Skip to content
Center for Reproductive Rights
Center for Reproductive Rights

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • The Center’s Impact
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Annual Reports
    • Corporate Engagement
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
    • Careers
    • Contact Us
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • Cases Archive
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Global Advocacy
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Stories
    • Events
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Press Releases
    • Statements
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • U.S. Abortion Rights: Resources
    • Maps
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
    • Repro Red Flags: Agency Watch
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Become a Monthly Donor
    • Make a Donor Advised Fund Gift
    • Leave a Legacy Gift
    • Donate Gifts of Stock
    • Give a Gift in Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Employee Matching Gifts
    • Mail a Check
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Donate
icon-hamburger icon-magnifying-glass Donate
icon-magnifying-glass-teal

Hodes & Nauser MDs, P.A., et al. v. Schmidt & Howe

Center for Reproductive Rights - Center for Reproductive Rights - search logo
search Close Close icon
Center for Reproductive Rights -
Menu Close Menu Close icon
Donate

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • The Center’s Impact
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Annual Reports
    • Corporate Engagement
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
    • Careers
    • Contact Us
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • Cases Archive
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Global Advocacy
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Stories
    • Events
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Press Releases
    • Statements
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • U.S. Abortion Rights: Resources
    • Maps
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
    • Repro Red Flags: Agency Watch
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Become a Monthly Donor
    • Make a Donor Advised Fund Gift
    • Leave a Legacy Gift
    • Donate Gifts of Stock
    • Give a Gift in Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Employee Matching Gifts
    • Mail a Check
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn

  • Overview

Share this page

Donate Now

Join Now

Hodes & Nauser MDs, P.A., et al. v. Schmidt & Howe

Filing date: 06.01.2015

Share this page

  • facebook
  • Twitter
  • linkedin
  • Email id

(REVISED 4.07.2021) This lawsuit, filed on June 1, 2015, challenges a Kansas law (SB95) banning the most commonly used method of ending a pregnancy in the second trimester—a law that could force some women to undergo an additional invasive unnecessary medical procedure even against the medical judgment of her physician.  The law was slated to take effect July 1, 2015.  Kansas Governor Brownback signed SB 95 in April 2015 over the objections of local and national medical experts.

Major medical groups oppose political interference and medically unnecessary procedures similar to what is found in SB 95. In an amicus brief opposing the measure, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) stated that SB 95 “raises serious safety and health concerns for women as well as intrudes unnecessarily into the patient-physician relationship.”

Plaintiff(s):  Hodes &, Nauser MDs, P.A.,, Herbert C. Hodes, M.D., and Traci Lynn Nauser, M.D.

Center Attorney(s): Genevieve Scott, Caroline Sacerdote, Alice Wang

Case Summary:

We filed our complaint in state court on June 1, 2015. The trial court granted our request for a temporary injunction on June 25, 2015 and the law has remained blocked while the case proceeds. The State appealed the the temporary injunction and oral argument took place in front of the full Kansas Court of Appeals on December 9. On January 22, 2016, the Court of Appeals upheld the district court’s decision, ruling that Kansas women have a right to abortion under the Kansas Constitution. The State filed an appeal of the decision with the Kansas Supreme Court and oral argument took place on March 16, 2017.

On April 26, 2019, the Kansas Supreme Court issued a 6-1 decision in our favor, upholding the temporary injunction and ruling that the Kansas Constitution contains an independent right to abortion for the first time.  The Kansas Supreme Court also clarified for Kansas courts that laws limiting abortion access must meet the highest standard of judicial review to satisfy the requirements of the Constitution. 

The case was then remanded back to the trial court for a decision on the merits.

On April 7, 2021, a Kansas state court permanently blocked the state’s ban—issuing the final decision on the merits of the case. In the ruling, Judge Teresa Watson said banning D&E abortion “is not a narrowly tailored solution to the compelling state interest Defendants seek to address because, according to the evidence before the court, it would leave no alternative for second trimester abortions other than more complicated, less reliable, less tested, and high-risk procedures.”

The State has filed an appeal with the Kansas Supreme Court.

Stories

  • Center in the Spotlight: Will Kansas pursue Texas-style abortion restrictions? Here’s what stands in the way. (Kansas City Star), 9.13.21
  • Feature Story: Kansas Court Strikes Down Abortion Method Ban, Reaffirming Right to Abortion Under State Constitution, 4.12.21
  • Center in the Spotlight: Kansas judge overturns ban on some abortions, citing state Supreme Court ruling (Kansas City Star), 4.7.21

Press Releases

  • Kansas Ban on Standard Abortion Method Struck Down as Unconstitutional, 04/07/21
  • Kansas Supreme Court Says State Constitution Protects Abortion, 05/02/19
  • Kansas Supreme Court Says State Constitution Protects the Right to Abortion, 4/26/19
  • Kansas Court of Appeals: State Constitution Protects Right to Safe, Legal Abortion, 1/22/16
  • State Court Blocks Kansas Law Criminalizing Doctors for Providing Safe, Common Abortion Method, 6/25/15
  • Center for Reproductive Rights Challenges Kansas Law Criminalizing Doctors for Providing Safe, Common Abortion Method, 6/1/15

Rulings

  • District Court order granting permanent injunction, 04/07/21 
  • Kansas Supreme Court Opinion Upholding Temporary Injunction, 4/26/19
  • Kansas Court of Appeals Opinion Upholding Temporary Injunction, 1/22/16
  • Order Granting Temporary Injunction, 6/30/15

Filings

  • Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment, 3/6/20
  • Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, 2/21/20
  • Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, 1/31/20
  • Kansas Supreme Court Brief for Amicus Curiae ACOG in Support of Plaintiffs, 6/13/16
  • Kansas Supreme Court, Respondents’ Supplemental Brief, 5/25/16
  • Response to Petition for Review, 2/17/16
  • Kansas Court of Appeals Brief for Amicus Curiae ACOG in Support of Plaintiffs, 11/9/15
  • Kansas Court of Appeals Brief for Amicus Curiae Kansas Physicians in Support of Plaintiffs, 11/9/15
  • Kansas Court of Appeals, Brief of Appellees, 11/4/15
  • Motion for Temporary Injunction, 6/1/15

Explore all case documents & related news

Related Content

Issues:

Abortion, Legal Restrictions, Other Barriers

Regions:

United States

Work:

In the Courts

Case Status:

Open

Footer Menu

  • Careers
  • Privacy Policy
  • Gift Acceptance Policy
  • Contact Us

Center for Reproductive Rights
© (1992-2024)

Use of this site signifies agreement with our disclaimer and privacy policy.

Better Business Bureau Charity Watch Top Rated Center for Reproductive Rights
This site uses necessary, analytics and social media cookies to improve your experience and deliver targeted advertising. Click "Options" or click here to learn more and customize your cookie settings, otherwise please click "Accept" to proceed.
OPTIONSACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
CookieDurationDescription
_ga2 yearsThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
_gat_UA-6619340-11 minuteNo description
_gid1 dayThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the wbsite is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages viisted in an anonymous form.
_parsely_session30 minutesThis cookie is used to track the behavior of a user within the current session.
HotJar: _hjAbsoluteSessionInProgress30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjFirstSeen30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjid1 yearThis cookie is set by Hotjar. This cookie is set when the customer first lands on a page with the Hotjar script. It is used to persist the random user ID, unique to that site on the browser. This ensures that behavior in subsequent visits to the same site will be attributed to the same user ID.
HotJar: _hjIncludedInPageviewSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjIncludedInSessionSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjTLDTestsessionNo description
SSCVER1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for online advertising by creating user profile based on their preferences.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
CookieDurationDescription
_fbp3 monthsThis cookie is set by Facebook to deliver advertisement when they are on Facebook or a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising after visiting this website.
fr3 monthsThe cookie is set by Facebook to show relevant advertisments to the users and measure and improve the advertisements. The cookie also tracks the behavior of the user across the web on sites that have Facebook pixel or Facebook social plugin.
IDE1 year 24 daysUsed by Google DoubleClick and stores information about how the user uses the website and any other advertisement before visiting the website. This is used to present users with ads that are relevant to them according to the user profile.
IMRID1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for storing the start and end of the user session for nielsen statistics. It helps in consumer profiling for online advertising.
personalization_id2 yearsThis cookie is set by twitter.com. It is used integrate the sharing features of this social media. It also stores information about how the user uses the website for tracking and targeting.
TDID1 yearThe cookie is set by CloudFare service to store a unique ID to identify a returning users device which then is used for targeted advertising.
test_cookie15 minutesThis cookie is set by doubleclick.net. The purpose of the cookie is to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
CookieDurationDescription
adEdition1 dayNo description
akaas_MSNBC10 daysNo description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional1 yearThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others1 yearNo description
geoEdition1 dayNo description
next-i18next1 yearNo description
SAVE & ACCEPT
Powered by CookieYes Logo
Scroll Up
Abortion bans cost lives.

This isn't political—it's life or death.

GIVE NOW
Abortion is Essential Rally