>> This hour of local news is made possible by yeutions from thecontributionsfrom friends of PBS.

>> Welcome to Arizona horizon.

I'm Ted Simons and Russian drug trial involving Brittney Griner today with testimony from defense witnesses including the teachcope of thethecoach of the Russian team and this was after she entered a guilty plea.

And there was a mistake and she had to intention of committing a crime and despite her plea, the trial is expected to last for weeks and facing up to ten years in prison.

>>> Congressman Paul Gosar is speaking out against his actions and three of his siblings endorsed him for district 9 and two of his brothers along with his sister and their brother is, quote, clearly unhinged, unfit for office and does not represent reality-based people in Arizona.

And his campaign responded by calling his siblings, quote, liberal establishment trump haters.

>>> Ing economicAn estimate from the advocacy group the senior citizen's league with an increase of $175 to the average monthly retiree benefit at $1,688 a month.

The estimate based on the latest inflation numbers at the Social Security administers uses to calculate adjustments and how much will be determined this fall.

Mortgage rates in the U.S. are on the rise again and the average for a 30-year fixed is 5 5 5.5% and nearly twice what it was this time last year.

If one of the many who play Wurdle, the popular word game will be a board game and Hasbro is teaming up with the "New York Times" in which two players guess five players assigned by a Wurdle host, called Wurdle, the party game in one of the fastest product launches.

>>> State attorney mark Brnovich sets aside an injunction blocking 158 pre-state law and here to explain the legal aspects of the request is the codirector of ASU Sandra day O'Connor college of law and thank you for joining us because there's a lot to go over here and gives us the basics and what did the attorney general do in court?

>> Asking to list an injunction that was implemented right after Roe v. Wade.

That injunction blocked that pre-statehood territorial law in Arizona that criminalized abortion on the provider and not the woman.

That's a different statute but providing an abortion facing two to five years imprisonment and that's the language of the law.

Sphwhrt >> The attorney general has said that old super supercedes an old law that he signed the 15-week abortion law.

>> That's what the attorney general is arguing, but there's a hefty bit of litigation to sort out which law stands in Arizona.

>> Why that hefty bit of litigation.

>> Arizona is not the only state confusing route right now, but in the aftermath of the Supreme Court of Roe v. Wade, there's a patchwork of abortion-related laws not consistent with each other and one of which is from pre-statehood days that fully bans abortion and then you have Arizona laws that ban abortion at violate viability and genetic or race selection and Arizona laws that set up an entire regulatory regime for abortion clinics to provide abortions.

So all of these newer laws are inconsistent with that pre-statehood law that bans abortion.

>> It sounds as though, the attorney general is saying, that's all fine and dandy, but that old law back in 1864 or whenever that was, that was the first one and holds sway.

>> That's not entirely true.

There's a legal doctrine called implied repeal and what you're looking at is has the legislature repealed that law and the answer is no, the legislature has never expressly repealed it.

What the legislature has done since that law was passed, passed a seer series of different laws that conflict with that initial law and the argument will be, that the legislature did not expressly repeal that pre-statehood law and repealed it by implication because it passed newer laws.

>> Interesting.

>> That are indicate with inconsist tent with it.

ent with it.

>> You don't mention that old lawn becauselaw and because you pass that new law, the intent was there and that old law doesn't stand as strong as maybe the attorney general thinks?

>> And there is a preference to apply the new law because courts are attempting to give credence to the legislature's will.

What they've done will applies.

This does not repeal that pre-statehood law.

OK, so that's making it a little more complicated because now you can have a court say and that may be the intent of the legislature but that doesn't make the court make that decision.

>> Wouldn't that be the intent of this legislature as opposed to the previous legislatures which passed those who laws?

>> But you have an entire series of other laws, not just this 15-week ban, a viability ban and an entire regulatory body that you have developed to license abortion clinics in the state.

How is it possible that you can give effect to all of those more recent laws if the law that's actually applicable is a pre-statehood law that fully bans abortion?

>> Let's talk about the injunction itself and I originally thought that the injunction was in place the minute Roe v. Wade passed?

You had Roe v. Wade said you can't do that and that's not the case, is it?

>> So there was a lot of litigation going on that started in Tucson and we're back in Tucson with this request to lift this inscrungs.

injunction.

But around the time that Roe v. Wade was coming down from the Arizona Supreme Court, the Arizona court of appeals wag was dealing with this issue in our own state courts and have come out with a decision essentially saying, these laws are constitutional based on what the Arizona court of appeals interpreted and afterwards, quickly afterwards, Roe v. Wade comes down and announces a constitutional right to abortion and so at that point, there's a rehearing want reordering of the opinion where the Arizona court of appeals says, actually what's really taking credence is Roe v. Wade and now the injunction.

>> Wasn't it originally the ruling by a court judge that the law was inconstitutional originally.

>> Yes.

>> Because of implied privacy which is what Roe was all about.

>> At the lower court level, yes, an initial injunction about that.

That's not all together surprising, because California, for instance, the California Supreme Court actually did the same thing, with a privacy right before Roe v. Wade was announced.

So in the late '60s, you see this coming out of California.

So something similar out of an Arizona trial cost is not all together surprising.

Of course, the court of appeals reversed it and the court of appeals, nope.

>> Things happening before Roe v. Wade and literally, within weeks, Roe v. Wade just made that other stuff inconsequential and we've moving on and what is going on right now in Arizona as far as abortion is concerned?

>> It's very, very hard to tell.

It's very confusing for providers and for patients because you have on the one hand all of this litigation that we're talk about and does this pre-abortion ban apply?

The attorney general seems to think so and trying to get it to apply and that has a chilling effect on providers and they don't want to provide care if they're risking a potential two to five year felony sentence.

You have other litigation in the district court about a section of Arizona law that attempts to say all of our Arizona statutes need to be interrupted and acknowledged that the rights begin to people in those statutes also should be given to unborn children at all stages.

>> Personhood.

>> Yes.

>> We blocked that law as unconstitutionally vague which is what we're talking about right now.

People have no idea how that will be applied.

They have to idea what conduct or what statues are read in that way.

>> Last question and 30 seconds here.

This is fascinating stuff, but these pre-stathood laws, how many of these things are out there waiting to rear up?

>> Several, Wisconsin, west Virginia, and all of these states wrestling with these questions right now.

>> Interesting stuff and Jennifer from the college of law, good conversation and thank you.

Good information and thanks for joining us.

>> Thanks for having me.

>> Up next on Arizona horizon, a closer look act the Supreme at the Supreme Court's ruling of American Indians on tribal lands.

>> The Supreme Court ruled that stated can prosecute nonnative Americans for crimes against American Indians on tribal lands and we welcome the A ASU professor of law and again, this is another legal issue that is just very, very confusing and talk about this case as Oklahoma.

>> Before the Supreme Court of whether the state could prosecute together with the Federal Government, where you have a nonIndian ha is H20 H2 who is a defendant and reservation boundaries and the victims in those crimes were native individuals and so, if asked this question, is this purely a federal matter or room for the states?

>> We should mention, a nonnative charge for malnourishing a stepdaughter who was a native American and we won't go too far into that and the bigger picture, the Supreme Court saying and that what you can now prosecute nonnatives tor crimes against natives on tribal lands and a lot changes.

>> A lot does change and it had been very well settled law since the late 1800s.

that where a native person is involved in a crime, either as the perpetrator or the victim, that case is out of the reach of the state government and the state prosecutorial governments.

It's prosecuted by the Federal Government and tribes in some instances.

This case was a bit of a shock and not just to Indian tribes but to U.S. attorney's offices and to state prosecutors who had not been exercising this type of jurisdiction.

The only similarring acception similarexception, the state has to have the right to pros progressprosecute so that defaults to state courts and long understood that where crimes take place inside of Indian country, a legal term of art that comes from federal statutes that say Indian lands, those are off limits to -- I'm sorry off limits to the state unless Congress has stepped in and said otherwise in some unique circumstance and that has not happened.

>> And yet Brett Kavanaugh, this is a quote, Indian country within a state territory is a part of the state, not separate from the state and also says, quote, a state has jurisdiction over all of the territory including Indian country and what do you make of that?

>> Well, that type of incredibly broad language, as you might imagine, sent shockwaves across native communities and experts, tribal leaders and that broad, sweeping language taken to the extremes suggests there no thing as a reservation or treaty rights and and the breadth of it was rather shocking.

If you parcel it down in front of the courts, it asks the question, where a non-Indian is a defendant can the state prosecute, too, in addition to the Federal Government?

If you look at it in that narrow way, it does at another cook to the kitchen, so to speak, another prosecutor in that mix.

And that might create complications, but it doesn't take away powers that a tribe has that wasn't at issue in the case, but certainly that broad language has alarmed people who are, you know, scholars and practitioners.

>> Along with Supreme Court justices, kneel Neil this would be hard to fathom.

Make sense to you?

>> And that's the sentiment among most of my colleagues across the whole United States, that if there's one thing that the foundation of native American rights throughout the United States' history, it's that native American affairs are within the purviews of Congress, a federal matter and not a state matter and to cash casually make a broad statement that the states have a right to be involved in this, that was shocking.

>> This is the kind of thing that Congress can take up?

>> It seems to suggest that Congress could just correct this wrong and there's been many times in the past and in Indian law cases where the Supreme Court says one thing and some corrective legislation where Congress says, you know, no, that's not how we've always understood it and there is the conventional wisdom that Congress could step in and make that same sort of correction here, but the majority of opinion defined this as a state's constitutional right as opposed to, you know, an interpretation about the power of tribes and what a treaty language means or something along those lines.

So I guess there's a fair question, whether if Congress went in and corrected the situation, whether that would stand up to this current Supreme Court.

And I just don't know.

That language was so far-reaching that it was troubling.

>> Last question for you and we thank you for your time.

What response are you hearing from tribes in Indian country?

>> Tribes want public safety on their own reservation and they'll do what's necessary to protect people from crimes and if that means that they're going to have to work more closely with state and federal officials, that's what they'll do.

But as a secondary matter, just you know, sorting out what this might mean for next steps and mean for an agenda in Washington, D.C. >> Stacie, thank you for joining us on zoom and we appreciate it.

Thank you.

>> Thank you.

>> The Mesa art center offering seniors free art classes and as a part of the AARP segment it highlights issues and how these programs can enhance the lives of seniors and joining us is art studio manager Laura wild and welcome.

>> Thank you for having me.

Some you bet.

Free creativity programs for older adults.

What are we talking about here?

>> A lot of different things and so, we call these opportunities for adults ape ages 55 and older and they want to build professional art's program for adults that have health related, and then, of course, allow them to build skills in art's making.

>> And any prior art's experience needed?

>> None at all and we want folks to come down and Arizona is one of the largest states for retirees and we know there's a big population that could benefit from this and we know finances can play a part and two great sponses, blue cross, blue shield that allow for us to make programs which are year round completely free to attend.

>> Gives us more of an explanation of the programs involved there because it sounds like it runs the gamut as far as expression.

>> Normal opportunity classes cases classes can be Cheerio chair yoga and visual arts classes, charred makes, card making and we have dance for PD and increased balance and gate for adults with Parkinson's disease and adults with mild to mod result moderate dementia.

>> And getting up and going is a big deal, is it not?

>> You know, we find the dance group piloted this program in Brooklyn, New York, years ago and found that it increases the risk ofit decreases therisk of falling and a lot of the participants remark it's helped them and the thing they say the most is to keep moving as much as possible.

>> Story-telling and, you know, doing some of the drawing and especially story-telling, and they must love that.

>> I love that part of the program.

The stories and the participants participants, getting to know them is a favorite aspect.

>> All as a way of expression.

Talk more now about what studies have shown regarding getting artistic creation to older folks and how that just helps enhance their lives.

>> Well, also getting up and doing something different outside of your yourself, having a hobby or community has real-life impact and we know older adults isolate, all of the health really goes downhill and a lot of risk and so through these programs, it allow themselvesthem tobe creative and build relationships with other participants, as well as teaching artists in the room and allows them to feel brave and confident in their creative choices and the in the artwork they make.

>> Self-esteem play as big factor.

>> It's great to see folks, I don't know how to dance or draw, but they come anyway and make a brave choice to be with us and see they're so excited at the end of the day.

I know a lot of folks give their artwork away to their grandkids or friends.

>> Sure.

Who are the instructors?

>> They are staff at Mesa art center and either people working to our studio classes anyway.

We've got 14 state-of-the-art performing art studios at the center or folks in the community who have dedicated themselves, specifically, and gone through training to understand maybe the specific needs and those kinds of things.

>> When you're aninstructor for some folks and different for older folks who do not have the art or craft they're interested in.

>> It's not just any instructor but people who realize the significance that older adults play in our community and the impact this may have and the Alzheimer's institute or Alzheimer's association, area agency on aging.

This is a vetted program with folks who love to work with this population.

>> You mentioned virtual is included here, as well.

Can you do a whole class and have a couple like we did have here?

Have a couple of monitors off to the side?

>> Ever since Covid, this is the first program we offer just ritual breathing and yoga and so we recognize that some folks feel hesitant about coming out to this space and offering both in-person and virtual classes.

So we did send visual art-making kits through the mail and then would is an instructor hop on zoom and everybody would share their artwork and share photos and definitely.

>> It sounds great and where can people learn more?

>> Mesa art center and look for 55 plus.

>> And that is it for now.

I'm Ted Simon spz thank you Simons and thank you for joining us.

Have a great evening.

Coming up on Arizona PBS, new efforts to increase numbers of the California condore in the wild.