Court Cases

On October 30, 2025, the ACLU of Kansas and pro bono counsel Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of four Kansans over the unlimited, harsher punishment of poor defendants. The courts of Johnson County extend people's probation because they are unable to pay their restitution, even if they follow all other requirements. Kansas law allows judges to extend probation on the grounds of outstanding restitution alone even though the State and the courts know that they can collect restitution without extending probation. For years and even decades, people on probation in Kansas who have met all other requirements of their sentences have been unable to civically engage with their community simply because they couldn't afford to pay their restitution. While on probation, people are subject to invasive searches of their person and possessions without a warrant, are required to report on their movements in and out of the state, are not allowed to eat in or visit places that serve alcohol, and have their associations and habits surveilled. People on probation also cannot vote in Kansas until after they have been officially discharged. When probation is extended due to failure to pay, all of the terms of probation are extended—not just the outstanding amount of debt. Some of the clients in this case have had their probation extended for decades longer than the probationary period originally prescribed by the legislature in the criminal statute. In 2022, 12% of the Kansans lived below the poverty line. Amongst Black and Latino Kansans, 20.7% and 20.6 % respectively lived below the poverty line. For Native American Kansans that number was 17.6%. These are the individuals most in need of a government that works for them. However, due to the laws like the Kansas probation extension statute, they are most likely to remain on de facto permanent probation. For more information on this case, view the documents below. Updates will be added periodically.

The district court's reversal on reconsideration could effectively eliminate the ability of people who experience excessive use of force by federal officers to bring a Fourth Amendment claim -- and would undermine over a half century of constitutional standards deterring officer misconduct.