GOVERNMENT
Kansans now can't change their driver's license gender marker for at least a few months
Andrew Bahl
Topeka Capital-Journal
Gender marker changes on Kansas driver's licenses will remain barred for at least the next few months, as attorneys continue to spar over the impact of a new state law.
In a ruling Tuesday, Shawnee County District Court Judge Teresa Watson said a temporary pause on gender marker changes will extend indefinitely until a longer lasting halt can be considered by her court, a move supported by all parties involved in the case.
Initially, the temporary restraining order was set to last until early next week.
But a hearing on the more extensive pause won't take place until early November, as a group of transgender individuals seeks to intervene in the ongoing lawsuit, brought by Attorney General Kris Kobach against Gov. Laura Kelly's administration over their interpretation of the new law, Senate Bill 180.
The lawsuit, filed by Kobach earlier this month, is seeking to compel the Kansas Department of Revenue to permanently halt gender marker changes, pointing to SB 180, which outlines strict definitions of sex along biological lines in state law.
Transgender Kansans will remain unable to change the gender marker on their driver's license for at least the next few months.
Kobach's office has argued that the bill text, which applies those definitions to state and local agencies that collect vital statistics information, would bar gender marker changes on driver's licenses, as well as birth certificates, though that issue is currently part of a separate federal court fight.
The Kelly administration has resisted, pointing to a different interpretation of SB 180. Watson disagreed with them, however, in her ruling granting the temporary restraining order.
Unclear whether transgender Kansans and ACLU can intervene in lawsuit
It will also remain unclear whether a group of transgender individuals, represented by the ACLU of Kansas, will be able to intervene.
In a motion filed last week, the group sought inclusion in the case, arguing the interests of their clients would be irreparably harmed if Kobach were to prevail and that the voices of transgender Kansans should be heard.
"I think it's important to remember that these lawsuits impact people," said Sharon Brett, the ACLU's legal director. "They have impact on people's health and safety and livelihood and dignity and privacy. And those rights could be asserted in the state court and should be asserted in the state court."
A hearing on that issue is set for Aug. 16, but Kobach has already said his office will oppose the ACLU's inclusion in the case.
"There are a number of reasons why intervention wouldn't be appropriate," Kobach told reporters after the hearing.
During a hearing Thursday, Kobach sought a swifter timeframe for consideration than the Department of Revenue, arguing that, for now, the matter should be confined to the statutory impact of SB 180, not whether that law is ultimately constitutional.
He acknowledged, however, that the broader question of whether the law is allowable under the state constitution will likely be raised eventually.
“It’s a pretty cut-and-dried case,” Kobach said. “The statute means what it says. They have a different interpretation of the statute.”
But Brett argued that Kobach's desire for a faster resolution was a quest to avoid those constitutional questions — questions she believed would ultimately be fatal to his case.
"He thinks that it is a cut and dry case that is just about statutory interpretation and he doesn't care about the impact that it has on the constitutional rights of transgender Kansans," she said. "He doesn't want that evidence presented to the court."