Protect Medication Abortion
Anti-abortion extremists are attacking medication abortion. Add your name in support of access to medication abortion.
Activism 101 Profiles
Anthony Powell’s Record Against Reproductive Freedom
We strongly oppose Anthony Powell, Trump's Pick for the United States District Court for the District of Kansas
Key Takeaways
- Reproductive Freedom for All strongly opposes Anthony Powell for the District of Kansas.
- Reproductive Freedom for All opposes his nomination due to his record of hostility toward reproductive freedom and voting rights.
- + Read More
- Anthony Powell also has a record of attacking other fundamental rights, including LGBTQ+ equality, and voting rights.
- Trump has a deeply troubling track record of nominating judges who oppose reproductive freedom, reflecting the Trump administration’s vision for courts that are hostile to the basic reproductive rights and freedoms of all Americans.
Who is Anthony Powell?
Anthony Powell was nominated by President Trump to a lifetime appointment to the District of Kansas. Reproductive Freedom for All opposes his nomination due to his record of hostility toward reproductive freedom and voting rights.
Powell also has a record of attacking other fundamental rights, including LGBTQ+ equality, voting rights, and more.
Quick Hits: Anthony Powell’s Record Against Reproductive Freedom
As the Solicitor General of Kansas, Powell helped lead various attacks on reproductive freedom, including attacking access to mifepristone, defending restrictive licensing regulations targeting abortion providers, being dismissive of Kansas voters’ decision to overwhelmingly reject a constitutional amendment to restrict abortion, and targeting reproductive rights organizations.
Later as a state judge, Powell joined a dissent that argued that the Kansas Constitution does not contain an independent state-law right to abortion.
Dive Deeper: Anthony Powell’s Anti-Repro Record
Endorsed Attacks on Abortion Access
As the Solicitor General of Kansas, Powell represented the state in supporting the anti-abortion organization Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM) in its challenge to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval and subsequent regulatory decisions about mifepristone.
- Anti-abortion attorneys general from Missouri, Idaho, and Kansas filed to intervene in the case, but were not parties to the issues before the Court. In June 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that the anti-abortion group did not have standing and sent the case back to the lower courts.
- Powell represented Kansas alongside the state’s attorneys general from Missouri and Idaho in a request to intervene in the case, boldly alleging that the states had standing despite having no connection to the district where the case was filed.
- Powell also represented Kansas in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of the anti-abortion group’s baseless claims. The brief, which was filed alongside the Missouri and Idaho states attorneys general, propagated medically and factually inaccurate anti-abortion disinformation.
- In January 2025, Judge Kacsmaryk took the extraordinary step of allowing Kansas, Missouri, and Idaho to continue this baseless case despite the states’ lack of connection to the Texas district where the case is being litigated and without the involvement of AHM, the group that initially brought the claim. The states’ attorneys and solicitors general are pushing the FDA to rescind approval of mifepristone, or in the alternative, severely restrict access to mifepristone by instating medically unnecessary restrictions.
- When he was a judge on the Kansas Court of Appeals, Powell joined a dissenting opinion arguing that the Kansas Constitution does not contain an independent state-law right to abortion. The majority upheld a lower court’s decision to block a Kansas law that would ban, with limited exceptions, procedural abortion procedures after the first trimester of pregnancy. Had Powell’s dissenting position been adopted, it would have allowed the abortion ban to take effect.
- As Solicitor General of Kansas, Powell defended the state in challenges to restrictive licensing regulations targeting abortion providers. The Kansas Supreme Court ruled against Powell in both cases, affirming that the Kansas Constitution protects the right to abortion through the fundamental right to personal autonomy.
- As a Kansas Court of Appeals judge, Powell explicitly objected to a citation of a particular case in a concurring opinion because it recognized a right to abortion under the Kansas Constitution.
- In an oral argument before the Kansas Supreme Court in March 2023, Solicitor General Powell stated that the 2022 ballot measure in which Kansas voters overwhelmingly rejected a constitutional amendment to restrict abortion “doesn’t matter” and should not factor into the court’s decisions. Powell dismissed the court’s potential consideration of voters’ opinion on reproductive rights as resolving cases by “judicial fiat.”
- As Solicitor General of Kansas, Powell served as co-counsel and lead attorney in a case that targeted reproductive rights advocacy organizations. He defended HB 2196, a campaign finance law that would impose enhanced reporting requirements on ballot-issue advocacy groups—specifically targeting Kansans for Constitutional Freedom, the coalition that spent $11 million defeating a 2022 anti-abortion ballot measure.
Efforts to Undermine Planned Parenthood
During his time as Solicitor General of Kansas, Powell filed an amicus brief on behalf of Kansas and twelve other states in support of a student who sought to hang “Defund Planned Parenthood” flyers in a public high school. While framed as a First Amendment case, the brief reflects an active effort to advance anti-reproductive freedom messaging through the Kansas Attorney General’s (AG) Office.
Affiliation with Anti-Reproductive Freedom Organizations
Powell has been a member of the Federalist Society since 2003. The Federalist Society is a well-funded, conservative legal network that exerts influence through law schools, professional networks, and conferences, and over the judiciary at large. It serves as a talent and influence pipeline for the conservative movement to cultivate young lawyers and then pack the courts with judges who will execute their unpopular agenda, which includes undermining reproductive freedom.
Career
- Bachelor of Arts, The George Washington University, 1985
- Juris Doctor, Washburn University School of Law, 1991
- Associate, Martin and Churchill, 1991-1995
- Attorney, Patterson, Van Zandt, Powell, Woolley, and Harric, LC (now Patterson Legal Group), 1995-1997
- Of Counsel, Martin and Churchill, 1997-2003
- House Representative, Kansas House of Representatives, 1995-2003
- Judge, Eighteenth Judicial District, Sedgwick County District Court, 2003-2013
- Judge, Kansas Court of Appeals, 2013-2022
- Solicitor General, Kansas Attorney General’s Office, 2023-Present
Anthony Powell's Record Against Democracy and Voting Rights
As the Solicitor General of Kansas, Powell led several efforts to undermine the right to vote in Kansas.
- Powell defended HB 2332, which prohibited prefilled mail-ballot applications.
- Powell defended HB 2183, which made it a felony to engage in conduct that gives the appearance of being an election official—a vague standard the Kansas Supreme Court found to be likely unconstitutional.
Anthony Powell's Record Against LGBTQIA+ Equality
As the Solicitor General of Kansas, Powell led several efforts to undermine LGBTQIA+ equality, specifically targeting the transgender community.
- Powell was co-counsel in a case where he defended SB 63, a law that bans gender-affirming care for minors.
- Powell fought to prevent transgender Kansans from changing gender markers on driver’s licenses in a 2024 lawsuit. He subsequently co-authored Attorney General Opinion 2023-2, interpreting the Women’s Bill of Rights Act (SB 180) to prohibit transgender individuals from updating driver’s license sex designations. The Kansas Legislature later codified this restrictive interpretation into state law.
- Powell also filed amicus briefs in two cases supporting state policies denying gender marker amendments to birth certificates.
The Big Picture
Trump has a deeply troubling track record of nominating judges who oppose reproductive freedom, reflecting the Trump administration’s vision for courts that are hostile to the basic reproductive rights and freedoms of all Americans.
Decisions made by these judges will impact our health, access to care, and daily lives, and we deserve to know whether these nominees are committed to fairness and equality under the law or if they are beholden to an ideology or agenda opposing reproductive freedom.
Citations and Sources
- Anthony Powell, Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees, United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary (March 19, 2026).
- Brief for Kansas, Missouri and Idaho as Amicus Curiae Supporting Respondent, Food & Drug Admin. v. All. for Hippocratic Med., 602 U.S. 367 (2024).
- + Read More
- U.S. Food and Drug Admin. v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, 602 U.S. 367 (2024), https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-235_n7ip.pdf.
- Motion of Mo., Idaho, and Kan. to Intervene, U.S. Food and Drug Admin., et al., Petitioners, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, et al., No. 23-235, 23-236 (2024), https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-235/298312/20240122150358882_A.%202024-01-22%20-%20Alliance%20v.%20FDA%20-%20Motion%20to%20Intervene.pdf; Reply in Support of Motion to Intervene, No. 23-235, 23-236 (2024), https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-235/299912/20240206153029384_2024-02-6%20-%20Alliance%20v.%20FDA%20-%20Reply%20in%20Support%20of%20Motion%20to%20Intervene.pdf.
- Brief of Mo., Idaho, and Kan. in Support of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, U.S. Food and Drug Admin. v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, Nos. 23-235, 23-236 (2024), https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-235/301864/20240229125923158_1.%202024-02-29%20-%20FDA%20v.%20Alliance%20for%20Hippocratic%20Medicine%20-%20States%20amicus%20brief.pdf.
- Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint, Mo. v. U.S. Food and Drug Admin., 2:22-CV-233-Z (N.D. Tex. 2025), https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/gkvlbeywevb/01162025abortion.pdf.
- Hodes & Nauser, MDS, P.A. v. Schmidt, 52 Kan. App. 2d 274, 368 P.3d 667 (2016).
- Hodes & Nauser, MDs, P.A. v. Stanek, 318 Kan. 995, 551 P.3d 62 (2024).
- Nelson v. State, 388 P.3d 627 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017).
- John Hanna, Kansas Supreme Court signals continued abortion rights support, PBS News (Mar. 27, 2023), https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/kansas-supreme-court-signals-continued-abortion-rights-support.
- Kansans for Const. Freedom v. Kobach, No. 2:25-cv-02265-DDC-GEB, 2026 WL 56261 (D. Kan. Feb. 4, 2026); About Us, Kansans for Constitutional Freedom, https://kansansforfreedom.com/about/.
- Brief of Amici Curiae States of Kansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and South Dakota in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellants and Reversal, E.D. v. Noblesville Sch. Dist., 151 F.4th 907 (7th Cir. 2025).
- Anthony Powell, Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees, United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, p. 4 (March 19, 2026).
- VoteAmerica v. Schwab, 121 F.4th 822 (10th Cir. 2024).
- League of Women Voters of Kansas v. Schwab, 317 Kan. 805, 539 P.3d 1022 (2024).
- Lily Loe v. Kobach, DG-2025-CV-241 (Douglas Co. Dist. Ct.).
- State ex rel. Kobach v. Harper, 65 Kan. App. 2d 680, 571 P.3d 6 (2025).
- Anthony Powell, Attachment Package for Question 12(a) of the Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees, p. 16, United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary (Mar. 19, 2026).
- Kansas v. Harper, American Civil Liberties Union, (March 11, 2026), https://www.aclu.org/cases/kansas-v-harper.
- Anthony Powell, Attachment Package for Question 12(a) of the Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees, p. 83, United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary (Mar. 19, 2026); Brief for Kansas, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia as Amicus Curiae Supporting Defendant-Appellees And Affirmance, Gore v. Lee, 107 F.4th 548 (6th Cir. 2024).
Fight back against anti-abortion extremism with us
Add Your Name: We Need Court Reform!
Sign the petition in support of court reform efforts, including court expansion and investigations into ethics of justices, to restore the legitimacy of our judicial system.
Commit to Being a Repro Freedom Advocate
It's going to take all of us to win back our freedom. Add your name today to commit to fighting for reproductive freedom.
Tell Congress to Protect Our Reproductive Freedom
Send a message now to tell your U.S. Senators and Representative that reproductive freedom is a top priority for you—and that you're part of a nationwide movement that votes.
Further Reading on Anti-Abortion Extremism
Profiles Activism 101
Michael Hendershot’s Record Against Reproductive Freedom
Profiles Activism 101
Benjamin Flowers’ Record Against Reproductive Freedom
Profiles Activism 101