Kansas Court Enjoins State-Directed Messaging, Waiting Periods for Abortions
- November 03, 2023
A Kansas trial court judge agreed October 30 to temporarily enjoin certain state-directed messaging requirements and waiting periods for abortion care after finding the provisions likely violated patients’ fundamental right to bodily autonomy and providers’ fundamental right to free speech under the state’s constitution.
The Center for Reproductive Rights and Planned Parenthood brought the lawsuit in June on behalf of Kansas abortion providers who challenged the Kansas Women’s Right to Know Act, which was enacted in 1997 and amended several times since then.
The Act, among other things, imposes a mandatory 24-hour waiting period after patients receive certain state-mandated information on abortions in print as part of informed consent for the procedure. The law also requires patients to wait an additional 30 minutes after a private meeting with their provider before they can receive abortion care. In addition, a 2023 amendment to the Act requires providers to tell patients that medication abortions may be reversed.
In a 92-page ruling, Kansas District Court of Johnson County Judge Krishnan Christopher Jayaram granted plaintiffs a temporary injunction as to the informed consent provisions and medication abortion amendment.
Both sets of restrictions were subject to strict scrutiny as they implicated the fundamental right of bodily autonomy and free speech under the Kansas Constitution, the court said.
According to the court, the state failed to articulate a “compelling interest” for the restrictions, nor could did it show that the restrictions were “narrowly tailored.”
The court criticized the state-mandated disclosures, noting they were not supported by credible scientific/medical evidence in the record, particularly claims about reversing medication abortions.
Instead, according to the court, “the Act appears to be a thinly-veiled effort to stigmatize the procedure and instill fear in patients that are contemplating an abortion, such that they make an alternative choice, based upon disproven and unsupportable claims.”
Kansas voters last year rejected an amendment that would have eliminated abortion protections under the state constitution.
Hodes & Nauser MDS Pa v. Kobach, No. 23CV03140 (Ks. Dist. Ct. Oct. 30, 2023).