June 2015: Brnovich And Planned Parenthood Reached An Agreement To Put On Hold A Part Of State Law Requiring Doctors To Inform Patients That Medicated Abortions Are Potentially Reversible. According to Law360, “An agreement reached between Arizona's attorney general and Planned Parenthood this week will put on hold a controversial section of a state abortion law that requires doctors to inform patients that medicated abortions are potentially reversible, according to court documents.” [Law360, 6/17/15]
Brnovich Declined To Uphold The Abortion Reversal Law, But Said That Did Not Mean The State Was Conceding The Law Was Illegal. According to the Daily Star, “Attorneys for the state are not going to fight to uphold a controversial law that says women need to be told that their medication abortions may be reversible, at least not now. In a brief filing Thursday, the Attorney General’s Office consented to U.S. District Court Judge Steven Logan entering a preliminary injunction barring the state from enforcing the law. The concession is at least an interim victory for Planned Parenthood of Arizona and the Center for Reproductive Rights. Attorneys for both groups had argued the law amounted to requiring doctors to give their patients medically inaccurate information. Mia Garcia, spokeswoman for Attorney General Mark Brnovich, said this does not mean the state is conceding the law is illegal. But she essentially conceded that there was a likelihood that Logan, after hearing the evidence, would have imposed a preliminary injunction himself.” [Daily Sun, 10/8/15]
October 2015: Federal Judge Refused To Delay A Lawsuit Against The State Law Requiring Doctors To Tell Women That A Medication Abortion May Be Reversible. According to the Associated Press, “A federal judge on Friday refused to delay a lawsuit against a new state law requiring doctors to tell women that a medication abortion may be reversible. Lawyers for the Arizona Attorney General and abortion providers asked U.S. District Judge Steven P. Logan on Thursday to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the enforcement of the law and delay further hearings. Instead, Logan told lawyers he would consolidate the preliminary injunction hearing set to begin Oct. 21 with one on the merits of the case. Abortion providers say the law is unconstitutional because it makes doctors give patients a state-mandated message they believe is medically wrong. Abortion opponents say women ought to be informed about a new method. The judge's decision was praised by Dan Pochoda, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona who is involved in the case on behalf of abortion providers.” [Associated Press, 10/19/15]
After Being Left Without Expert Witnesses On Abortion Reversal, Brnovich’s Office Reached Out To Anti-Choice Political Groups To Find Qualified Medical Experts To Defend The Law. According to Rewire, “As the lawsuit progressed, the state argued that the abortion-pill-reversal claim was based in sound science. The problem, however, was that the state could not find expert witnesses with the research background and experience to vouch for this medical claim, other than the two authors of the case report: Dr. George Delgado and Dr. Mary Davenport. The state eventually removed Delgado as its legal expert and determined Davenport was also unqualified as an expert witness, as their case study report did not constitute adequate evidence. That left Arizona with exactly zero experts to verify the ’science’ behind this new law. So, the Arizona Attorney General’s Office started fishing for experts. Emails obtained by Rewire through a public records request show that staff attorneys reached out to anti-choice political groups to find qualified medical experts to defend the law. We discovered that several of the experts recommended to the state are known as outspoken anti-choice advocates who use their medical or academic credentials to further discredited or baseless scientific theories into public policy. Some of them are featured in Rewire’s newly updated False Witnesses series, which identifies the tight-knit group of anti-choice activists and advocates who have succeeded in putting forth myths and bogus science that have made their way into statute and legal precedent.” [Rewire, 3/22/17]
In October 2015, Aaron Baer, A Former Policy Adviser To Arizona’s Attorney General, Reached Out To The Susan B. Anthony List, Who Forwarded The Request To David Prentice, Head Of The Research Arm Of The SBA List. According to Rewire, “Public email records show that in October 2015, Aaron Baer, a former policy adviser to Arizona’s attorney general, reached out to the Susan B. Anthony (SBA) List, a lobbying group in Washington, D.C., that works to help elect politicians with anti-choice agendas. The group spearheaded the so-called Pro-Life Court Coalition organized in February to support President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch. The SBA List forwarded the request to David Prentice, who heads up the research department at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, the self-described education and research arm of the SBA List. The Charlotte Lozier Institute houses a cabinet of associate scholars who pen papers for the organization on subjects ranging from abortion-funding restrictions to medically assisted suicide. False Witnesses Byron Calhoun, Maureen Condic, Jacqueline Harvey, Donna Harrison, and Michael New are all Charlotte Lozier associate scholars. Prentice is a professor of molecular genetics. Prior to taking his role as the vice president and research director for the Charlotte Lozier Institute in 2015, Prentice spent the better part of a decade as the senior fellow and director for life sciences at the conservative Family Research Council, lobbying on issues related to stem cell research and cloning.” [Rewire, 3/22/17]
Prentice Informed The Office That He Couldn’t Find A Steroid Biochemist To Recommend For Their Case, But Could Recommend Statisticians. According to Rewire, “Prentice promised to help the Arizona Attorney General’s Office find a qualified steroid biochemist—the relevant expertise required to testify in support of the abortion-reversal law. Specifically, Baer asked Prentice in an October 9, 2015 email to help him find ‘someone who can discuss the interaction between mifepristone and progesterone.’ Prentice ultimately informed the office that he couldn’t find a steroid biochemist to recommend for their case. He did, however, recommend New and the Family Research Council’s Henry Potrykus, both statisticians, who could potentially provide a meta-analysis of available research for the state.” [Rewire, 3/22/17]