to the New York Times, “Doesn’t Roe v. Wade guarantee a woman’s right to abortion? Can the Texas law be challenged on constitutional grounds? The Texas law bars state officials from actually enforcing it, a design intended to make it difficult to challenge in the courts. Usually a lawsuit aiming to block such a law as unconstitutional names state officials as defendants. Instead, the Texas law deputizes private citizens to sue anyone who performs an abortion or ‘aids and abets’ a procedure. Plaintiffs who have no connection to the patient or the clinic may sue and recover legal fees, as well as $10,000 if they win.” [New York Times, 9/1/21]
¶ Brnovich Supported Kentucky Attorney General’s Right To Defend Law Restricting Dilation And Evacuation Procedures
December 2020: Brnovich Led Coalition Of Attorneys General In Filing An Amicus Brief In Support Of Kentucky Attorney General’s Ability To Defend Its Law Banning So-Called “Dismemberment Abortions.” According to a press release from Attorney General Daniel Cameron, “A 20-state coalition of attorneys general, led by Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, this week filed an amicus brief before the United States Supreme Court in support of Attorney General Cameron's ability to defend Kentucky's law banning live dismemberment abortions (House Bill 454). ‘The General Assembly put an end to the gruesome practice of live dismemberment abortions when they passed House Bill 454, and this law should continue to receive a full defense in court, rather than being invalidated because of the decision of one public official," said Attorney General Cameron. "I'm grateful to my colleagues for recognizing the importance of allowing our office to defend the constitutionality of Kentucky's laws, and I'm grateful to General Brnovich for leading the coalition in filing this brief.’” [Press Release – Kentucky Attorney General Cameron, 12/9/20]
Brnovich Led 20-State Amicus Brief In Support Of Kentucky’s Live Dismemberment Abortion Ban Law. According to WYMT, “Attorneys general from 20 states are backing Kentucky’s top law enforcement official’s efforts to defend House Bill 454, which bans live dismemberment abortions, before the U.S. Supreme Court. The General Assembly passed the legislation during the 2018 session and it was signed into law by then-Governor Matt Bevin. The law bans the Dilation and Evacuation procedure (D&E) on a living unborn child. The group, led by Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, filed an amicus brief Wednesday to support Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s effort to defend the law to the nation’s highest court.” [WYMT, 12/9/20]
Kentucky’s Law Largely Banned Abortions Performed With “Dilation And Evacuation” Procedure, The Most Common Method Used For Second-Trimester Pregnancies. According to CNBC, “The Kentucky law, H.B. 454, would largely ban abortions performed with the ‘dilation and evacuation’ procedure, the most common method used for second-trimester pregnancies. It was signed into law in 2018, but a district court declared it unconstitutional and an appeals court upheld that ruling. Kentucky’s health secretary opted not to pursue further appeal of the decision — but Daniel Cameron, the state’s Republican attorney general, tried to intervene to seek another hearing in defense of the law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rejected that bid, saying Cameron’s motion came too late.” [CNBC, 10/12/21]
¶ Brnovich Supported Arizona Law Barring Abortions On Genetic Conditions
Brnovich Argued In Support Of A Law Which Would Allow Abortion Providers To Tell Women They Are Not Allowed To Have An Abortion If The Reason Is Because Of A Genetic Fetal Defect, Even If It Is Prior To Viability. According to the Arizona Daily Star, “Arizona is free to tell women they can’t have an abortion if the reason is because of genetic fetal defect, even if it is prior to viability, the state’s top prosecutor is arguing. In a new court filing, Attorney General Mark Brnovich acknowledges that SB 1457, approved earlier this year by the Republican-controlled Legislature, would block some women from getting an abortion in Arizona even before a fetus is able to live outside the womb. That viability standard has been the constitutional touchstone for more than 40 years in determining whether the state can interfere with what the Supreme Court has held is a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. Under the law, set to take effect Sept. 29, medical professionals in violation could be sentenced to up to a year in prison, though women who undergo these procedures are exempt from criminal prosecution.” [Arizona Daily Star, 9/11/21]
Brnovich Defended Arizona’s Restrictive Abortion Law On The Grounds That It Protects Against Discrimination Based On Genetic Conditions. According to the Arizona Republic, “Groups seeking to overturn part of Arizona's newest law restricting abortion took their case before a federal judge on Wednesday, just one week before doctors who perform the procedure could face criminal penalties including prison time in certain circumstances. […] Defending the law is Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who says it should stand because it protects against discrimination based on genetic conditions, in the same light as a 2011 Arizona law that prohibits parents from seeking abortions based on gender or race. The state argued women can still obtain abortions as long as they don't say their sole reason for doing so is a genetic abnormality.” [Arizona Republic, 9/22/21]
¶ Brnovich Attempted To Enforce An Arizona Law Prohibiting Abortions On Fetuses With Genetic Defects Despite A Federal Court Ruling Which Declared The Law Unconstitutional
Brnovich Sought To Enforce A Law Prohibiting Abortions On Fetuses With Genetic Defects Despite A Federal Court Ruling That Found The Law Unconstitutional. According to the Arizona Daily Star, “Attorney General Mark Brnovich wants a judge to let him start enforcing a law prohibiting certain abortions despite a federal court ruling that found it unconstitutional. In new legal filings, Brnovich contends U.S. District Court Judge Douglas Rayes misinterpreted the law when he barred the state last month from making criminals out of doctors who perform abortions knowing the woman’s reason is a genetic fetal defect.” [Arizona Daily Star, 10/6/21]
- A Federal Judge Blocked The Law Which Would Have Applied Felony Charges To Doctors Who Terminate Pregnancies Solely Because The Fetuses Have A Genetic Abnormality. According to Boston Globe, “A judge has blocked a key portion of a new Arizona law that would have let prosecutors bring felony charges against doctors who knowingly terminate pregnancies solely because the fetuses have a genetic abnormality such as Down syndrome. U.S. District Judge Douglas Rayes on Tuesday also threw out another provision that would have let prosecutors bring charges against anyone who helped raise money or pay for abortions done solely because of genetic abnormality.” [Boston Globe, 9/28/21]
¶ Brnovich Defended Arizona TRAP Laws
Brnovich Defended Arizona Laws Prohibiting Anyone Other Than A Physician From Performing Abortions, Requiring Patients To Visit Clinics Twice Over A 24-Hour Period For Counseling, And Barring The Use Of Telemedicine In Providing Abortion Services; Said “We’re Talking About Human Beings, Not Appliances.” According to the Associated Press, “Abortion rights groups filed a lawsuit Thursday challenging Arizona laws they say unnecessarily restrict access to the procedures and leave most rural areas without clinics. The legal action by Planned Parenthood Arizona targets laws that prohibit anyone other than a physician from performing abortions; require patients to visit clinics twice over a 24-hour period for counseling; and bar the use of telemedicine in providing abortion services […] The lawsuit was filed against Attorney General Mark Brnovich, Arizona Medical Board Executive Director Patricia McSorley, Arizona Department of Health Services and Arizona State Board of Nursing Executive Director Joey Ridenour. ‘Planned Parenthood might be disappointed its business model is failing, but we're talking about human beings, not appliances,’ Brnovich said in a statement. ‘Planned Parenthood should work to change the law if it doesn't like the policies, not rely on the courts to do its bidding.’” [Associated Press, 4/12/19]