by Sarah Neely UPDATED July 23, 2024 5:14 PM

Topeka, KS – Earlier this month, the Kansas Supreme Court reaffirmed its total devotion to expanding unfettered, late-term abortion across the Sunflower State. Operation Rescue has sounded the alarm repeatedly ever since 2019, when the state Supreme Court ruled that a right to abortion was protected within the state constitution. 

Now, in two decisions handed down on July 5 – Hodes & Nauser MDs v. Kobach and Hodes & Nauser MDs v. Stanek – justices also struck down numerous long-standing abortion regulations by a 5-1 vote, including the removal of a ban on gruesome dismemberment abortions. Justice Caleb Stegall was the only dissenting judge.

“This has always been the long-term goal for the Abortion Cartel,” says Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “First, it seeks to enshrine abortion in the constitution, then use that grounding to dismantle every state protection for children in the womb as fast as they can. These two rulings are only the beginning and, as usual, preborn children will pay the horrific price.”

The brutality of the court’s two opinions against preborn persons is obvious in specific pages of Hodes v. Kobach, wherein the Court endeavors to disprove the state’s assertion that a dismemberment abortion – that is, an abortion where a living child that can feel pain is torn apart in the womb – is “particularly barbaric” and, in turn, removes more dignity in death compared to other procedures.  

Leaning on the reasoning of the district court’s previous ruling, the opinion bizarrely argues that all forms of abortion remove dignity, but concludes that assertion only means no methods of abortion are worse than another: 

“[The district court] held that S.B. 95 is not narrowly tailored because, even if the D&E is undignified, ‘so is death by induced labor or caesarean section prior to viability, cutting the umbilical cord, or injecting lethal chemicals into the womb or into the heart of the unborn child.’ The court reasoned: ‘Defendants offer no facts and little argument about how these alternatives for bringing death promote greater respect for the value and dignity of human life as a substitute for D&E….”

However, with the logical whiplash so common to justifying atrocities, the court openly acknowledged that abortion removes dignity from a group of persons (a non-person cannot have or be withheld dignity), but went on to rule that the state failed to show the Kansas government has a compelling interest in regulating dismemberment abortions. 

“What is a more compelling reason to govern than human dignity being stripped away?” asks Newman. “This is exactly what our team predicted about the state of Kansas,  where Operation Rescue’s headquarters is located. This court will continue to tear down protections for the preborn until our state is an abortion wasteland.”

Justice Stegall keenly addressed the court’s mental gymnastics in his dissenting opinion: 

“…it is noteworthy that the majority cannot bring itself to acknowledge the government’s compelling interest in unborn human life. Yes, the majority maneuvers around this problem by skipping it in favor of its narrow tailoring analysis. But the truth is, the majority doesn’t answer this question because it is so decidedly troublesome to the majority’s new section 1 regime…For those unfamiliar with legalese, this translates to, ‘We don’t want to tie our hands with such inconveniences.’”

Protections for preborn persons fared no better in the second opinion handed down on July 5 (Hodes v. Stanek). Aside from striking down a regulation requiring abortions done after 22 weeks to only be performed in a licensed hospital or ambulatory setting, numerous other regulations — everything from requiring a physician to be present for chemical abortions, to requiring inspections of abortion facilities, or barring non-physicians from performing abortions — have been thrown out.

Despite other ambulatory centers in the state still being required to adhere to common sense regulations and accountability, abortion clinics have now been given a sweeping free pass.  And, at this point, the only question that remains is not if the Kansas Supreme Court will strike down another pro-life law, but when. 

“This Kansas Supreme Court seems to think their legacy will be ‘protecting access to abortion,’” says Newman. “In truth, their legacy will be the blood of innocent babies and the destroyed wombs of injured mothers. Abortion always brings destruction, and the Kansas Supreme Court just opened the floodgate.”