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.
What a great benefit it is to receive your engaging if too often incredulous messages (of course it's not you but these times). This one today from Arizona takes the cake - and that would be Devil's Food cake, I'm sure. As I read this post, I thought to myself you should be on MSNBC with this content. As an avid viewer of their station, as I am your valuable missives, it seems just their cup of tea. By the way, I just chanced to read your Boston College faculty profile. I slightly resent them referring to your readers as a "cult following," although I'm sure they intended it in a whimsical way. Problem is Donald Trump is the main exemplar of a cult leader these days. I for one, prefer to be thought of as an appreciative and enthusiastic follower.
Heather, I love it when you bring history into the present. One good thing that 1864 law did was exclude physicians so they didn't have to consult a lawyer before saving a woman's life or being afraid to act at all while watching the woman die. Would love to see the "originalists" of the Supreme Court overturn this law since it didn't originally have anything to do with banning abortion.
And Arizona is now leading the charge to march “forward, into the past.” (Apologies to Firesign Theater for using their phrase, but it seems most appropriate in describing Judge Johnson’s actions.)
Can it be that the judge reinstating this law is ignorant of this history or worse still ignored it? This seems like a combination of incompetence and malice. Ironically, those who profess to be originalists have to know that the law was never intended to regulate reproduction for women. Why are they failing to understand the original meaning of these laws? Just astonishing hypocrisy!
It is essential that we explain where ever possible the historical and continuing brutality (indeed fascism = total supremacy) of patriarchy. It's certainly a very bad and unhealthy ideology for men, but for women it is relentless oppression. Remember: Patriarchy is a structure comprised of laws, tradition, wealth concentration, ownership, and a continuing unchallenged historical record (to name some of the basics). Dismantle the structure and the power of all those who work to maintain that structure.
"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."
This is SUCH an awesome sentence. It contains a stark set of facts, irony, humor, shock, a sense of the repugnant, and great history all in ONE single sentence.
Best sentence of the year award Dr. Richardson. No doubt.
Wow. How crazy is it that we learn so little from our previous mistakes? Thanks so much for sharing this, Professor-perhaps if we talk about it boldly and honestly, It can finally be addressed and corrected-your truth telling is so vital to that process. I’m beyond grateful to you. Our children and our children’s children deserve a better future than returning to past atrocities. When will we ever learn?
Once again lazy, unrealistic Repubs refuse to live in the 21st Century. Progress is one of their greatest fears; refusing to learn lessons from history is their greatest achievement. 👋🏼 Bye bye Ridiculous Party.
I notice a division between those who trust authority based on the special status of some person, vs those who trust the authority of collaborative verification and/or polling to determine which actions best fit our understanding of our circumstances. At the extreme is the authority of a hereditary king or queen, or some some other form of autocrat, vs a republic. And some seem to believe that the older an idea is, the more true it is, which is different from recognizing that some circumstances of existence remain constant over long periods of time, and may have been recognized to some degree over many generations, for example, ancient earth and stoneworks that appear aligned with astronomical cycles. And reading of ancient histories and fiction suggest that basic human nature has remained stable over long periods as well, though ideas and mores change.
While "The Enlightenment" is showing signs of age, it was still a recognition of how rethinking our circumstances can lead to improved understandings and outcomes. The thoroughness of the properly conducted scientific method and ongoing good-faith public dialog providing some anchor against throwing out babies with bathwater. Enlightenment thinking powerfully affected the tone and methodologies of some of the most reliably useful aspects of "The American Experiment".
Seems to me the appropriate reading of the Arizona law was to make it illegal for someone to induce a miscarriage by poisoning inferring it is without a woman's consent--perhaps to prevent a man from poisoning a woman he had impregnated to avoid the consequences of the pregnancy--more in keeping with the policing of men's behavior theme.
What's more incredible is the fragile reeds Republicans are using to get abortion bans back on the books without having to legislate new laws. The disengenuous defense will be "I am only upholding the law" not "I am actively taking away your rights"
"The laws for this territory, chaotic and still at war in 1864, appear to reflect the need to rein in a lawless population of men." Sad to see, Arizona is still there, dominated by fear, trauma, and disability to make judgements.
Grateful to have the history of our laws recorded so that we don’t make the same mistake……….damn, too late. No wonder there’s such a push on banning our history (HERstory) from the classroom.
Women still need protection from patriarchy run amok; As is happening in the Republican Party, and with the aid and support of forced-birth nuts. If they won’t concede that women are capable beings (at least on the level of any gamete), then rise up we must. I never thought I’d live so long as to see such evil ooze back into our world. Wonder if Alito helped Arizona nuts come up with arcane justification to slap down any progress women have clawed their way to achieving. He certainly has the animus for the task.
This -- I don't have words (so I am glad Heather Cox Richardson is in possession of some powerful ones!) This law was drafted by a group of less than 30 men (of course) who worked rather hastily to write and quickly implement a body of laws designed to bring order to the chaos of an United States territory trying to operate in the middle of a Civil War. It is almost comical (if it were not so obscene) to think it has a place today in the state of Arizona in our United States of America.
We can only hope that the law's restoration will secure the future of both the governor's office and the US Senate with respect to Arizona, since the people of that state cannot let this stand.
What a great benefit it is to receive your engaging if too often incredulous messages (of course it's not you but these times). This one today from Arizona takes the cake - and that would be Devil's Food cake, I'm sure. As I read this post, I thought to myself you should be on MSNBC with this content. As an avid viewer of their station, as I am your valuable missives, it seems just their cup of tea. By the way, I just chanced to read your Boston College faculty profile. I slightly resent them referring to your readers as a "cult following," although I'm sure they intended it in a whimsical way. Problem is Donald Trump is the main exemplar of a cult leader these days. I for one, prefer to be thought of as an appreciative and enthusiastic follower.
Fascinating stuff. Heather, but oh so gruesome, racist, and patriarchal!!
“Written to police the behavior of men, the code tells a larger story about power and control.”
Heather, I love it when you bring history into the present. One good thing that 1864 law did was exclude physicians so they didn't have to consult a lawyer before saving a woman's life or being afraid to act at all while watching the woman die. Would love to see the "originalists" of the Supreme Court overturn this law since it didn't originally have anything to do with banning abortion.
And Arizona is now leading the charge to march “forward, into the past.” (Apologies to Firesign Theater for using their phrase, but it seems most appropriate in describing Judge Johnson’s actions.)
This is the stuff of dystopian historical fiction. Or the some warped version of the Twilight Zone. Sadly, it is reality in today's America.
Can it be that the judge reinstating this law is ignorant of this history or worse still ignored it? This seems like a combination of incompetence and malice. Ironically, those who profess to be originalists have to know that the law was never intended to regulate reproduction for women. Why are they failing to understand the original meaning of these laws? Just astonishing hypocrisy!
It is essential that we explain where ever possible the historical and continuing brutality (indeed fascism = total supremacy) of patriarchy. It's certainly a very bad and unhealthy ideology for men, but for women it is relentless oppression. Remember: Patriarchy is a structure comprised of laws, tradition, wealth concentration, ownership, and a continuing unchallenged historical record (to name some of the basics). Dismantle the structure and the power of all those who work to maintain that structure.
"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."
This is SUCH an awesome sentence. It contains a stark set of facts, irony, humor, shock, a sense of the repugnant, and great history all in ONE single sentence.
Best sentence of the year award Dr. Richardson. No doubt.
And a great letter for this Sunday morning.
Another wake up and get going letter. Thank you.
Wow. How crazy is it that we learn so little from our previous mistakes? Thanks so much for sharing this, Professor-perhaps if we talk about it boldly and honestly, It can finally be addressed and corrected-your truth telling is so vital to that process. I’m beyond grateful to you. Our children and our children’s children deserve a better future than returning to past atrocities. When will we ever learn?
Once again lazy, unrealistic Repubs refuse to live in the 21st Century. Progress is one of their greatest fears; refusing to learn lessons from history is their greatest achievement. 👋🏼 Bye bye Ridiculous Party.
I notice a division between those who trust authority based on the special status of some person, vs those who trust the authority of collaborative verification and/or polling to determine which actions best fit our understanding of our circumstances. At the extreme is the authority of a hereditary king or queen, or some some other form of autocrat, vs a republic. And some seem to believe that the older an idea is, the more true it is, which is different from recognizing that some circumstances of existence remain constant over long periods of time, and may have been recognized to some degree over many generations, for example, ancient earth and stoneworks that appear aligned with astronomical cycles. And reading of ancient histories and fiction suggest that basic human nature has remained stable over long periods as well, though ideas and mores change.
While "The Enlightenment" is showing signs of age, it was still a recognition of how rethinking our circumstances can lead to improved understandings and outcomes. The thoroughness of the properly conducted scientific method and ongoing good-faith public dialog providing some anchor against throwing out babies with bathwater. Enlightenment thinking powerfully affected the tone and methodologies of some of the most reliably useful aspects of "The American Experiment".
Seems to me the appropriate reading of the Arizona law was to make it illegal for someone to induce a miscarriage by poisoning inferring it is without a woman's consent--perhaps to prevent a man from poisoning a woman he had impregnated to avoid the consequences of the pregnancy--more in keeping with the policing of men's behavior theme.
What's more incredible is the fragile reeds Republicans are using to get abortion bans back on the books without having to legislate new laws. The disengenuous defense will be "I am only upholding the law" not "I am actively taking away your rights"
'
"The laws for this territory, chaotic and still at war in 1864, appear to reflect the need to rein in a lawless population of men." Sad to see, Arizona is still there, dominated by fear, trauma, and disability to make judgements.
Grateful to have the history of our laws recorded so that we don’t make the same mistake……….damn, too late. No wonder there’s such a push on banning our history (HERstory) from the classroom.
Women still need protection from patriarchy run amok; As is happening in the Republican Party, and with the aid and support of forced-birth nuts. If they won’t concede that women are capable beings (at least on the level of any gamete), then rise up we must. I never thought I’d live so long as to see such evil ooze back into our world. Wonder if Alito helped Arizona nuts come up with arcane justification to slap down any progress women have clawed their way to achieving. He certainly has the animus for the task.
This -- I don't have words (so I am glad Heather Cox Richardson is in possession of some powerful ones!) This law was drafted by a group of less than 30 men (of course) who worked rather hastily to write and quickly implement a body of laws designed to bring order to the chaos of an United States territory trying to operate in the middle of a Civil War. It is almost comical (if it were not so obscene) to think it has a place today in the state of Arizona in our United States of America.
We can only hope that the law's restoration will secure the future of both the governor's office and the US Senate with respect to Arizona, since the people of that state cannot let this stand.