When Janet Napolitano gives her speech at the 2004 National Democratic Convention, she won't talk about the one health care issue that millions of Americans prefer did not exist. She will not talk about her extremist support for abortion. Now, I'm not simply talking about the standard "I'm in favor of everyone's right to choose to have an abortion" position. And I'm not even talking about the strident NOW or NARAL "we must keep abortion legal and prevent judges from overturning Roe v. Wade” position. No, I'm speaking about support for abortion that extends to her efforts, while Arizona’s Attorney General, to ensure that a 14-year-old girl, who was 28 weeks pregnant, had an late term abortion in Wichita, Kansas at the hands of notorious abortionist George Tiller.

The time is August 25, 1999. A 14-year-old girl, who has been a ward of the Juvenile Court since age 5, is pregnant -- 6 months pregnant. The attorney for the minor child requests an abortion from the juvenile court Judge. The Arizona Department of Economic Security (DES), the state’s social welfare agency, does not oppose this request. DES is represented in court by the Attorney General's office. The Attorney General at the time is Janet Napolitano.

The Court grants permission for her to leave Arizona to have the abortion in California, because Arizona law provides for restrictions to having an abortion after 24 weeks, except if the mother's life is in immediate danger. And the fact is there are no abortion facilities, including Planned Parenthood, which will do late-term abortions in Arizona.

When County transportation employees learn of the assignment, objections are raised. When the juvenile court does not rectify the matter, the public becomes aware that a Superior Court Judge has ordered a 14 year-old girl be permitted to leave the state to have a late term abortion. The public outcry is incredible. People from all over the country offer assistance to this 14-year-old juvenile, whose mother had died and whose father was in prison. They offer to help raise her and/or the unborn child. There is an offer by an out-of-state pregnancy center to provide her education through age 18. One particular political figure offers a college scholarship to assist her and also offers help to raise the baby. The pressure upon the State and the governor to challenge the court order is loud and furious. The governor is forced to put pressure on the attorney general to file a motion to reconsider the judge’s order. At first Napolitano refuses. The governor threatens to appoint a private attorney general to file the request. Napolitano reluctantly agrees. And so the State files first a motion to reconsider, and when that is denied, then files an appeal of the court's decision -- and here is where it gets even more interesting.

The Court of Appeals, per Judge Michael Ryan, orders a stay of the juvenile court order and asks certain questions, including the age of the unborn child, the extent to which the mother had been properly counseled, the appropriate risks to the mother and to the baby, and the other opportunities available. Judge Ryan had made his decision on Saturday, August 28.

The Court of Appeals order required that prior to traveling to Kansas the juvenile would be examined by an Arizona physician to determine the viability of the unborn child. The Court of Appeals further ordered that if the child was determined viable, an Arizona physician would have to be in Kansas to ensure that the Kansas abortionist proceeded in accordance with Arizona, rather than Kansas, law. The attorney for the juvenile then filed a Motion to Vacate the Court of Appeals Order, Petition for Special Action, and alternatively a Petition for Review.

The attorney for the juvenile wants to petition the Supreme Court. The attorney General, Janet Napolitano, does not oppose the petition. The Attorney General, Janet Napolitano, agrees to the motion to expedite the matter to the entire Supreme Court the next morning. This is a very unusual action without any precedent. Janet Napolitano further agrees to allow the matter to be argued by telephone on a Sunday morning, after limited pleadings are filed in the late night of Saturday, August 28, 1999.

The Attorney General, whose motion for reconsideration was granted by the Court of Appeals, in essence agreed to allow that order to be vacated by the Supreme Court the next day. She did not oppose the petition or even challenge the whole notion of getting the judges to review this on Sunday. She knew that the abortion could not take place unless the 14 year-old girl was flown to Wichita on Sunday afternoon. Planned Parenthood had arranged for the plane fare to make sure the abortion took place The State permitted the juvenile to leave the state in the custody of Planned Parenthood employees. Had the Attorney General opposed the expedited request, the Supreme Court would not have been able to hear the case until later in the week. The abortion would not have occurred.

The State in essence was in on the fix. Should this sound harsh all one need do is read the dissents of Justice Zlaket and Vice-Chief Justice Jones, who both noted that the Attorney General's office essentially stipulated to an expedited proceeding without any evidence, any documents, or any other information, and without any challenge to the claims by the attorney for the child. This accelerated process, the Court said, left the Justices with little by the way of a record, either from the trial court or the Court of Appeals. The Court was not provided with any substantive legal authority, and had little time for independent research on those issues that were important. Neither the attorney for the juvenile nor Janet Napolitano's attorney were prepared to authoritatively discuss whether and to what extend the juvenile's delinquent and dependent status could legally affect her right to travel to Kansas for a late-term abortion, or to subject her to the laws of Arizona governing the performance of the procedure. In fact, the Court noted that these fundamental questions were largely ignored.

Janet Napolitano and her office wanted that baby aborted. They did not want that child to be born. They did not want that 14-year-old girl to continue her pregnancy. And while she sits as the Governor of the State of Arizona, this episode in her life should haunt us all. It should remind us of the power of the state to kill an innocent child, because the chief law enforcement officer in the state supported abortion through the entire nine months. She supports partial birth abortion. As attorney general she is culpable in the death of this child, which has lest a black mark on the history of Arizona, Kansas, and this nation.

In Arizona, and in most states, juvenile proceedings are confidential and not open to the public scrutiny. DES, along with the Attorney General's office, has a duty to follow the laws of Arizona. DES was responsible for a 14 year-old juvenile who was over 24 weeks pregnant when they determined she was pregnant, and 28 weeks pregnant by the time that she was shipped to Kansas for an abortion. Arizona law says that no abortion shall be performed on a viable fetus without an independent physician present, and that the abortion should be done in a manner as to most likely preserve that unborn child. But Janet Napolitano was not concerned about upholding the laws of the Arizona. Janet Napolitano and the abortion industry, Planned Parenthood, the now-imprisoned Brian Finkel, and all others -- had nothing but a blood lust for the death of that child.

As I stated, Janet Napolitano is now getting her moment in the sun, to shine as a future democratic leader on the national stage. Because she is a woman, because she is a governor of a bright-growing state, people in this country are going to hear glowing reports when she was a Clinton appointed U.S. Attorney and later state Attorney General. But during the month of August in the summer of 1999, Janet Napolitano and her department became agents of death. Instead of protecting that unborn child and her 14-year-old mother, they conspired with the attorney for the juvenile, the Court and the Department of Economic Security to kill that child. And one must ask, "How many other children are in foster care, in the custody of the State, or in group homes, and find themselves pregnant and are not provided abortions?" One cannot know, because such information is confidential and protected.

John Jakubczyk is a lawyer and President of Arizona Right to Life. He has been a frequent speaker on life issues throughout the country.

Email John Jakubczyk

Send this Article to a Friend