About these laws passed in 1864, Arizona (Heather Cox Richardson)

[Pluvious]

Fascinating, and infuriating, posting today from her newsletter...

In Arizona, Pima County Superior Court Judge Kellie Johnson has restored a law put into effect by Arizona’s Territorial legislature in 1864 and then reworked in 1901 that has been widely interpreted as a ban on all abortions except to save a woman’s life. Oddly, I know quite a bit about the 1864 Arizona Territorial legislature, and its story matters as we think about the attempt to impose its will in modern America.

...

The legislature provided that “No black or mulatto, or Indian, Mongolian, or Asiatic, shall be permitted to [testify in court] against any white person,” thus making it impossible for them to protect their property, their families, or themselves from their white neighbors. It declared that “all marriages between a white person and a [Black person], shall…be absolutely void.”

And it defined the age of consent for sexual intercourse to be just ten years old (even if a younger child had “consented”).

So, in 1864, a legislature of 27 white men created a body of laws that discriminated against Black people and people of color and considered girls as young as 10 able to consent to sex, and they adopted a body of criminal laws written by one single man.

And in 2022, one of those laws is back in force in Arizona.

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/september-24-2022

[Deuxcents]

1. Isn't this law unconstitutional?

[multigraincracker]

2. If it is, it's one giant

can of worms. Unintended consequences?

[Polybius]

4. When Roe was law of the land, yes

With it repealed, apparently not.

[Nevilledog]

3. Thank you! I was looking for this earlier.

[Deuxcents]

5. Seems to me to be blatantly discriminatory

Being based but reworked but not repealed after 150+ years.