Progress Arizona doesn't need to target abortion justices on the ballot; we’ll remember

I understand why the group Progress Arizona says it will work to unseat two Arizona Supreme Court justices who recently upheld a near-total abortion ban from 1864.

But I don’t believe it’s necessary.

In fact, I’d like it very much if no organized group of any kind said anything about the Justices Clint Bolick and Kathryn H. King, who sided with Justices John R. Lopez IV and James P. Beene to restore the barbaric 19th century law.

Bolick and King both will be on the ballot in November. As voters here know, Arizona requires judges to periodically appear on the ballot in order to be retained — or not — by voters.

Voters rarely keep track of judges. This will be the exception

Judges are almost always retained, mostly because it is impossible for voters to get any clear understanding of a long list of names on the ballot that they don’t recognize. This will not be the case in November. At least for Bolick and King.

After the Arizona Supreme Court decided that a 160-year-old abortion ban with no exceptions for rape or incest, and which puts abortion facilitators in prison for years, could go into effect, Arizona voters who care about women’s reproductive health care took notice.

In a big way.

So big that people like Republican U.S. Senate candidate Kari Lake, who called the 1864 monstrosity a “great law” began backpedaling almost immediately. (Though no one is buying it.) Donald Trump did the same thing, going from anti-abortion zealot to now saying Arizona has gone too far.

Republican lawmakers have a scheme to save the judges' jobs

Actually, the people who have gone too far are the Republicans who control the Arizona Legislature.

They’ve cooked up a scheme to put a referendum on the ballot that would give judges lifetime terms with no more periodic review from voters. Not only that, but the resolution has a provision in it that makes it retroactively effective to Oct. 31, 2024, meaning that any judge voted off the bench on Nov. 5, 2024 — hmmm, whom might that be? — would be able to keep his or her job

It won’t work, except perhaps to further anger and motivate voters already angry over the court’s decision.

In the lead-up to the election, voters here also will hear a lot about the citizen initiative called the Arizona Abortion Access Act. The groups behind it said in early April they had collected over 500,000 signatures from voters in favor of the constitutional amendment that would permanently restore abortion rights.

Progress Arizona's Abigail Jackson said of that group’s campaign to vote out the two justices, "In extraordinary circumstances like the ones we are in today, removing judges who serve ideology over the people is not just a constitutional right, it is a civic duty. It’s up to voters to preserve the integrity and balance of the judicial system.”

Wow. Allowing voters – not politicians – to make important decisions. What a concept.

Reach Montini at ed.montini@arizonarepublic.com.

For more opinions content, please subscribe.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Group need not target abortion justices for election. We’ll remember