A judge has ruled that Kansas is not allowed to impose a new law that restricts access to abortion pills and requires patients to wait 24 hours before obtaining the procedure.

A judge in Kansas has temporarily suspended a recent state law regarding medication abortions and has also lifted previous limitations requiring providers to disclose certain information to patients and imposing a 24-hour waiting period before terminating a pregnancy.

The decision was a significant success for supporters of abortion rights in Kansas. In August 2022, voters in the state overwhelmingly voted to uphold protections for access to abortion under the state’s constitution. District Judge K. Christopher Jayaram’s ruling temporarily lifts certain long-standing restrictions. The waiting period, which has been in effect since 1997, is now suspended.

“In his 92-page order, Jayaram expressed the Court’s high regard for the strongly held convictions of both sides involved in this divisive matter. However, the State’s ability to enact laws based on its own moral principles is limited by the Kansas Constitution and its Bill of Rights.”

The order issued by Jayaram will remain in place until the end of June 2024 for a lawsuit brought by abortion providers against state officials responsible for enforcing abortion restrictions. The providers filed their case in Johnson County, located in the Kansas City area, where two clinics offer abortion services.

“The limitations imposed each day have resulted in us having to reject patients for reasons that go against medical ethics,” stated Emily Wales, the leader and CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Plains. The organization runs three clinics in Kansas that offer abortion services.

The ongoing legal dispute brings attention to the role of state courts in upholding access rights, following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson that removed protections under the U.S. Constitution and allowed states to enact abortion bans. In Texas, a judge recently deemed the state’s ban too restrictive, while the Utah Supreme Court is deliberating on whether to lift a hold on a state law that bans most abortions.

“Ilustrating the enduring desire of Kansans, these informed consent laws are a result of the people’s wishes,” stated Caleb Dalton, a senior lawyer for Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative organization aiding in Kansas’ defense of its anti-abortion legislation. “It is justifiable for Kansans to prioritize the well-being of pregnant individuals and the unborn, and we will persist in advocating for their best interests.”

Kansas, unlike other states with Republican-controlled legislatures, has taken a different stance on abortion. In 2019, the state Supreme Court ruled that the Kansas Constitution guarantees the right to bodily autonomy and thus, access to abortion is considered a fundamental right. In an attempt to overturn this decision, GOP lawmakers suggested an amendment to the state constitution stating that it does not grant the right to abortion. However, in the August 2022 vote, this ballot initiative was defeated by a significant margin, ultimately upholding abortion rights in Kansas.

Jayaram concluded that the restrictions now on hold violate a patient’s right to bodily autonomy. The judge also ruled that they violate doctors’ free speech rights by giving doctors “no discretion” to omit any of the material mandated by the state.

The judge stated that there is no reliable proof that the required delays set by the Act for random durations will actually enhance the consent and decision-making process for pregnant patients or the conduct of the medical profession.

This year, Republican legislators contended that it is still acceptable to have “reasonable limitations.” On July 1, a new regulation went into effect that mandates abortion providers to inform patients that a medication-induced abortion can be halted using a method promoted by anti-abortion organizations. The state has promised not to enforce this requirement until there is a decision from Jayaram.

During a hearing in August, Jayaram stated that his interpretation of medical research indicates that there is no evidence to support the effectiveness of the treatment regimen. Leading medical organizations have deemed the regimen to be ineffective and potentially hazardous.

Medical providers criticized current legislation passed by Republican legislators as a means of guaranteeing that patients are adequately educated prior to having an abortion. In addition to receiving medical details 24 hours in advance, patients are required to receive this information in written form, using a specific font and format. This information includes statements created by anti-abortion advocates regarding fetal growth and alleged risks associated with abortion that have been refuted, proven incorrect, or deceptive by prominent medical organizations.

Jayaram’s decision stated that abortion providers presented “believable evidence” that the information doctors are required to give is often medically incorrect and does not align with commonly accepted scientific knowledge on the development of embryos and fetuses.

The attorneys representing the providers claim that the increasing number of limitations has created a prejudiced counseling system intended to dissuade individuals from obtaining abortions. In Kansas, abortion is not prohibited until the 22nd week of pregnancy.

The providers also mentioned that as other states started prohibiting abortion and non-residents began inundating them with appointment requests, the need to challenge previous restrictions became more urgent. Based on data from the state health department, Kansas experienced a 57% rise in abortions in 2022.

According to a statement from Alice Wang, a staff lawyer at the Center for Reproductive Rights, a group advocating for abortion rights, Jayaram’s order eliminates obstacles that were seen as controlling and restrictive to accessing abortion.

She stated that these limitations are particularly detrimental since Roe v. Wade was overturned, and medical facilities in Kansas are inundated with individuals from nearby states where abortion is prohibited.

Those who oppose abortion expressed concerns before the August 2022 vote that if the state constitution remained unchanged, current abortion regulations could be jeopardized. The state’s highest court is currently examining a 2015 legislation that prohibits the most commonly used method of second-trimester abortion and a 2011 law that imposes stricter health and safety standards solely for abortion providers. However, due to ongoing legal proceedings, neither law has been enforced thus far.

Lawyers representing the state and the Alliance for Defending Freedom contend that by filing a lawsuit against the state, providers are going against the best interests of their patients who desire to have access to all available information. Danielle Underwood, spokesperson for Kansans for Life – the state’s foremost anti-abortion organization with significant political influence – stated that Jayaram’s ruling has left women seeking abortions in a more precarious position.

In a statement, she expressed that this is a nightmare for women and a dream come true for the abortion industry focused on making profits.


“Connect with John Hanna on the X platform by visiting https://twitter.com/apjdhanna.”