Issues: Litigation Center

In the Courts

Center for Arizona Policy (CAP) has been involved in the passage of 136 bills to date; however, the fight to defend life, marriage and family, and religious freedom does not end with the governor's signature on a bill. Our opponents continue to file lawsuits challenging CAP-supported laws in order to prevent them from being enforced.

CAP's Involvement

CAP's involvement in these lawsuits is usually one of support, and we are often used as a resource for compiling legislative history, expert testimony, and research. Additionally, CAP continues to be in a position to submit amicus briefs (friend of the court briefs), which allow for CAP's voice to be heard in these court battles.

CAP-Supported Legislation Being Litigated

Connolly v. Roche (originally Connolly v. Brewer)

Description:

Issue: Whether Arizona's constitutional definition of marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.

Current Status:

On October 17, 2014, District Court Judge John Sedwick struck down Arizona’s marriage amendment. Then-Attorney General Tom Horne filed a notice of appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals following the Sixth Circuit Court’s upholding of the constitutionality of one man, one woman marriage. This case is stayed, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s impending decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Notes:

Relevant URLs:

For Marriage Supporters: Grief Yes, Despair No via http://www.azpolicy.org/newsroom/for-marriage-supporters-grief-yes-despair-no 

4 Same-Sex Couples File Suit on Marriage via http://ktar.com/305/1690056/Samesex-marriages-again-an-issue-in-Arizona  

Planned Parenthood v. Humble (Federal Court Case)

Description:

Issue: Whether Arizona's requirement that chemical abortions be administered according to the Food and Drug Administration Protocol is unconstitutional and imposes an undue burden on a woman's right to an abortion.

Current Status:

District Court Judge David Bury upheld the law in April 2014, but an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals resulted in the law being struck down on June 3, 2014. Arizona appealed that decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, and on December 15, 2014 the Court declined to review the Ninth Circuit’s decision to issue a preliminary injunction and halt the law from taking effect. Although not finished, this case is stayed, pending the outcome of the state court case focusing on the same law.

Notes:

Relevant URLs:

Going Rogue: Ninth Circuit Bucks Legal Precedent by Blocking AZ Law via http://www.azpolicy.org/newsroom/going-rogue-ninth-circuit-bucks-legal-precedent-by-blocking-az-law 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal blocks Arizona Law via http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2014/06/03/arizona-abortion-law-blocked-appeals-court/9917647 

To read Americans United for Life's amicus curiae brief submitted on behalf of 32 Arizona legislators in support of this CAP-supported law, click here.

Planned Parenthood Once Again Puts Profits Before People via http://www.azpolicy.org/newsroom/planned-parenthood-once-again-puts-profits-before-people

Planned Parenthood Loses. Arizona Women Win. via http://www.azpolicy.org/newsroom/planned-parenthood-loses-arizona-women-win

Arizona Women Deserve Better via http://www.azpolicy.org/newsroom/Arizona-Women-Deserve-Better

Circuit Court to Hear Abortion Drug Ban via http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/arizona/politics/article_cbd8b560-da1c-11e3-8d21-001a4bcf887a.html

Court to Decide on Abortion Drug Ban via http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2014/05/12/court-hear-arizona-abortion-drug-limits-case/9019949

Federal Appellate Judges to Determine if Abortion Drugs Should be Used According to FDA Protocol via http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2014/05/13/a-flaw-in-the-argument-federal-judges-question-arizonas-restrictions-on-medication-abortion

Majors v. Jeanes (originally Majors v. Horne)

Description:

Issue: Whether Arizona's constitutional definition of marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.

Current Status:

On the same day Judge Sedwick decided Connolly v. Roche, he also struck down Arizona’s marriage amendment in this case. Then-Attorney General Horne filed a notice of appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for this case, and this case is also stayed, pending the outcome of the Obergefell v. Hodges case at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Notes:

Relevant URLs:

Lawsuit Challenges Arizona's Constitutional Marriage Amendment via http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/13/arizona-same-sex-marriage-lawsuit/6378435

Same-Sex Couples Challenge Arizona's Constitutional Definition of Marriage via http://www.citizenlink.com/2014/03/14/same-sex-couples-challenge-arizonas-constitutional-marriage-amendment

NAACP v. Horne

Description:

Issue: Whether Arizona's prohibition of abortions based on race or gender violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.

Current Status:

District Court Judge David Campbell dismissed the lawsuit in October 2013 for lack of standing. That decision was then appealed by the ACLU to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and as of July 16, 2014, the case has been fully briefed. There is no timetable for when the court will make a decision on this case.

Notes:

Relevant URLs:

Challenge Against Law Prohibiting Race and Gender Based Abortions via http://www.adfmedia.org/News/PRDetail/8539

Planned Parenthood v. Brnovich

Description:

Issue: Whether requiring abortion providers to inform women prior to obtaining abortion that the effects of a medication abortion may be reversible but that time is of the essence is unconstitutional and a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Current Status:

Planned Parenthood filed the legal challenge on June 4, 2015, less than one month before the law was set to take effect. A hearing was initially set for June 23, 2015 before District Court Judge Steven Logan to determine whether the law would be allowed to take effect. To ensure the availability of the state’s witnesses for the court hearing, the state agreed to temporarily not enforce the law and the hearing is rescheduled for October 21-23, 2015.

Notes:

Relevant URLs: