ÃÛÌÒÓ°ÏñAV

There are a number of laws Planned Parenthood believes are no longer valid in the wake of voter approval in November of Proposition 139, Erika Mach, a spokeswoman for the organization, said Tuesday.

That measure enshrined a “fundamental right’’ to terminate a pregnancy in the Arizona Constitution. It was cited by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Frank Moskowitz just a week ago when he declared that a statutory limit of 15 weeks on abortion could no longer be enforced.

But dozens of other restrictions remain on the books. And Mach said lawyers for Planned Parenthood Advocates, the lobbying and legal arm of the organization, are combing through them now to determine which are ripe for legal challenge.

One likely candidate for litigation is a law that requires women to wait for 24 hours between seeking the procedure and it being performed. Mach said there is no medical reason for that delay.

She also pointed to requirements in existing law that require abortion providers to report details on pregnant women in the state. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs already asked lawmakers in December to repeal that, calling it “government surveillance’’ of medical decisions.

So far, though, not a single measure to end abortion restrictions or reporting has advanced in the Republican-controlled Legislature. In fact, GOP lawmakers are moving in the opposite direction, proposing new regulations and seeking to deny funding for Planned Parenthood for the non-abortion services it also provides to patients, including birth control and testing for sexually transmitted infections.

And with legislation to repeal existing laws stalled, that pretty much leaves litigation as the only option.

Key to all of this is the scope of Prop. 139.

On one hand, it bars the state from adopting or enforcing any law or regulation that denies, restricts or interferes with the right to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability “unless justified by a compelling state interest that is achieved by the least restrictive means.’’

The constitutional amendment does give lawmakers some additional latitude to regulate abortions in cases of abortion after viability, generally considered between 22 and 24 weeks. But that is overridden if a treating health-care professional determines the procedure is necessary to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.

Mach said there appear to be some existing laws that clearly fall outside the role of what the initiative preserves as the power of legislators to regulate.

“We have over 40 restrictions still on the books,’’ she said.

“This includes the 24-hour waiting period, reporting restrictions, tele-health ban, et cetera, all unnecessary restrictions that just don’t allow people to gain full access to abortion care,’’ Mach said. “So we are evaluating with partners and the Planned Parenthood Federation so that we can strategically move forward.’’

That waiting period and prohibition against tele-health abortion care, she said, have a particular impact on those who live outside the main population areas where Planned Parenthood or others have staff to provide abortion services.

Mach said there is no reason for a woman to have to personally visit a doctor to get a prescription for mifepristone, a medication used to terminate a pregnancy in the first 10 weeks. She said a woman should be able to have a remote consultation with a doctor, and one visit, and be sent the drugs.

Yet this comes as the House voted a week ago to impose even more restrictions on medication abortions.

Approved on a party-line vote, House Bill 2681 would require doctors to independently and personally verify a pregnancy exists, determine the patient’s blood type, impose new documentation requirements and inform the patient “of possible physical and psychological aftereffects’’ of the drug. That measure by Rep. Rachel Keshel, R-Tucson, now awaits Senate action.

“It is absurd that we are still voting on bills to restrict access to your reproductive rights when the voters spoke so loud and clear in November,’’ said Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton. The Tucson Democrat said she expects the governor to “put those bills where they belong.’’

Gubernatorial press aide Christian Slater said Hobbs has not specifically reviewed this legislation. But he said she has made it clear she will refuse to sign any measure that she believes restricts the right of women to have an abortion.