Civil and Human Rights

RELEASE: Victory for Equal Dignity in Kansas Supreme Court Ruling

“We are gratified that the Court echoed the brief of CAC and ACLU of Kansas Foundation, emphasizing the original meaning of the Kansas Constitution in incorporating into state law the broad promises of equality and dignity found in America’s Declaration of Independence.” — CAC President Elizabeth Wydra

WASHINGTON – On news this morning that the Kansas Supreme Court issued its ruling in Hodes & Nauser, M.D.s, P.A., et al. v. Schmidt & Howe, holding that “the Kansas Constitution’s drafters’ and ratifiers’ proclamation of natural rights applies to pregnant women” and that this “proclamation protects the right to decide whether to continue a pregnancy,” Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra issued the following reaction:

In a profound ruling this morning, a supermajority of the Kansas Supreme Court—including Justices appointed by Republican and Democratic governors—recognized the importance of “the right to control one’s own body, to assert bodily integrity, and to exercise self-determination” on decisions concerning abortion.

We are gratified that the Court echoed the brief of CAC and ACLU of Kansas Foundation, emphasizing the original meaning of the Kansas Constitution in incorporating into state law the broad promises of equality and dignity found in America’s Declaration of Independence.

While applying only within the state of Kansas, today’s ruling should provide an example to all other courts in the nation grappling with these critical questions. As we noted in our brief, and as the framers of the Kansas Constitution explained, the immortal words of the Declaration of Independence are a call to secure “wide liberty” and to ensure “to every individual perfect freedom to enjoy in safety and tranquility the rights and blessings of that existence.”

#

Resources:

Brief of CAC and ACLU Foundation of Kansas in support of plaintiff physicians Herbert C Hodes and Traci Lynn Nauser: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/hodes-nauser-m-d-s-p-a-et-al-v-schmidt-howe-kan-sup-ct/

“It’s 2016 and Kansas Approvingly Cited Dred Scott in an Abortion Case. It Was Not a Good Idea.,” Mother Jones, October 20, 2016: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/kansas-retracts-dred-scott-citation-supporting-anti-abortion-law/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J.

In Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., the Supreme Court is considering whether laws in Idaho and West Virginia that prohibit all transgender women and girls from joining women’s and girls’ sports teams—across...
Civil and Human Rights
November 9, 2025

Supreme Court to hear case on religious rights in prison

Deseret News
Oral arguments on Monday in Landor v. Louisiana will focus on religious liberties while incarcerated.
Civil and Human Rights
November 10, 2025

CAC Release: In Landor Case, Question of Whether Person in Prison Who Suffered Undisputed Religious Liberty Violation Has Any Meaningful Remedy Hangs in the Balance

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Landor v....
Civil and Human Rights
October 7, 2025

Supreme Court Appears Poised to Strike Down Ban on Anti-LGBTQ ‘Conversion Therapy’

The New Civil Rights Movement
The U.S. Supreme Court appears poised to strike down a Colorado ban on so-called conversion...
Civil and Human Rights
October 6, 2025

Conversion Therapy Ban Case Tests Traditional State Police Power

Bloomberg Law
A therapist’s challenge to Colorado’s ban on treatment the state says harms LGBTQ+ youths may...
Civil and Human Rights
October 7, 2025

CAC Release: Colorado Banned Conversion Therapy Because It Is Harmful. That Conversion Therapy is Accomplished Through Speech Does Not Make Colorado’s Law Unconstitutional Under the First Amendment.

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Chiles v....