Anti-abortion AZ Supreme Court justice rebuffs abortion rights group's recusal calls

An Arizona Supreme Court justice who publicly opposed the state's largest abortion provider before he was named to the bench has declined to step aside in a case involving an abortion rights ballot measure.

Justice William "Bill" Montgomery said in an order on Tuesday he would not recuse himself from the case that deals with a description of the ballot measure that will be mailed to voters later this year. The case is being expedited to meet timelines related to the Nov. 5 election.

The "responsibility to perform my duties with honor and integrity and with fidelity to my oath of office is paramount to any opinion or feeling about any issue that may come before the Court, including this one," Montgomery wrote.

Arizona for Abortion Access, the campaign behind the Arizona Abortion Access Act, asked Montgomery to step aside a day earlier. It noted his past comments, made while he was the Maricopa County attorney, opposing abortion and provider Planned Parenthood.

The campaign argued because Montgomery stepped aside under pressure in another abortion case earlier this year, he should do so again.

But the justice, appointed to the bench by Republican Gov. Doug Ducey in 2019, quickly declined to do so.

Montgomery wrote that the ballot measure case "does not involve either of the parties" nor those same legal issues as the prior case that temporarily reinstated a pre-statehood abortion ban. Planned Parenthood was a named party in that case. While the organization is not a named party in the lawsuit over language, it is one of the leading groups behind the campaign and one of the biggest financial backers of the ballot measure.

Based on that difference and case law, the previous recusal "is not relevant to these present proceedings," he wrote.

In a statement, Arizona for Abortion Access noted Montgomery didn't deny making anti-abortion statements, including comparing abortion to "atrocities" and "genocide."

"Instead, he took less than 24 hours to deny our motion for recusal by saying little more than 'trust me,'" the statement said. "We think the Code of Judicial Conduct requires more than that and are disappointed, but we will stay vigilant and hold him to his promise to be impartial. We look forward to prevailing in this appeal as we did in the trial court."

The case pending before the Arizona Supreme Court will determine what language goes into a voter pamphlet that explains the ballot measure. The pamphlet is mailed by the Arizona Secretary of State's Office, but the language is approved by a Republican-majority legislative committee.

State law says the description must be impartial, and a Maricopa County judge previously said the approved description using the term "unborn human being" did not meet that bar. The county court ordered a new description be drafted; Republican House Speaker Ben Toma and Senate President Warren Petersen filed the appeal in the interim.

Petersen said there was no reason Montgomery should step aside.

"Every justice has an opinion on abortion," Petersen wrote in a text message. "The issue is can they apply the law impartially. Montgomery is a good man. He will perform his job with integrity."

In a separate court case, Arizona for Abortion Access won a Monday ruling that stopped an attempt to keep it off the November ballot.

Reach reporter Stacey Barchenger at [email protected] or 480-416-5669.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Justice Bill Montgomery rebuffs abortion rights group's recusal calls