Skip to main content

Litigation

Since the United States Supreme Court overturned its earlier decision recognizing a federal constitutional right to abortion, there has been a lot of litigation, both in Arizona and around the country, related to reproductive rights. Get an overview of some of those cases below.

Gill, et al. v. State (Maricopa County Superior Court) 

Issue 

The plaintiffs in this case are Advanced Practice Nurses (“APNs”) who have sued to invalidate a variety of Arizona statutes and regulations that prevent or limit APNs from providing abortion care.  The full list of laws challenged by plaintiffs is:

  • A.R.S. § 32-1606(B)(12)
  • A.R.S. §§ 36-449.03(C)(3), (D)(5), (G)(4)-(5), (G)(5), (G)(8) & (H)(2)
  • A.R.S. §§ 36-2152(A), (B), (H) & (M)
  • A.R.S. §§ 36- 2153(A), (C) & E
  • A.R.S. § 36-2155 
  • A.R.S. § 36-2156(A) 
  • A.R.S. § 36-2158(A) 
  • A.R.S. § 36-2160(A)
  • A.R.S. §§ 36-2161(A)(16)-(17), (A)(20)-(21) & (D) 
  • A.R.S. §§ 36-2162.01(A) & (C) 
  • A.A.C. R9-10-1507(B)(2)-(3) 
  • A.A.C. R9-10-1509(A)(2), (B)(1), (B)(5), (C), (D)(3)(a) & (J) 

Background 

In February 2026, several APNs filed this lawsuit to challenge those laws under the Arizona Constitution.  AG Mayes is evaluating her position on the constitutionality of the laws. 
President of the Arizona Senate Warren Petersen and Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives Steve Montenegro have intervened in the lawsuit to defend the laws. The litigation is ongoing. 

Isaacson, et al. v. State (Arizona Court of Appeals) 

Issue 

This case is a challenge to multiple Arizona laws related to abortion, including statues that prohibit certain reasons for seeking an abortion; statutes requiring in-person notices, an ultrasound, and lab testing at least 24-hours prior to any abortion, resulting in a required two trips to receive care; and statutes that ban physicians from using telemedicine related to abortion care and prohibit sending abortion medications in the mail. The full list of laws challenged by the plaintiffs is:

  • A.R.S. § 13-3603.02
  • A.R.S. §§ 36-449.03(D) & (G)(5)
  • A.R.S. §§ 36-2153(A) & (F) 
  • A.R.S. § 36-2156(A)
  • A.R.S. § 36-2157
  • A.R.S. § 36-2158(A)
  • A.R.S. § 36-2160(B)
  • A.R.S. § 36-2161(A)(25) 
  • A.R.S. § 36-2162.01 
  • A.R.S. § 36-3604
  • A.A.C. R9-10-1501(8)
  • A.A.C R9-10-1509(A)-(E)(1)

Background

In May 2025, several healthcare providers filed this lawsuit to challenge these laws under the Arizona Constitution.  Attorney General Mayes carefully analyzed the laws under the new constitutional amendment and agreed that they are now unconstitutional under the Arizona Constitution’s new legal standard for laws that regulate abortion. 

President of the Arizona Senate Warren Petersen and Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives Steve Montenegro (“Legislative Leadership”) intervened in the lawsuit to defend the laws.

On February 6, 2026, the Maricopa County Superior Court declared all of the challenged laws unconstitutional and permanently enjoined the State from implementing and enforcing them. Legislative Leadership has appealed that ruling to the Arizona Court of Appeals, so the issue is not conclusively resolved. But in the meantime, the challenged laws are not currently enforceable. 

Reuss, et al. v. State (Maricopa County superior court) 

This case challenged several Arizona statutes (A.R.S. §§ 36-2321–2326) that prohibited abortions after 15 weeks and penalized health care providers who performed such abortions.  

In December 2024, several healthcare providers challenged these laws, arguing that they were now unlawful under Arizona’s new constitutional amendment providing a fundamental right to abortion.

The Attorney General agreed that those statues plainly violated the new constitutional amendment, and in March 2025, the Arizona trial court declared the statutes unconstitutional and enjoined the State from implementing or enforcing them in the future.  

Disclaimers

This website is not intended to be legal advice and creates no attorney-client relationship between readers and the Attorney General’s Office. This website is not an exhaustive explanation of all abortion-related information and does not provide medical advice. Patients should always consult with licensed medical providers to answer their questions. The law is in flux and may change; this website will be updated as reasonably appropriate to reflect relevant developments in the law.