Legal representatives for two state departments said Friday that there would be financial and administrative benefits to delaying the enforcement of a new anti-transgender bill for another month, drawing an apparent concession from Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach.

House Substitute for Senate Bill 244 became law on Feb. 18 after the Kansas House and Senate both voted to override Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto. The bill took effect Feb. 26. 

SB 244 strikes down trans people’s opportunity to change their gender markers on Kansas driver’s licenses or identification cards, and invalidated documents overnight that had already been updated. It also criminalizes trans people who use bathrooms that align with their gender identity over bathrooms that align with their sex assigned at birth in public buildings.

Transgender people in Lawrence have already been navigating the impact of the legislation on their access to bathrooms and driver’s licenses.

The ACLU and Ballard Spahr LLP filed the case on behalf of two trans men in Lawrence to challenge SB 244 last week. The men, who are going by the pseudonyms Daniel Doe and Matthew Moe, both go to school or work in public buildings and are affected by the loss of their driver’s licenses. They are arguing that the anti-trans bill is unconstitutional and that it puts their rights, autonomy, livelihoods and safety at stake.

Douglas County District Judge James McCabria held a hearing Friday to determine whether he would grant a temporary restraining order (TRO), thus delaying the onset of SB 244 as the case plays out.

The courtroom was packed with only standing room left.

Kobach and a cadre of attorneys representing various state agencies, including the Kansas Department of Revenue and Department of Administration, had originally appeared in court to defend the law and ask the judge to deny the injunction. 

By the end of a nearly three-hour hearing, Kobach said that the State of Kansas would not take punitive action against any government agency struggling to comply with the bathroom provisions in the bill until Thursday, March 26, a month after it was published in the Kansas Register. Similarly, he said “we will ask KDOR to refrain from changing any more records” until the same date. 

McCabria said he needed more time to contemplate arguments made by both sides and reference an extensive backlog of case law. He said he will aim to issue a written ruling on the TRO by Tuesday, March 10, but was concerned that might prove to be too tight of a deadline.

McCabria said there are “important interests on both sides,” and that he’s sentenced people for things that he doesn’t even think should be crimes before in order to follow the letter of the law.

In the meantime, Harper Seldin with the ACLU said he’d be willing to come to an agreement with Kobach outside of the courtroom on a delay in enforcement, although their motivations would be oceans apart.

Seldin previously said the plaintiffs and attorneys hope trans people can keep their licenses and ID cards and that a judge will strike down criminal restrictions on restrooms. Kobach asserted the bill’s alleged constitutionality, but his arguments on the TRO shifted course after hearing from lawyers representing KDOR and the Kansas Department of Administration.

Ted Smith, KDOR’s legal representation at the hearing, said the agency would abide by the state’s interpretation of the bill’s constitutionality. 

He pointed out that transgender people losing their licenses haven’t done anything unsafe on their driving record, unlike some people whose licenses are revoked. At the same time, the bill’s one-week turnaround period put a large cost and administrative expectation on KDOR, which can face investigation and penalties for failing to comply.

Jordan Brewer, representative for the Department of Administration, sang much the same tune. His department is tasked with enforcing how bathrooms are policed in public buildings, although he said the definition of a public building under SB 244 is broad.

Brewer said they’d lean toward supporting a TRO for the bathroom portion of the law to give them more time to sort out implementation.

“The constitutionality of this law was challenged the day this went into effect” and the department needs additional guidance, Brewer said.

Friday’s hearing was livestreamed over Zoom to allow more people to watch if the courtroom filled up. If future hearings are also available online, the courts will post links on this page.

Wulfe Wulfemeyer (they/them), reporter and news editor, has worked with The Lawrence Times since May 2025. They can be reached at wulfe@lawrencekstimes.com.

Read their complete bio here. Read their work for the Times here.

More coverage:

MORE …

Latest Lawrence news:

MORE …