Hobbs won't take sides on ousting justices over abortion ruling

PHOENIX — Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs says she won’t take sides on whether two Arizona Supreme Court justices should be retained or removed by voters in November.

That’s even though she would like, of course, to have the chance to put two people of her choice on the court. “No governor’s going to turn that down, for sure,’’ she told Capitol Media Services.

But Hobbs said she isn’t going to weigh in on whether justices Clint Bolick and Kathryn King, who have to stand for election in November, should be retained for six-year terms, or removed, which would let her put her imprint on the court by replacing them. That, she said, is a decision people will have to make when they fill out their ballots.

Ditto, Hobbs said, on whether they should be ousted based on their ruling last month on the state’s 1864 abortion law. Bolick and King provided two of the four votes on the six-member court to uphold that old law.

But Hobbs also suggested she is opposed to a measure pushed by Republican Sen. David Gowan to alter the Arizona Constitution to strip voters of their authority to keep or oust sitting judges.

“I am glad that we have a chance at retention elections and voters can make their feelings known about it,’’ she said.

If voters do decide to oust Bolick and King, that would create two vacancies for Hobbs to fill, which could change the political balance on the court. If Bolick and King — both appointees of Republican former Gov. Doug Ducey — were not there, the April 9 court ruling on abortion might have been different.

That’s because two of the six justices sitting on the case — Republican William Montgomery recused himself — sided with Planned Parenthood and its arguments that a 2022 law allowing abortions up to 15 weeks of pregnancy superseded the 1864 law. Hobbs appointees might have sided with them and the vote could have been 4-2 to nullify the territorial-era law.

The question of whether Hobbs gets to make her mark on the state’s high court — she has not named a justice — is not occurring in a vacuum.

Progress Arizona, a progressive political action committee, has launched a drive to convince Arizonans to vote “no’’ when they are asked in November whether Bolick and King deserve a six-year term.

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

“Voters across the board are angry about this (abortion) ruling,’’ the organization’s Abigail Jackson told Capitol Media Services. “This decision is not in line with what voters want.’’

Jackson said it’s irrelevant whether people believe the majority reached the right legal conclusion about the interplay between the territorial-era that outlaws abortion except to save the life of the mother and the more recent 15-week statute.

“If Arizona voters want to use the power that the constitution gives them to hold them accountable, and their main concern is this ruling, then I think voters are within their rights and power to do so,’’ she said.

This also comes against the backdrop of Gowan’s measure to change the system.

Right now, all Supreme Court justices stand for election on a retain-or-reject basis two years after they are first picked. If voters approve, they get six year terms.

That system, approved by voters in 1974, is what is forcing Bolick and King to face voters in November.

Gowan’s measure, by contrast, would ask voters to alter the system so that, once chosen, Supreme Court justices could serve until they reach mandatory retirement age of 70 pretty much without having to fear they might be turned out of office.

Gowan, of Sierra Vista, has ushered the measure through the Republican-controlled Senate on a party-line vote. But its future is uncertain as it is currently stalled in the House.