HB 4117 is becoming a classic Arizona culture-war collision: a bill written to protect religious worship from intentional disruption is now drawing opposition from abortion providers who fear it could shield clinic protesters from ordinary security responses.

The measure, filed by Senate Majority Leader John Kavanagh, would expand penalties for intentionally disrupting a religious service or religious activity, with violations potentially rising from a misdemeanor to a felony under certain circumstances. Supporters argue the bill is aimed at protesters who interfere with worshippers entering churches, synagogues, mosques, and other religious gatherings. The Anti-Defamation League’s Desert Region has backed the concept as a narrowly tailored response to disruptions at houses of worship.

But abortion clinics see a dangerous ambiguity. Planned Parenthood Arizona argues the bill’s language could apply beyond traditional houses of worship to public or private places where people regularly gather for “religious activities.” That matters because anti-abortion demonstrators outside clinics often pray, read Scripture, and attempt to engage patients. Kelley Dupps of Planned Parenthood Arizona warned that clinic escorts, volunteers, or security personnel could face heightened criminal exposure if police interpret those sidewalk demonstrations as protected religious activity.

Kavanagh has dismissed that concern, saying Bible reading on a sidewalk would not qualify as a religious service or activity under the bill. His argument is that the legislation targets intentional disruption of worship, not ordinary disputes or protest activity.

The political problem is that both sides are arguing from plausible fears. Religious groups want protection from targeted interference at worship services. Abortion clinics, already operating in a heated post-Roe environment, worry the bill could tilt law enforcement discretion toward protesters and against clinic staff or escorts.

The real test is drafting. If HB 4117 clearly limits enhanced penalties to organized worship settings and excludes clinic-sidewalk confrontations, it may survive the criticism. If not, opponents will frame it as a religious-liberty bill that unintentionally—or perhaps inevitably—creates new leverage for anti-abortion protesters.