Rucker explains Constitutional amendment pro-life proposal

The Kansas State Senator who chaired an interim committee that advanced a proposal to change the state Constitution to clarify that there is not an implied right to an abortion as previously ruled by the Kansas Supreme Court explained that rationale.

“What we discussed in the committee was the endangerment of all of the pro-life enactments that the legislature has passed since 1997 are in jeopardy,” said Eric Rucker, a Republican from Topeka.
“Everything from parental consent, to notification laws, all of the legislation that attempts to deal with cleaning up the actual abortion clinics. All of that has the possibility of being set aside. It also raises the specter of euthanasia and mercy killing. The opinion passed by the Supreme Court is that broad.”

The goal is to narrow the field, not to eliminate all abortions. They can’t do that.

“There will be all sorts of misinformation about what it is the Constitutional Amendment attempts to do,” said Rucker. “One of the things that has been popular to say in other states that have been in similar situations, like Tennessee is that, you don’t want to pass a pro-life Constitutional Amendment, because it will ban all abortions. That is absolutely untrue.”

Whatever anyone thinks about the issue, Roe v. Wade is still the law of the land. This deals with the level beneath that.

“Roe v. Wade could be off the books and all of its provisions gone and what will normally happen is that the matter of abortion regulation then would revert back to the individual states to articulate,” said Rucker. “We have articulated. This Supreme Court opinion is as deep and as wide as any state in the United States in granting unfettered abortion right to our citizens. That, we object to and don’t find to be responsible.”

Any proposed amendment would have to have two-thirds majorities in both houses of the Kansas legislature to be put on the ballot in 2020.