Keep Kansas Pro-Life

A KS court has ruled that the KS ban of dismemberment abortion of a living unborn child violates our State constitution.

We will propose a constitutional amendment that would allow the State to pass laws on abortion.

Keep Kansas #Prolife http://ow.ly/zrDw30iCQje

Is there a need to amend the Kansas Constitution?

Yes. As explained below the Kansas courts have “found” the right to an abortion in the Kansas Constitution. Kansans for Life favors a constitutional amendment to make it clear that the right to an abortion is not in the Kansas Constitution. The constitutional amendment we support will make it clear that the legislature can regulate abortions, including limiting late-term abortions, partial birth abortions, and ban the dismemberment abortion of a living unborn child. This amendment will not change the court rulings that are based on the U.S. Constitution.

Will this proposed amendment ban all abortions?

No. It will make it clear that the right to an abortion is not in the state constitution and the people through their elected representatives have the right to regulate abortion.

What difference does it make?

A constitutional amendment will save thousands of lives. Here is why.


The state legislatures have difficulty regulating abortion now because of a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions limiting the state legislatures from passing laws regulating abortion. The U.S. Supreme Court decisions started with one called Roe v. Wade which ruled state regulation of abortion unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution.

It is foreseeable the U.S. Supreme Court will reverse itself if our president appoints additional pro-life judges to the U.S. Supreme Court. If Roe v. Wade is reversed, state legislatures would be able to regulate abortion, but not in Kansas, if our Kansas courts “find” the right to abortion in our State Constitution.

This new constitutional right could potentially threaten all our pro-life laws on the books today. If we pass this state constitutional amendment, when Roe v. Wade is reversed the legislature can regulate abortion. So if we pass the amendment thousands of lives will be saved, if we do not thousands of lives will be lost.



Two abortionists sued in Shawnee County District Court challenging the constitutionality of the April 7, 2015, live dismemberment abortion ban claiming there is a right to an abortion in the Kansas State Constitution.  The caption is HODES & NAUSER, MDs, P.A. et al. vs. DEREK SCHMIDT, et.al. Case No. 2015CV490.

The District Court Decision:

The Shawnee County District Judge Hendricks ruled for the Plaintiffs reasoning that provisions of the state constitution have been interpreted to reflect the federal law. The ban in his opinion would violate the federal law, therefore it must also violate the state constitution. Shawnee County District Court Judge Hendricks ruled on a Motion for Preliminary Injunction for the plaintiffs in June of 2015.

Why  this case is unique:

The lawsuit is unique because it expressly made a claim ONLY under the Kansas State Constitution and specifically under Sections 1 and 2 of the Bill of Rights of the Kansas Constitution.

The most relevant part of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights states:

Section 1 provides: “All men are possessed of equal and inalienable natural rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

The Kansas Court of Appeals Decision:

The Kansas Court of Appeals in a 78 page, a 26,589-word opinion handed down on January 22, 2016, affirmed with seven Judges voting to affirm, and seven Judges voting to overturn the lower court. Judge LEBEN wrote the opinion joined by Judges PIERRON, MCANANY, BUSER, STANDRIDGE, and ARNOLD-BURGER, JJ.  ATCHESON writes a concurring opinion. Judge Leben concluded that Section One of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights effectively duplicates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, so they apply federal law governing abortion as Kansas constitutional law. MALONE, C.J writes a dissenting opinion joined by Judges GREEN, HILL, BRUNS, POWELL, SCHROEDER, AND GARDNER. The dissenting opinion disagreed pointing out that “[T]he best and only safe rule for ascertaining the intention of the makers of any written law[] is to abide by the language they have used.” showing the Kansas Constitution is not similar to the 14th Amendment.

 The current status:

The case is pending before the Kansas Supreme Court. The case has been fully briefed, and the Court had a hearing in March of 2017.





Cow - Copy

1,608 Deaths and Counting

1,608 deaths and counting. 1,608 unborn Kansas children have died by live dismemberment abortion since a Kansas judge blocked enforcement of the Kansas live dismemberment abortion ban on June 30th, 2015. For 84 days in 2015, the state of Kansas led the nation by banning live dismemberment abortion, then a Judge found a new “right” in our Kansas Constitution and ordered that live dismemberment can continue. The case is now pending before the Kansas Supreme Court.

We led the nation, for 84 days. Now we count the dead.

Cow - CopyA Judge blocked enforcement of the Kansas live dismemberment abortion ban. A lawsuit was filed challenging the ban on live dismemberment abortion with a claim that our state constitution contains a right to abortion. The case is now before the Kansas Supreme Court, and has been pending there for nearly a year. This means the ban on live dismemberment abortion can not be enforced. This court decision represents a radical change in our Kansas public policy.

The courts have now blocked enforcement of the Kansas live dismemberment abortion ban. A lawsuit was filed challenging the ban on live dismemberment abortion with a claim that our state constitution contains a right to abortion. This court decision represents a radical change in our Kansas public policy.

In a Republic, laws and public policy should not be made by unelected Judges. The people should make laws and public policy through their elected representatives, not unelected, unaccountable Judges.

The Court has basically amended the constitution by interpretation. There is a procedure to amend the Kansas Constitution which the people have used often. If the Judges want to amend our constitution to include a state right to abortion, they may do so properly but not by judicial decree.

How ironic. Our Kansas law forbids live dismemberment of a cow, horse, calf, hog, mule, or sheep unless it is rendered incapable of feeling pain. However, since the court in Kansas “discovered” the right to an abortion in the Kansas constitution, the state legislature may not afford similar humane protection to unborn humans.

We have passed 29 pro-life laws making Kansas the most pro-life state in the union. This new interpretation of the Kansas constitution threatens these laws. We have passed a law that bans live dismemberment abortion, stopped taxpayer funding of abortion, banned partial birth abortion, banned late-term abortion, promoted informed consent, and regulations that would improve the health and safety standards of facilities performing any abortion. We will support a constitutional amendment clarifying that our constitution does not block this type legislation.


Footnote Supporting material:

The protection against cruelty also extends to animals. See Kan. Stat. Ann. 21-6412 (2017). Kansas law recognizes the legality of killing farm animals, but restricts such killings to those conducted in accord with “normal or accepted practices of animal husbandry.” Kan. Stat. Ann.  (2017). The practices of animal husbandry are subject to the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, 7 U.S.C 1901 et seq. (2012), which requires that livestock by “rendered insensible to pain by a single blow or gunshot or an electrical, chemical or other means that is rapid and effective, before being shackled, hoisted, thrown, cast, or cut.” Id. at 1902. Federal law forbids live dismemberment of a cow, horse, calf, hog, mule, or sheep unless it is rendered incapable of feeling pain.



Abortion Risks

Some will claim that abortion is a caring alternative to mothers involved in a crisis prconcernedegnancy.  It is argued that it’s the safer alternative to child birth or raising the child in an unwanted home.  What is never discussed is just how severely abortion hurts the very women it is supposed to help.

First off abortion is a traumatic event.  It is not another simple out-patient procedure where the patient would go home and forget about it the next day.  There is a multitude of testimonials of women who experience anxiety, loneliness, and severe depression after this “simple procedure.”  In fact, a study in Finland found that women who have had abortions are six times more likely to commit suicide than those who carried the child to term.  (M. Gissler, “Injury deaths, suicides and homicides associated with pregnancy, Finland 1987-2000,” European J. Public Health 15(5):459 63,2005.) This and many other studies point to Post Abortive Syndrome.  Similar to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder it can negatively affect the lives of post abortive women if not properly treated.

Outside of the mental risks of having an abortion, there are also physical risks that are often glossed over.  There are twenty-three different world-wide studies that show a 50% increased risk of breast cancer for a woman who has undergone an abortion if she has never had a child before.  (J. Brind et al., “Induced abortion as an independent risk factor for breast cancer: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis,” Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health 50 (1996): 481-496.)  Additional studies show that a woman who has one abortion is 2.3 times more likely to have cervical cancer and a woman with two or more abortions is 4.92 times more likely.  If the increased risk of cancer were not frightening enough, one study found women are 4 times more likely to DIE during an abortion than natural child birth. (Gissler, M., et. al., “Pregnancy-associated deaths in Finland 1987-1994 — definition problems and benefits of record linkage,” Acta Obsetricia et Gynecolgica Scandinavica 76:651-657 (1997). (The mortality rate was 41 per 100,000 registered ended pregnancies (27 for births, 48 for miscarriages or ectopic pregnancies, and 101 for abortions).

In addition to these incredibly dangerous risks, this so called “safe procedure” also increases a woman’s risk of uterine perforation, cervical lacerations, and infertility.

As you can see from all the above risks, having an abortion is far from safe for women. Women deserve better than the trauma that abortion offers.  Women in crisis pregnancies deserve compassion and help, not another traumatic life event.