An Arizona judge has struck down several abortion restrictions, ruling that the laws violate the state constitution and conflict with new voter-approved protections passed in 2024.
On Friday Feb. 7th, Maricopa Superior Court Judge Gregory Como invalidated three state laws that limited abortion access in Arizona. Among the restrictions eliminated was a ban on telemedicine abortions, meaning patients will now have expanded access to abortion care through virtual consultations and medication delivered by mail.
Judge Como ruled that the restrictions were written before Arizona voters approved a constitutional amendment in 2024 that established abortion access as a protected right. In his decision, Como said the laws interfered with what he described as Arizonans’ “fundamental right to abortion under Arizona law.” He also noted that the restrictions did not provide meaningful benefits to patient health.
In his written ruling, Como argued that the laws infringed on women’s ability to make private medical decisions. He said the measures forced certain procedures and required disclosure of information even when those steps were not medically necessary or desired by the patient. The judge wrote that the laws disrupted a woman’s “autonomous decision making” and placed unnecessary barriers in the way of obtaining care.
The ruling affects multiple restrictions that had shaped abortion access in the state for years. Those laws included requirements such as forcing patients to undergo an ultrasound at least 24 hours before receiving an abortion. They also included a rule that required patients to make two separate trips to a clinic—one for in-person counseling and another for the procedure itself. Another restriction blocked abortion medication from being mailed to patients, limiting access for those who rely on remote care or have trouble traveling.
Supporters of the laws criticized the decision and argued the restrictions were meant to protect health and safety. Arizona House Speaker Steve Montenegro and Senate President Warren Petersen, both Republicans, defended the regulations and suggested abortion-rights advocates were using the state constitution to remove safeguards. Petersen’s office told The Associated Press that the state plans to appeal Judge Como’s ruling.
The lawsuit was filed by two Arizona OB-GYN doctors and the Arizona Medical Association, who argued that the restrictions made abortion care more difficult to access and directly violated the constitutional amendment approved by voters. The American Civil Liberties Union and its Arizona affiliate also joined the case as plaintiffs. In a statement, the ACLU said the restrictions were medically unnecessary and had long created obstacles for people seeking abortion care in the state.
The ACLU also warned that despite voter-approved protections, lawmakers are continuing efforts to limit abortion access through additional legislation.
Advocates praised the ruling as a significant step forward. Kimya Forouzan, a policy adviser for the Guttmacher Institute, called the decision a major win for abortion seekers in Arizona. She said the ruling would reduce delays and remove requirements that do not improve medical care, while expanding options like telehealth.
The decision comes amid broader shifts in abortion policy across the country following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Since then, states have taken dramatically different approaches, with some voters choosing to protect abortion rights through ballot measures, while others have supported tighter restrictions.
