BY: ANNA KAMINSKI
Kansas Reflector
TOPEKA — Jessie Lawson made an appointment for Monday morning as soon as she heard about the Kansas Court of Appeals ruling Friday that allows Kansans to change the gender markers on their licenses.
As a trans Kansan, Lawson said, she was thrilled about the court order.
Then, she was turned away.
“I’ve gone to great lengths to match my body to who I am, and to have this document show the wrong gender is insulting,” Lawson said. “It’s embarrassing.”
Lawson waited all morning in the parking lot of the Andover driver’s license office in hopes of getting an explanation from officials. Meanwhile, meetings in Topeka resulted in a decision to prohibit implementing the change.
Attorney General Kris Kobach instructed the Kansas Department of Revenue, which houses the division of motor vehicles, not to make gender marker changes while the matter is in litigation, said Zach Denney, a spokesperson for the department.
The Attorney General’s Office intends to appeal, and Denney said he expects it to be soon.
Danedri Herbert, a spokeswoman for the Attorney General’s Office, confirmed the stance.
“We can’t start instantly implementing those changes right now because we have some time to appeal the decision,” she said.
Parties typically have a 30-day window after a decision to appeal it. Procedurally, it is unclear whether the decision goes into effect immediately following a ruling or until the end of the 30-day appeals window.
Herbert, who is also chair of the Kansas Republican Party, said there has been no gray area in the Attorney General’s Office.
The 56-page decision from the appeals court panel Friday reversed an injunction from a Shawnee County District Court judge who ordered the state to stop allowing gender marker changes on driver’s licenses. The appeals court decision only applies to the injunction. The case itself, and its merits, were remanded to the district court to be decided by a new judge.
Kobach was quick to express in social media posts Friday his dissatisfaction with the decision and his appetite for an appeal.
In a statement, Kobach said the ruling contains “multiple factual errors” and a “deeply flawed” legal analysis. He expected the court “to be more careful,” he said.
“In addition, the Court improperly attempts to strip jurisdiction over the case away from the district court judge — which is highly unusual,” Kobach said. “We will be asking the Kansas Supreme Court to review this case in an expedited manner and overturn the Court of Appeals decision.”
The revenue department has allowed Kansans to change their gender markers since at least 2007, but a 2023 state law required vital statistics to recognize a person’s biological sex at birth, conflating the distinction between “sex” and “gender.” Kobach sued the revenue department after it continued to allow transgender residents to change their gender markers.
The constant uncertainty has been a maddening and distressing experience for Lawson. She called the legislation “bogus” and “hurtful.” Having her motives and identity questioned frequently is tiring, she said, especially when she just wants to be a regular citizen.
“It’s not just legislation. It’s not just bad laws being put into place,” Lawson said. “It’s humans’ lives.”