
Arizona lawmakers on Wednesday (Apr 24) voted on a critical bill seeking to repeal an 1864 ban on abortion that was slated to go into effect next month. In a 32-28 vote, Arizona's House of Representatives have voted 'yes' to the repeal.
The bill will now move to the next stage, where the Arizona state Senate must vote to repeal the bill before the 160-year-old ban is knocked down.
On April 9, the Arizona Supreme Court revived a more than a century-old strict ban on abortion.
The nearly 160-year-oldlaw holds no exceptions for rape or incest. It places a blanket ban and criminalises the medical procedure of abortion throughout pregnancy. The only exception is if the pregnancy puts the mother's life at risk.
The ban could take effect within 60 days of the top state court ruling unless the legislature intervenes, reports Reuters.
Currently, the state enforces an abortion ban beyond 15 weeks of pregnancy. This is because of ongoing legal delays preventing the full implementation of the 1864 law.
Arizona Democrats have twice already attempted to repeal the ban but were snubbed by Republicans.
Also read |Arizona Republicans thwart attempt to repeal archaic 160-year-old abortion ban once again
In America, the political landscape around abortion has become particularly charged since the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. This decision led to significant electoral repercussions for Republicans during the 2022 midterms and was credited with slowing a much-promised "red wave".
With the 2024 elections fast approaching, the voter temper in the 2022 midterms has prompted several Republican leaders to shift their stance and be more moderate regarding abortion.
Watch |US: Arizona reinstates 160-year-old Abortion ban
Notably, after the Arizona top court’s decision last week, Senator Shawnna Bolick, who is married to a Supreme Court Justice who supported the old ban, called on her colleagues to repeal the ban.
Even Donald Trump, who takes the credit for the overturning of Roe V. Wade, said that he believed the 1864 ban goes too far and suggested it will be "straightened out".
(With inputs from agencies)