As KFL Predicted, More Abortion Limits Blocked

The following statement was released in response to the telemedicine abortion ban in Kansas being blocked.

“We’re sickened to watch another commonsense abortion limit be blocked by a judge after a law was challenged by the abortion industry, which consistently puts its own profits and convenience ahead of women’s health and safety,” said Jeanne Gawdun, KFL Director of Government Relations.

“Issuing the order the day before Thanksgiving appears to be a ploy to quietly slip the latest loosening of abortion industry regulations past Kansans preoccupied with holiday preparations. The timing is suspect, which proves once again that unlimited abortion is woefully out-of-step with Kansas values. Sadly, pregnant women will be endangered by this ruling, the abortion industry will profit off the destruction of more innocent babies, and other abortion limits are just a few court filings away from also being removed.”

“The Value Them Both Amendment was written to keep broadly supported limits like this in place. The amendment failed to pass after the abortion industry and its allies mounted an out-of-state funded disinformation campaign to convince voters that abortion was already “heavily regulated” in Kansas and would remain so after a “no” vote. They lied. Today’s ruling confirms that every existing abortion limit can now be blocked or struck down due to the extreme 2019 Hodes ruling from the Kansas Supreme Court.”

The so-called “Trust Women” abortion clinic, which was the plaintiff on the case to remove the in-person doctor requirement, was a member organization of Kansans for Constitutional Freedom, which opposed the Value Them Both Amendment this past summer.

Kansans need to be informed of the dangers of this removal of the in-person doctor requirement, namely:

  1. Endangering the life of the mother from an undiagnosed ectopic pregnancy
  2. Endangering the life of the mother from an unsupervised, failed chemical abortion, with no doctor on premises to provide continuation of care for a woman experiencing rapidly deteriorating physical condition
  3. Increased risk of excruciating pain for a later-term unborn child, due to a lack of doctor’s confirmation of the baby’s gestational age.