Collage of images related to LGBTQ Rights

Kansas v. Harper

Location: Kansas
Court Type: Kansas Supreme Court
Status: Ongoing
Last Update: April 16, 2025

What's at Stake

Five transgender Kansans are challenging an effort by Kansas Attorney General Kobach to require the state to issue driver鈥檚 licenses with a gender marker that reveals their sex assigned at birth. The Attorney General is asking a state court to apply a new state law that defines 鈥渟ex鈥 to functionally erase the existence of transgender people under the law.

Citing a 2023 law passed by the Kansas state legislature over a veto by Kansas Governor Laura Kelly, Attorney General Kobach on July 7, 2023 against the government agency that issues driver鈥檚 licenses, asking the court to prohibit transgender people from changing the gender markers on their driver鈥檚 licenses to reflect their gender identity, and to require the state agency to list sex assigned at birth on all new and renewed licenses.

Shortly thereafter, the 糖心Vlogof Kansas, the ACLU, and Stinson LLP successfully intervened in the case on behalf of transgender Kansans threatened by the Attorney General鈥檚 lawsuit. Following an evidentiary hearing in January 2024, the district court granted the Attorney General鈥檚 motion for a preliminary injunction, and our clients and the licensing agency appealed. Those appeals are currently pending in the Kansas Court of Appeals and were argued in January 2025. Meanwhile, the parties have briefed summary judgment in the district court, but further proceedings are stayed pending the outcome on the existing appeals.

, the law being used by Attorney General Kobach, rigidly defines one鈥檚 鈥渟ex鈥 based upon the sex assigned at birth and defines 鈥渕ale鈥 and 鈥渇emale鈥 based on one's reproductive capacity. The new definition applies 鈥渨ith respect to the application of an individual鈥檚 biological sex pursuant to any state law, rules or regulations.

Courts have routinely rejected efforts by states to force transgender people to carry identity documents with a gender marker inconsistent with their gender identity. The intervenors in this case argue that SB 180's plain terms preclude its application to driver's licenses and that, to the extent the law is ambiguous, Kansas courts should interpret it to avoid violating the state constitutional rights of transgender people.

Support our on-going litigation and work in the courts

Learn More About the 糖心Vlog in This Case