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 v. Kobach

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 v. Kobach

Filing date: 06.06.2023
This case challenges a Kansas regulatory scheme that forces providers to relay inaccurate information to patients and makes it more difficult for Kansans to access abortion care.

Share this page

  • facebook
  • Twitter
  • linkedin
  • Email id

On June 6, 2023, the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit in state court challenging several onerous, harmful Kansas abortion restrictions that greatly diminish access to care. Kansas’s restrictions, which were scheduled to go into effect on July 1, force providers to convey inaccurate medical information and impose arbitrary bureaucratic requirements that delay time-sensitive care.

On October 30, a Kansas state court issued a temporary injunction blocking several of these laws from going into effect, including restrictions that compel providers to convey false government-scripted information to patients and impose unjustified requirements that threaten patients’ health. 

State lawmakers passed the Women’s Right to Know Act (or “Biased Counseling Scheme”) just eight months after Kansan voters overwhelmingly rejected efforts to eliminate the fundamental right to abortion from the state constitution.

The restrictions being challenged in the lawsuit include:

  • A requirement that all patients are given inaccurate state-mandated information before they can receive care, including medically unfounded statements that abortion poses a “risk of premature birth in future pregnancies” and “risk of breast cancer”.
  • Arbitrary bureaucratic requirements that delay access to time-sensitive care, such as insisting that the state-mandated information given to patients conform to a specific typeface, font size, and color.
  • A medically unnecessary rule forcing patients to wait 30 minutes after meeting with their provider before they may receive abortion care.
  • A law requiring providers to relay to their patients at least five times that medication abortion can be “reversed”—a false, and potentially dangerous, claim unsupported by scientific evidence.

On August 8, 2023, a Kansas state trial court judge heard oral arguments in the Center’s challenge to block the restrictions, some of which have yet to take effect.

On May 20, 2024, the Center and Planned Parenthood filed a legal challenge to HB 2749—a new law that would force providers to report to the state patients’ reasons for seeking abortion—and asked the court to add the challenge to this case. HB 2749 requires providers to have patients rank their top reasons for seeking an abortion, such as financial difficulty, a threat to their health posed by pregnancy, or the pregnancy resulting from rape or incest. It also requires providers to collect patients’ demographic information, including age, race, marital status, state or country of residence, highest level of education, and whether the patient has reported domestic violence. The law passed April 29 after the Kansas Legislature overrode a veto from Governor Laura Kelly, and it is set to take effect July 1.

Case Arguments 

In the lawsuit, the Center argued that the restrictions violate the state constitution, including providers’ right to free speech and their patients’ right to abortion. 

Specifically, the Center argued that the Kansas Biased Counseling Scheme:

  • Imposes unique, additional “informed consent” requirements on abortion that it does not impose on any other health care in Kansas.
  • Undermines informed consent and its underlying ethical principles by forcing providers to disseminate inaccurate and/or misleading information to their patients.
  • Harms the health and safety of people seeking abortion by delaying time-sensitive health care, requiring providers to force potentially traumatizing information on their patients, and mandating that providers convey medically inaccurate information that poses threats to patients’ safety.
  • Stigmatizes abortion care and discriminates against pregnant people seeking abortion care by perpetuating the demeaning view that people seeking abortions are uniquely incapable of making informed health care decisions.

In their October 30 decision, the Kansas state court ruled that there is no “credible scientific/medical evidence that the ‘reversal’ therapy proposed in the Amendment actually ‘affect’ the effects of mifepristone. Indeed, the overwhelming weight of credible evidence, given this record, suggests that such a theory is misleading, untested, potentially-dangerous for women, and speculative.” They further stated that “the State’s rationale and schemes… violate the fundamental rights of ‘free speech’ held by the provider plaintiffs.”

In granting a temporary injunction, the court further declared that it was “skeptical” the Act’s requirements effectuated a genuine State interest, instead characterizing the Biased Counseling Scheme as a “thinly-veiled effort to stigmatize the procedure and instill fear in patients that are contemplating an abortion, such that they make an alternative choice, based upon disproven and unsupportable claims.”

The additional challenge filed May 20, 2024, asserts that by requiring providers to interrogate patients with invasive and unnecessary questions—including probing the “reasons” they are seeking an abortion—HB 2749 directly interferes with Kansans’ bodily autonomy and their fundamental right to make their own decisions about health care.

Plaintiff(s): Hodes & Nauser, MDs, P.A.; Traci Lynn Nauser, M.D.; Tristan Fowler, D.O 

Center Attorney(s): Jiaman Wang, Cici Coquillete, Megan Jones 

Co-Counsel/Cooperating Attorney(s): Teresa A. Woody, The Woody Law Firm PC; David J. Weiner and Paul W. Rodney, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP; Mandi R. Hunter and Stephanie L. Hammann, Hunter Law Group; Erin Thompson, Planned Parenthood Great Plains; Diana O. Salgado and Emma Noftz Stern, Planned Parenthood Federation of America  

Defendant(s): Kris Kobach; Stephen M. Howe; Marc Bennett; Susan Gile; Ronald M. Varner, D.O.

Timeline:

June 06, 2023 The Center files a lawsuit in Kansas state court challenging a regulatory scheme that impose several onerous, harmful restrictions on abortion care, including a requirement that providers convey medically inaccurate information to their patients.
July 01, 2023 Abortion restrictions, including the so-called medication abortion “reversal” requirement, are scheduled to take effect in Kansas.
August 08, 2023 Kansas state trial court judge hears oral arguments in the case.
October 30, 2023 Kansas state court issues a temporary injunction blocking several of the restrictions laid out in Kansas’s regulatory scheme from taking effect.
May 20, 2024 The Center and Planned Parenthood file a legal challenge to HB 2749 and ask the court to add the challenge to this case.

Legal documents:

  • Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Supplement Second Amended Petition, 05.20.24
  • Petition in the District Court of Johnson County, Kansas Civil Court Department, 06.06.23

Read more:

  • Press release: Kansas Abortion Providers Challenge New Law Forcing Them to Give Patient Information to the State, 05.20.24
  • Press release: Kansas Court Blocks Laws Mandating Disinformation About Abortion, 10.30.23
  • Press release: Kansas Abortion Restrictions Challenged in Court, 06.06.23 
Get the latest news on reproductive rights and opportunities to take action.

Related Content

Issues:

Abortion, Legal Restrictions

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
ALERT: Defend Medication Abortion

Help fight Trump's anti-abortion policies.

FUND OUR FIGHT
Woman holding a white pill