Source: http://www.overruleroe.com/States/Washington.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 12:19:42+00:00

Document:
1 Wash. Rev. Code Ann.§ 9.02.010 (West. Supp. 1971).
2 Id. § 9.02.020. No prosecutions were reported under this statute.
3 Id. §§ 9.02.060 to 9.02.090.
5 Id. §§ 9.02.060, 0.02.070. The statutes adopted by referendum imposed other conditions. An abortion could be performed only by a licensed physician in a licensed hospital or approved medical facility. If the abortion was being sought by a married woman, the consent of her husband was necessary and, if she was an unmarried minor, the consent of her legal guardian. Id. § 9.020.070. The law also required physical domicile in the State for ninety days prior to the performance of the abortion. Id.
6 See 1973 Wash. Op. Att’y Gen. 7, 11-14.
7 530 P.2d 260 (Wash. 1975).
8 1992 Wash. Laws ch. 1, § 9, Initiative Measure No. 120, approved Nov. 5, 1991. The Reproductive Privacy Act declares that “every individual possesses a fundamental right of privacy with respect to personal reproductive decisions,” including abortions. Id. § 1, codified as Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9.02.100 (West 2003). Consistent with that declaration, the Act provides further that “The state may not deny or interfere with a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion prior to viability of the fetus, or to protect her life or health.” Id. § 2, codified as Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9.02.110 (West 2003). No such statement of public policy is required to make abortion legal in any State. In the absence of specific legislation making abortion criminal (either pre- or post-Roe), abortion would remain legal even if Roe v. Wade were overruled.
9 Because of its undefined health exception, Washington’s post-viability statutes, see Wash. Rev. Code Ann. §§ 9.02.110, 9.02.120 (West 2003), would not effectively prohibit post-viability abortions.

References: § 9
 § 9
 § 9
 § 1
 § 9
 § 2
 § 9
 v.