Draft:Hodes & Nauser, MDs, P.A. v. Schmidt
 | Draft article not currently submitted for review.
This is a draft Articles for creation (AfC) submission. It is not currently pending review. While there are no deadlines, abandoned drafts may be deleted after six months. To edit the draft click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. To be accepted, a draft should:
It is strongly discouraged to write about yourself, your business or employer. If you do so, you must declare it. Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Last edited by JJMC89 bot (talk | contribs) 5 months ago. (Update) |
| Hodes & Nauser, MDs, P.A. v. Schmidt | |
|---|---|
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
| Full case name | Hodes & Nauser, MDS, P.A.; Herbert C. Hodes, M.D.; and Traci Lynn Nauser, M.D., Appellees, v. Derek Schmidt, in His Official Capacity as Attorney General of the State of Kansas; and Stephen M. Howe, in His Official Capacity as District Attorney for Johnson County |
| Citations | 309 Kan. 610; 440 P.3d 461 |
| Case history | |
| Prior action | 52 Kan. App. 2d 274, 368 P.3d 667 (2016) |
| Case opinions | |
| Section 1 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights affords protection of the right of personal autonomy, which includes the ability to control one's own body, to assert bodily integrity, and to exercise self-determination. This right allows a woman to make her own decisions regarding her body, health, family formation, and family life—decisions that can include whether to continue a pregnancy. | |
| Per curiam | |
| Concurrence | Biles |
| Dissent | Stegall |
Hodes & Nauser, MDs, P.A., v. Schmidt, 309 Kan. 610, 440 P.3d 461 (2019),[1] is a landmark Kansas Supreme Court case which held that the Kansas Constitution protected the right to abortion in Kansas.
Background
[edit]In the 19th century, bans by state legislatures on abortion were viewed as protecting the life of the mother given the number of deaths caused by abortions; state governments saw themselves as looking out for the lives of their citizens.[2] Kansas's first ban on abortion was passed in 1859, four years after the formation of the Kansas Territory.[3] It read:
“Every person who shall administer to any woman, pregnant with a quick child, any medicine, drug or substance whatsoever, or shall use or employ any instrument or other means, with intent thereby to destroy such child, unless the same shall have been necessary to preserve the life of such mother, or shall have been advised by a physician to be necessary for that purpose, shall be deemed guilty of manslaughter in the second degree.”[3]
Kansas Senate Bill 95
[edit]In January 2015, the Kansas Unborn Child Protection From Dismemberment Abortion Act was introduced in the Kansas Senate which banned intact dilation and extraction abortions with no exceptions except for the mother's life or health.
References
[edit]- ^ Hodes & Nauser, MDs, P.A., v. Schmidt, 440 Kan. 461 (2019).
- ^ Buell, Samuel (1991-01-01). "Criminal Abortion Revisited". New York University Law Review. 66 (6): 1774–1831. PMID 11652642.
- ^ a b Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Org., No. 19-1392, slip op. at 104 (U.S. June 24, 2022).