Tag: legislators
Reproductive Health Care Rights

Conservative State Courts Stir Trouble For GOP Legislators On Abortion

Abortion opponents have maneuvered in courthouses for years to end access to reproductive health care. In Arizona last week, a win for the anti-abortion camp caused political blowback for Republican candidates in the state and beyond.

The reaction echoed the response to an Alabama Supreme Court decision over in vitro fertilization just two months before.

The election-year ruling by the Arizona Supreme Court allowing enforcement of a law from 1864 banning nearly all abortions startled Republican politicians, some of whom quickly turned to social media to denounce it.

The court decision was yet another development forcing many Republicans legislators and candidates to thread the needle: Maintain support among anti-abortion voters while not damaging their electoral prospects this fall. This shifting power dynamic between state judges and state lawmakers has turned into a high-stakes political gamble, at times causing daunting problems, on a range of reproductive health issues, for Republican candidates up and down the ballot.

“When the U.S. Supreme Court said give it back to the states, OK, well now the microscope is on the states,” said Jennifer Piatt, co-director of the Center for Public Health Law and Policy at Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. “We saw this in Alabama with the IVF decision,” she said, “and now we’re seeing it in Arizona.”

Multiple Republicans have criticized the Arizona high court’s decision on the 1864 law, which allows abortion only to save a pregnant woman’s life. “This decision cannot stand. I categorically reject rolling back the clock to a time when slavery was still legal and where we could lock up women and doctors because of an abortion,” state Rep. Matt Gress said in a video April 9. All four Arizona Supreme Court justices who said the long-dormant Arizona abortion ban could be enforced were appointed by former Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican who in 2016 expanded the number of state Supreme Court justices from five to seven and cemented the bench’s conservative majority.

Yet in a post the day of the ruling on the social platform X, Ducey said the decision “is not the outcome I would have preferred.”

The irony is that the decision came after years of efforts by Arizona Republicans “to lock in a conservative majority on the court at the same time that the state’s politics were shifting more towards the middle,” said Douglas Keith, senior counsel at the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice.

All the while, anti-abortion groups have been pressuring Republicans to clearly define where they stand.

“Whether running for office at the state or federal level, Arizona Republicans cannot adopt the losing ostrich strategy of burying their heads in the sand on the issue of abortion and allowing Democrats to define them,” Kelsey Pritchard, a spokesperson for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in an emailed statement. “To win, Republicans must be clear on the pro-life protections they support, express compassion for women and unborn children, and contrast their position with the Democrat agenda.”

Two months before the Arizona decision, the Alabama Supreme Court said frozen embryos from in vitro fertilization can be considered children under state law. The decision prompted clinics across the state to halt fertility treatments and caused a nationwide uproar over reproductive health rights. With Republicans feeling the heat, Alabama lawmakers scrambled to pass a law to shield IVF providers from prosecution and civil lawsuits “for the damage to or death of an embryo” during treatment.

But when it comes to courts, Arizona lawmakers are doubling down: state Supreme Court justices are appointed by the governor but generally face voters every six years in retention elections. That could soon change. A constitutional amendment referred by the Arizona Legislature that could appear on the November ballot would eliminate those regular elections—triggering them only under limited circumstances—and allow the justices to serve as long as they exhibit “good behavior.” Effectively it would grant justices lifetime appointments until age 70, when they must retire.

Even with the backlash against the Arizona court’s abortion decision, Keith said, “I suspect there aren’t Republicans in the state right now who are lamenting all these changes to entrench a conservative majority on the Supreme Court.”

Meanwhile, abortion rights groups are trying to get a voter-led state constitutional amendment on the ballot that would protect abortion access until fetal viability and allow abortions afterward to protect the life or health of the pregnant person.

State court decisions are causing headaches even at the very top of the Republican ticket. In an announcement in which he declined to endorse a national abortion ban, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump on April 8 said he was “proudly the person responsible” for ending Roe v. Wade, which recognized a federal constitutional right to abortion before being overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022, and said the issue should be left to states. “The states will determine by vote or legislation, or perhaps both, and whatever they decide must be the law of the land,” he said. But just two days later he sought to distance himself from the Arizona decision. Trump also praised the Alabama Legislature for enacting the law aiming to preserve access to fertility treatments. “The Republican Party should always be on the side of the miracle of life,” he said.

Recent court decisions on reproductive health issues in Alabama, Arizona, and Florida will hardly be the last. The Iowa Supreme Court, which underwent a conservative overhaul in recent years, on April 11, heard arguments on the state’s near-total abortion ban. Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds signed it into law in 2023 but it has been blocked in court.

In Florida, there was disappointment all around after dueling state Supreme Court decisions this month that simultaneously paved the way for a near-total abortion ban and also allowed a ballot measure that would enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution to proceed.

The Florida high court’s decisions were “simply unacceptable when five of the current seven sitting justices on the court were appointed by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis,” Andrew Shirvell, executive director of the anti-abortion group Florida Voice for the Unborn, said in a statement. “Clearly, grassroots pro-life advocates have been misled by elements within the ‘pro-life, pro-family establishment’ because Florida’s highest court has now revealed itself to be a paper tiger when it comes to standing-up to the murderous abortion industry.”

Tension between state judicial systems and conservative legislators seems destined to continue, given judges’ growing power over reproductive health access, Piatt said, with people on both sides of the political aisle asking: “Is this a court that is potentially going to give me politically what I’m looking for?”

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Stalled Progress For Women In State Legislatures

Stalled Progress For Women In State Legislatures

By Rebecca Beitsch, Stateline.org (TNS)

WASHINGTON — In 2015, female candidates for state legislative seats are just as likely to win as their male competitors. The challenge is getting them to run.

A quarter of the nation’s state legislators are women. That’s up dramatically from the 5 percent figure of the early 1970s. But the percentage hasn’t budged much in more than a decade, prompting many to question what can be done to encourage more women to seek state elective office.

Party leaders are less likely to recruit female candidates — and women are less likely than men to run without being asked. Many younger women worry about balancing a political career with family obligations. And because Republicans have been less successful in recruiting female candidates, their recent dominance at the state level has contributed to the stalled progress.

It may not take a woman to speak up on issues that are important to women, but state legislators and researchers who have studied the issue say regardless of party, women often bring a different working style and more varied life perspectives to the legislative arena, in addition to a stronger focus on women, children and family issues.

“Women bring different perspectives and considerations,” said Kira Sanbonmatsu, a Rutgers University professor who studies women in politics.

Many political observers have credited women with helping to end the 2013 federal government shutdown, generally describing women as better at setting aside egos to get work done.

But even with the good qualities they may bring to politics, women tend to be more hesitant to seek office.

“Women just don’t wake up one day and look at themselves in the mirror the way men quite frankly do and say, ‘I should run for office,’” said Liz Berry, who recruits many candidates through her role as state president of the National Women’s Political Caucus of Washington.

Jennifer Lawless, director of the Women and Politics Institute at American University, agreed. “Women don’t assess themselves the same way when deciding if they’re qualified for office,” she said. “They perceive themselves as being less qualified.”

Many women agree to run after being recruited, but that requires parties and state legislators to reach out to them. Most party leaders and legislators are white men, and when they look for recruits, they turn first to people like them.

“Women are less likely to run unless they’re recruited, and they’re less likely to be recruited,” said Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University.

Another challenge is that it takes more time to convince female recruits to take the plunge, which means recruiters have to be determined — and patient.

“When women first think about running up until the time that they actually run is about three years. For men, it’s about three weeks,” said Washington state Sen. Christine Rolfes, who helps recruit Democratic candidates in her state.

Many recruited women delay candidacies because they worry about how their families will be affected, especially if their children are young. Even as men take on a greater share of family responsibilities, research shows that in most households, women still bear the heavier load. Convincing them that they can balance their legislative, professional and family duties — not to mention addressing their concerns about unpleasant political realities like negative campaigning and constant fundraising — takes time.

Some state legislatures are full-time while others are part-time, but the structure of the legislature doesn’t have much impact on the percentage of female members. Either way, it’s a time commitment that many women are reluctant to make.

When she was first approached to run for office, Rolfes’ children were toddlers, and she said the thought of leaving them “made me sick to my stomach. But when they were a little older I was ready.”

Rolfes, whose children are now in high school, is one of the few female Washington state legislators with children at home. For women who want to rise through the political ranks, delaying a run until their children are older can be costly, because they don’t have as much time to earn the seniority that delivers real power — and often the chance to run for a higher office.

The percentage of female state legislators varies widely from state to state — but in no state do women make up close to 50 percent.

Walsh said women tend to do better in states where recruiting is focused more at the local, rather than the state, level, but there are geographic and cultural differences as well.

The Northeast and the West have had more success in getting women to serve as lawmakers. The Northeast has more citizen legislatures, where legislators represent fewer people, and the role isn’t viewed as a profession, so people cycle in and out more, Walsh said. In the West, the relatively high percentage of female lawmakers may have its origins in a settlers’ culture in which women and men worked side by side. Western states also were among the first to grant voting rights to women.

States legislatures in the conservative South, where traditional gender roles hold greater sway, have the lowest percentages of women.

Until recently, Republican Sen. Katrina Shealy was the only woman in the South Carolina Senate. Shealy said most of her colleagues have been respectful — but not all of them. Shealy’s said her neighbor on the Senate floor, Republican Sen. Tom Corbin, often made comments to her, once joking about her wearing shoes, saying women should be barefoot and pregnant. During a dinner where reporters were present, he referred to women as a “lesser cut of meat.”

“I always told him to stop, and I didn’t treat it like a joke, but I didn’t say anything else because I didn’t want to come off like I was whining because I was the only girl in the room, and I can’t take care of myself,” she said. But once his comments became public, “I had to respond because you have to say something for all the women that will come behind you.”

Shealy later addressed the Senate, saying, “These type remarks are never acceptable in public or in private. … (W)hether the person speaking them thinks they are in jest or not, these words are hurtful and disrespectful. We are all created equal and, as such, deserve respect.”

A second female senator, Democrat Margie Bright Matthews, recently joined Shealy. Matthews was elected to replace state Sen. Clementa Pinckney, who was killed in last June’s mass shooting at a Charleston church. Shealy said she has reached out to Matthews to work on some of the children’s issues Shealy is most passionate about, hopeful that partnering on legislation will help it get passed.

Cary Brown, director of Vermont’s Commission on Women, credits the small size of the state’s districts for its relatively high percentage of female legislators. In tiny Vermont, women can campaign among their neighbors and don’t have to travel far to get to the Capitol. Nevertheless, few women there have been elected to a statewide or federal office.

“We have over 40 percent women in the state Legislature, but we’ve never sent a woman to Washington, so we’ve still got work to do,” Brown said.

In Washington, the percentage of female legislators has dropped, from 40 percent in 2001 to 33 percent now. “We stopped putting so much effort into recruiting, and it was a big mistake,” said Berry, of the women’s political caucus.

Sixty percent of female state legislators are Democrats, while 40 percent are Republicans. More than a third of Democratic state legislators are women, compared with less than a fifth of Republicans. Given those disparities, Republican gains at the state level over the past decade may be one reason the overall percentage of women in state legislatures has been stuck at 25 percent.

More women are registered as Democrats, but the GOP also has been less active in recruiting female candidates and has lagged behind the Democratic Party in providing trainings, PACs and support targeted to women, Walsh said.

©2015 Stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Photo: 112th United States Congress via Wikipedia