Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 1-219 (2026)

Interpretation of laws; unborn child; definition

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

1-219. Interpretation of laws; unborn child; definition

A. The laws of this state shall be interpreted and construed to acknowledge, on behalf of an unborn child at every stage of development, all rights, privileges and immunities available to other persons, citizens and residents of this state, subject only to the Constitution of the United States and decisional interpretations thereof by the United States Supreme Court.

B. This section does not create a cause of action against:

1. A person who performs in vitro fertilization procedures as authorized under the laws of this state.

2. A woman for indirectly harming her unborn child by failing to properly care for herself or by failing to follow any particular program of prenatal care.

C. For the purposes of this section, "unborn child" has the same meaning prescribed in section 36-2151.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2022–2024 · leading case: Planned Parenthood v. Kristin mayes/hazelrigg, 545 P.3d 892 (Ariz. 2024).
Planned Parenthood v. Kristin mayes/hazelrigg, 545 P.3d 892 (Ariz. 2024). · cites it 14× “¶34 Planned Parenthood argues that the legislature’s failure to include an express statutory trigger provision repealing § 36-2322 upon Roe’s reversal evinces the legislature’s implicit intent to create an independent statutory authority for elective abortion up to fifteen…”
Isaacson v. Mayes, No. 2:21-cv-01417 (D. Ariz. July 11, 2022). · cites it 4× “The laws of this state shall be interpreted and construed to acknowledge, on behalf of an unborn child at every stage of 19 development, all rights, privileges and immunities available to other persons, citizens and residents of this state, subject only 20 to the Constitution of…”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 1-219(A): 1 case
Planned Parenthood v. Kristin mayes/hazelrigg, 545 P.3d 892 (Ariz. 2024). “¶34 Planned Parenthood argues that the legislature’s failure to include an express statutory trigger provision repealing § 36-2322 upon Roe’s reversal evinces the legislature’s implicit intent to create an independent statutory authority for elective abortion up to fifteen…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.