Kansas
Overview
Kansas has enacted multiple anti-trans laws targeting healthcare, IDs, and bathrooms. In a landmark May 2026 ruling, Judge Carl Folsom III blocked SB 63 (the gender-affirming care ban) in a scathing 117-page opinion that methodically dismantled the state’s “expert” witnesses and found the ban likely violates the Kansas Constitution.
Current Legislation
Enacted Anti-Trans Laws
2023:
- SB 180 (Women’s Bill of Rights): Defines sex biologically (e.g., based on producing ova)
- Enacted over Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto
- AG Kris Kobach used it to challenge transgender gender marker changes on driver’s licenses
- Led to partial court victory vacating future changes but not retroactive ones
2024-2026:
- HB 2426 / SB 244: Rushed through in early 2026 session
- Invalidates changed gender markers on driver’s licenses and birth certificates
- Mandates bathroom use by sex assigned at birth in government buildings
- Overrode Gov. Kelly’s veto
- March 2026 court ruling allowed enforcement during ongoing ACLU lawsuit
2025:
- SB 63 (“Help Not Harm Act”): Passed by Republican supermajority, signed into law
- Bans gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors (puberty blockers, hormone therapy, surgery)
- Allows civil actions and professional discipline against providers
- Excludes insurance coverage for gender-affirming care
- BLOCKED by court order on May 16, 2026 (see Legal Challenges below)
Proposed Anti-Trans Bills (Not Enacted)
2024:
- 17 tracked anti-trans bills across healthcare, education, performance, and other categories
Legal Challenges
⚖️ Folsom v. Kobach — SB 63 Blocked (May 2026)
On May 16, 2026, Shawnee County District Judge Carl Folsom III issued a 117-page preliminary injunction blocking SB 63, finding the ban likely violates the Kansas Constitution’s Section 1 right to personal autonomy — the same provision that protects abortion rights in the state.
Key findings from the ruling:
- Anti-trans “experts” dismantled: Judge Folsom systematically rejected the testimony of every state witness:
- Dr. James Cantor: “Has not conducted any original scientific research on the efficacy or safety of gender dysphoria treatments.” Not licensed to treat anyone under 16, never diagnosed a minor with gender dysphoria. Relied on non-peer-reviewed sources while claiming peer review was essential. Given little weight.
- Dr. Farr Curlin (Duke): “Is not a pediatrician, nor is he a psychiatrist or endocrinologist.” Has never treated anyone for gender dysphoria. Believes birth control and IVF are “ethically problematic.” Views described as “radically counter to current medical orthodoxy.” Given little-to-no weight.
- Chloe Cole: Admittedly did not receive care in Kansas; care she described “would not have occurred in Kansas” under actual clinical guidelines. Given less weight.
- Jamie Reed: Not a medical provider or mental-health professional. Affidavit addressed a clinic outside Kansas. Given little weight.
- Corinna Cohn: Affidavit described care accessed as an adult in Wisconsin — nothing to do with Kansas minors. Given little weight.
- 349 findings of fact: The judge documented the scientific evidence for gender-affirming care, finding “over 20 scientific studies” showing treatments “effective at alleviating gender dysphoria and improving a variety of mental-health outcomes, including anxiety, depression, and suicidality.”
- 99.2% continuity rate: Based on the Kansas clinic’s own long-term follow-up data, 99.2% of patients who received gender-affirming care continue to identify as transgender into adulthood. Of the remaining 0.8%, “most did not regret the medical treatment they received.”
- Cass Review rebutted: The court found the Cass Review “changed their methodology from the methodology they said they would use in their preregistration, which is a deviation from standard academic publishing practices designed to minimize bias.” The review “reaches conclusions that are similar to those in the Endocrine Society Guideline and WPATH Standards of Care.”
- European bans debunked: “None of these systematic reviews recommend categorically banning gender-affirming medical care for adolescents.” The UK, Sweden, Finland, Germany, and Norway “have not categorically prohibited gender-affirming medical care for minors.”
- State constitutional immunity: Because the ruling rests on the Kansas Constitution’s Section 1 personal-autonomy right, it is insulated from the U.S. Supreme Court and its decision in Skrmetti v. United States, which closed the federal courthouse door but left state-level challenges open.
What happens next: The injunction is temporary while the case is litigated. AG Kris Kobach has vowed to appeal. The case is ultimately likely to reach the Kansas Supreme Court, where 5 of 7 justices were appointed by Democratic governors and have repeatedly upheld Section 1 personal-autonomy rights.
Active Lawsuits
- Kansas v. Harper: AG Kobach challenged transgender gender marker changes; partial court victory
- ACLU Lawsuit: Challenging HB 2426 enforcement; March 2026 court allowed enforcement during lawsuit
Opposition
- ACLU of Kansas and Lambda Legal oppose bills citing privacy violations, violence risks, rushed processes
Key Politicians
| Name |
Party |
Chamber |
Key Actions |
| Gov. Laura Kelly |
D |
Governor |
Vetoed SB 180, HB 2426, and opposed SB 63 (vetoes overridden by supermajority) |
| AG Kris Kobach |
R |
Attorney General |
Pushed bathroom/ID restrictions, challenged gender marker changes, defending SB 63 ban |
| Judge Carl Folsom III |
— |
Shawnee County District Court |
Issued preliminary injunction blocking SB 63; authored 117-page ruling |
Timeline
| Date |
Event |
| 2023 |
SB 180 enacted over Gov. Kelly’s veto |
| 2024 |
17 anti-trans bills tracked |
| 2025 |
SB 63 (“Help Not Harm Act”) passed, banning gender-affirming care for minors |
| Early 2026 |
HB 2426/SB 244 rushed through, veto overridden |
| March 2026 |
Court allows enforcement of HB 2426 during ACLU lawsuit |
| May 16, 2026 |
Judge Folsom issues preliminary injunction blocking SB 63; 117-page ruling |
Resources
Sources
- Erin in the Morning — Kansas Judge Eviscerates Anti-Trans “Experts”
- ACLU Kansas - Statement on Bill
- KCUR - Kansas Transgender ID Law
- Lambda Legal - Gov Kelly Veto
- ACLU - Kansas Challenges
- Kansas Legislature - HB 2071
- LegiScan - SB 180
- WIBW — Kobach Appeals Ruling on Help Not Harm Act
- Trans Legislation Tracker 2024/KS
- Trans Legislation Tracker 2023/KS
Related Pages
- Alliance Defending Freedom — Litigation arm behind many anti-trans care bans
- Kris Kobach — Kansas Attorney General
- James Cantor — Discredited expert witness whose testimony was rejected by Judge Folsom
- Chloe Cole — Prominent detransitioner whose testimony was given less weight
- Jamie Reed — Self-styled “whistleblower” whose affidavit was given little weight
Last updated: 2026-05-19