Latest news with #Kobach
USA Today
12-03-2025
- Health
- USA Today
AG Kris Kobach wants Section 504 lawsuit amended amid disability rights concerns
AG Kris Kobach wants Section 504 lawsuit amended amid disability rights concerns Show Caption Hide Caption Disability rights in Kansas may change through Section 504 lawsuit Get an inside look at the lawsuit Kansas AG Kris Kobach filed against Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. AG Kris Kobach joined a lawsuit challenging a Biden administration rule change that included gender dysphoria under the definition of disability in Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Disability rights advocates criticized the lawsuit for also seeking to declare the entirety of Section 504 unconstitutional, putting federal funding for disability services at risk. Kobach maintains he only intended to challenge the inclusion of gender dysphoria under Section 504 and has asked for the lawsuit to be amended. Kansas Democrats remain critical of the lawsuit and are calling for Kobach to withdraw the state from the litigation entirely. Disability rights advocates are calling on Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach to stop his involvement in a multistate lawsuit challenging a federal law on disability rights. As disability rights advocates spoke in a Statehouse news conference on Monday, Kobach told The Capital-Journal that he has asked for the lawsuit to be amended to remove the claim at issue. What are Kris Kobach and other AGs suing over? Kobach, a Republican, led Kansas to join as one of 17 states in a lawsuit led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton over Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Section 504 is a federal law applying to programs that receive federal funding which prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities. The lawsuit, filed in September, challenged a May rule change by President Joe Biden's administration to include gender dysphoria under the definition of disability. The lawsuit notes that the Americans with Disabilities Act explicitly excludes "transvestism," "transsexualism" and "gender identity disorders" from the definition of disability. "The Biden Administration is once again abusing executive action to sidestep federal law and force unscientific, unfounded gender ideology onto the public," Paxton said in a news release at the time. "Texas is suing because HHS has no authority to unilaterally rewrite statutory definitions and classify 'gender dysphoria' as a disability." While the lawsuit challenges that rule change by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, it also asks the court to strike down the entirety of Section 504 as unconstitutional and issue a permanent injunction against enforcing it. In a statement to The Capital-Journal, Kobach said it was his intention to only challenge the addition of gender dysphoria and not the entirety of Section 504. "We have already asked the coalition to remove the constitutional claim from the complaint," Kobach said. "It was entirely unnecessary. This case is a statutory claim, not a constitutional one. "It is routine in complex civil cases for complaints to be amended several times as litigants add and remove complaints." What is the status of the Section 504 lawsuit? Federal court records show the case — which was filed in U.S. District Court in Lubbock, Texas — has been stayed ahead of a Feb. 25 deadline for a status report. The U.S. Department of Justice attorneys on the case noted that President Donald Trump issued an executive order opposing "gender ideology" on inauguration day that requires "time to evaluate" the federal government's position on the case. They asked for time to meet with the state attorneys general to "address how to the parties wish to proceed in light of the recent executive order." "We anticipate the Biden rule will be reversed," said Kobach, who also serves as chair of the Republican Attorneys General Association. Democrats raise disability rights concerns Rep. Alexis Simmons, D-Topeka, and Rep. Mari-Lynn Poskin, D-Leawood, were flanked by fellow House Democrats as they held a news conference Monday. They noted that Kansas has a history of supporting disability rights, most famously by U.S. Sen. Bob Dole. "It's served us well since 1973," said Mike Burgess, of the Disability Rights Center, of Section 504. "It's a cornerstone disability rights legislation. ... It exists to make entities, requires them to be accessible to people with disabilities." Simmons said a letter would be sent to Kobach, and Poskin said she would introduce a resolution in the House calling on Kobach to withdraw Kansas from the Texas-led lawsuit. Pointing to lawsuit's requested relief, Poskin rejected the idea that the lawsuit isn't trying to declare Section 504 unconstitutional, as has been suggested by attorneys general in other states. "I don't know how much more clear it can be about what the intent and what the demand is — and it is to make 504 unconstitutional and unenforceable in the state of Kansas," Poskin said. Patrick Chapman, an adult with disabilities, spoke at the news conference along with his parents. "Please just drop this lawsuit for me and for my other friends too like me," Chapman said. Topeka boxer says fight against Section 504 is wrong Tayler and John Cantrell, a local boxer known as "the Iron Man," spoke at the news conference. "Like any good fighter, I know when a battle is worth fighting," John Cantrell said, "and this lawsuit against Section 504 is one that should have never been started." He said their son, Cooper, lost half his brain at birth. Despite that, their son has defied expectations, which he attributed in-part to the assistance of Topeka's TARC Inc., the Capper Foundation and Farley Elementary School's special education program./ "These groups provide support, therapy and education the children with disabilities like Cooper need to succeed," Cantrell said. "They don't just help kids survive, they help them thrive. Section 504 is what makes this possible and ensures children with disabilities get the care and education that they need. It levels the playing field, giving every child, no matter their challenges, a fighting chance." Cantrell said the lawsuit is more than a legal attack on a law. "It's an attack on children with disabilities like my son, Cooper," he said. "It's an attack on families who already fight every single day to give their children a future." The Cantrells voiced concern that without Section 504, their son might not have the same accommodations made for him, or entities may lose federal funding, such as for special education services. That could mean their son being segregated instead of integrated in the classroom. "This lawsuit is wrong. It is a massive mistake and it must be dropped," Cantrell said. "Kansas should be fighting for its children, not against them. I urge our state leaders: do the right thing, drop this lawsuit, stand with families, stand with children with disabilities. This is one fight you do not want to be on the wrong side of." A broader impact of anti-transgender politics Simmons said the Cantrell family is being affected by "the immense hate that people feel towards the transgender community in this country." She said politicians "decided they wanted to continue punching down on the transgender population, and what that has done is throw entire other groups of people, vulnerable people, into the line of fire." "It's totally inappropriate. I think it's incredibly un-American. And among other things, it's a waste of money. I've got a problem with this whole gender dysphoria focus. It is so not what we are here to do." When told that Kobach said he has asked that the claim be removed, Simmons said that does not ease her concerns. "This is a completely frivolous lawsuit that exists solely to punch down on vulnerable Kansans, vulnerable Americans," she said. "And for what? So they have campaign talking points? So they can go home and say, oh look at me standing up against these trans kids? I think it's ridiculous." Rep. Tobias Schlingensiepen, D-Topeka, said this is an example of sweeping policy changes affecting people's lives in ways that were not anticipated. "We have all kinds of policies that are now being instituted through presidential fiat that are affecting all kinds of people beyond what allegedly was originally proposed," he said. Attorneys general react to backlash on challenge to Section 504 The lawsuit received little publicity until recently — about five months after it was filed — when disability rights activists nationwide raised concerns with the part of the lawsuit challenging the entirety of Section 504. When that happened, attorneys general in other states appeared unaware of that part of the lawsuit. The lawsuit argues that Congress "crossed the line" with Section 504 because it "applies with extreme breadth" to any program receiving federal funding. "Because Section 504 is coercive, untethered to the federal interest in disability, and unfairly retroactive, the Rehabilitation Act is not constitutional under the spending clause," the lawsuit states. South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson said in his a statement that "there was no intention to throw out Section 504 entirely." Wilson also said that he believes Trump's executive order "resolves his concerns, so our mission is complete." Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird said the 17 states "are protecting Section 504 accommodations for students who need it." Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin said misinformation had spread online, and that "our lawsuit does NOT seek to eliminate Section 504." In a later update, Griffin said "the states DO NOT argue that Section 504 is actually unconstitutional," despite count three of the lawsuit alleging "Section 504 is Unconstitutional." "This statute has been on the books for 52 years," Griffin said. "If we wanted to try and get rid of it like some people have claimed, we could have sued anytime. But we didn't do that. We sued only after the May 2024 rule with the gender mandate." Lawmakers credit public outcry for Kansas AG response After finding out that Kobach said he wants to drop that part of the lawsuit, Simmons told The Capital-Journal that she credits the public outcry in Topeka and nationwide. "I wholeheartedly believe that," Simmons said. "I would also say, if they didn't realize the implications of that, that is the definition of sloppy lawmaking and the definition of a waste of money." "It's interesting that Kris Kobach would say that he might try to take that part out," Poskin, the Leawood representative, told The Capital-Journal. "That begs the question, why was it ever in there? That probably speaks to why he didn't advertise it very much. So no, pulling it out, just that section, they need to drop the lawsuit. That's the only thing that's acceptable." Jason Alatidd is a Statehouse reporter for The Topeka Capital-Journal. He can be reached by email at jalatidd@ Follow him on X @Jason_Alatidd.
Yahoo
17-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kansas AG Kris Kobach says KBI agents will work with ICE on illegal immigration
Kansas state law enforcement officers will assist federal officials with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement on illegal immigration cases, Attorney General Kris Kobach announced Monday. Kobach said the attorney general's office and the Kansas Bureau of Investigation have signed an agreement with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security allowing KBI agents to work with ICE on removing "criminal illegal aliens" from Kansas. "All across Kansas, illegal aliens who are dangerous criminals or gang members are released back to the streets on a regular basis," Kobach said in a statement. "That will end. This agreement will ensure that those criminals are deported." Kansas is among the first states to enter such an agreement, Kobach's office said, which is under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. "Under the terms of the agreement," the attorney general's office said in a news release, "a limited number of KBI agents will receive ICE training that authorizes the agents to arrest illegal aliens, to serve and execute warrants for some immigration violations, and to issue immigration detainers." "The KBI is pleased to have another tool at our disposal to get known criminal offenders out of our communities," KBI director Tony Mattivi said in a statement. "This agreement will not shift KBI investigative priorities but will allow us to more swiftly achieve justice in cases in which the KBI currently focuses — major violent crimes, crimes committed against children, and targeting drug trafficking organizations." Since 1996, the 287(g) program has allowed ICE to delegate certain immigration enforcement authority to state and local officials. As of December 2024, ICE had several such agreements nationwide, largely with county sheriffs, including Jackson and Finney counties in Kansas. The Kansas Highway Patrol isn't part of the KBI's agreement with ICE. The KBI is under Kobach, who is a Republican, while KHP is under Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly. More: Kansas lawmakers eye resolution urging governor to work with Trump on immigration Jason Alatidd is a Statehouse reporter for The Topeka Capital-Journal. He can be reached by email at jalatidd@ Follow him on X @Jason_Alatidd. This article originally appeared on Topeka Capital-Journal: Kansas AG Kris Kobach says KBI will help ICE on illegal immigration
Yahoo
13-02-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Topeka inmates to care for cats under HHHS program
TOPEKA (KSNT) – The Helping Hands Humane Society (HHHS) and Topeka Correctional Facility have partnered up for the launch of the 'PHAT' cats program to provide care to foster cats. Placing Homeless & Terrific, aka. PHAT, puts foster cats in the care of TCF residents. Three to five cats will be housed at the TCF. Handlers selected by the PHAT cats committee will feed, groom and help socialize the cats. 'The 'PHAT Cats' Program is a win-win for both the cats and the residents,' said Margaret Price, Behavior Director at Helping Hands Humane Society. 'These cats often come to us needing extra attention and care to become adoptable, and the residents at TCF will provide that in a way that's mutually beneficial. It's heartwarming to know how this program will not only transform the lives of these animals but will also provide residents with the joy of the human-animal bond and a sense of accomplishment.' According to a press release from the HHHS, the humane society will provide the necessary veterinary care, supplies, carriers, toys and food dishes. Kobach ends investigation into Winter Storm Uri disaster 'The 'PHAT Cats' Program emphasizes the importance of mutual benefit—helping cats become more adoptable while offering residents continued growth of work ethic, accountability, and empathy,' the HHHS wrote in a press release. 'The program also underscores the collaborative efforts between TCF and HHHS to create a safer, more compassionate community for all.' If you'd like to help the PHAT cat cause, you can donate supplies like cat strollers, plastic tubs, litter and spray bottles. You can financially support the cause by purchasing items from the HHHS Wish List by clicking here. For more local news, click here. Keep up with the latest breaking news in northeast Kansas by downloading our mobile app and by signing up for our news email alerts. Sign up for our Storm Track Weather app by clicking here. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
11-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Legal groups and ACLU decry proposed partisan elections of Kansas Supreme Court
The American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas called a proposed constitutional amendment that reforms the state's Supreme Court to directly elect justices a "blatant power grab" in light of past comments from state officials. The resolution — if passed by both chambers with a two-thirds majority and placed on a ballot for approval by the general public — would have elections for three justices in 2028, two justices in 2030 and two justices in 2032. The justices would face reelection every six years. It would also strip language out of the state constitution barring Supreme Court justices from contributing to or holding office in a political party. Kansas is one of 14 states that uses a judicial selection system called the Missouri Plan, or merit-based judicial selection. Kansas has used the system since the 1950s, which consists of a nominating commission creating a list of candidates from which the governor selects one. The process is meant to raise up qualified candidates and depoliticize the courts. But it's been criticized in Kansas by politicians that view it as too far left. "Our current state Supreme Court is selected in a manner that makes it one of the most progressive supreme courts in the United States," Attorney General Kris Kobach said in September at the opening of Shawnee County's GOP election headquarters. "I've argued in front of several of them, and our court is far to the left of the norm in state supreme courts. It's all because of the method we select our justices. We absolutely have to have a constitutional amendment to change that." Kobach invoked the Supreme Court's ruling on several abortion issues that were struck down and a signature verification law for elections that only narrowly survived a legal challenge. The ACLU of Kansas said the proposed amendment is meant to get around rulings that are unfavorable to its proponents politically. "The reason why (Kobach) wanted to undermine judicial independence was that he didn't like the rulings the court was making, that he didn't like the fact that the voters were retaining the justices who were making the rulings he didn't like and instituting a new judicial selection process would be a way of getting rulings that he does like," said Micah Cubic, executive director of the ACLU of Kansas. The Brennan Center for Justice says there are six ways that states select their supreme court justices. Following are how many each method is used by the 50 states and District of Columbia: Fourteen states use the Missouri Plan. Fourteen states use non-partisan elections. In 10 states, the governor appoints the Supreme Court. In seven states, justices are elected in partisan elections. Four states use a hybrid method. In two states, legislators appoint justices. In 20 states, including Kansas, justices are subject to retention elections where they can be voted out of office by a majority vote after their first year, and then every six years after. Justices are rarely ousted in retention elections, and no Kansas Supreme Court justice has ever lost their seat via election despite some campaigns to oust justices. "A few years ago Sam Brownback, Kris Kobach and their allies spent millions to try and defeat members of the court who had handed down the ruling on school funding equity, and despite spending millions, they did not succeed," Kubic said. In the current Supreme Court, five justices were appointed by Democratic governors — three by Laura Kelly and two by Kathleen Sebelius — while one each was appointed by former Republican Govs. Sam Brownback and Bill Graves. A panel made up of attorneys presents a list of three candidates to the governor. The state's three largest associations of attorneys — the Kansas Bar Association, the Kansas Association of Defense Attorneys and the Kansas Trial Lawyers Association — oppose the resolution. "The judicial branch is different from the legislative and executive branches of government. Justices have a constitutional obligation to consider cases in the interest of all Kansans who appear before them. They must have greater protections from improper influence than any other constitutional officers," the three groups said in a joint statement. The group pointed to a popular election of a justice in Wisconsin where $45 million in "dark money" was spent on the campaign and Arkansas's elected justices public attempts to override each other's decisions. "Neither popular elections nor Senate confirmation shield nominees for the Supreme Court from bias as well as the Supreme Court Nominating Commission process does," the statement said. But the Missouri Plan itself is criticized for putting too much weight to attorneys over the general public. Senate President Ty Masterson, R-Andover, who has previously said he's interested in reforming judicial selection, highlighted that in his response to the ACLU. 'It's appalling that the ACLU, who touts voting rights, now opposes voting rights — and suggests allowing the people to vote is a power grab. In fact, the present system is a power grab for attorneys, who currently have control over nearly the entire selection process. We believe the power to select who sits on our Supreme Court should belong to all Kansans," Masterson said. State lawmakers have made several attempts to reform how justices are selected. In 2013, 2015 and 2022, there were attempts to make justice appointees subject to Senate confirmation. Direct elections were also proposed in 2015-16 and 2022. All of the attempts at reform failed. House Speaker Dan Hawkins, R-Wichita, said judicial selection reform as proposed by Kobach isn't necessarily the House's position and said it has repeatedly come up short of supermajority support. "The last time we had that vote, which has not been that many years ago, we came up significantly short," Hawkins said after Kobach's comments in September. This article originally appeared on Topeka Capital-Journal: Constitutional amendment would reform Kansas judicial selection
Yahoo
07-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Kobach seeks to dismiss Ford County's lawsuit over ‘fraud and deception' about recycling
Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach at a news conference at the Statehouse in Topeka last year. Kobach is seeking to intervene in Ford County's lawsuit against major plastics manufacturers. (Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector) Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach hopes to intervene in a lawsuit accusing major plastics manufacturers of engaging in a 'decades-long campaign of fraud and deception' about the feasibility of recycling. A group of U.S. residents who have purchased plastic products, along with officials in Ford County, Kansas, filed the lawsuit in December. The lawsuit names ExxonMobil, Chevron, other plastics manufacturers and an industry group as defendants. 'Plastic pollution is one of the most serious environmental crises facing the world today,' an amended complaint filed last month by the plaintiffs says. But Kobach's office argued in a motion to intervene, filed earlier this week, that the county is attempting to usurp the Attorney General's Office's authority. Kobach asked to intervene for the purposes of filing a motion to dismiss Ford County's claims. While Kobach's filing focuses on whether the county has the authority to bring its case, he took issue with the underlying allegations of the lawsuit in a press release issued Wednesday. 'Left-wing environmentalist attorneys have hijacked Ford County and are using the county to push a radical, anti-oil agenda,' Kobach said. 'If this abuse is allowed to stand then any county in America could launch any number of attacks to cripple American energy production.' Attorneys for the plaintiffs did not immediately return a request for comment. Ford County initially sued ExxonMobil, Chevron and others last year in U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas, claiming that plastics manufacturers and industry promoters lied about the recyclability of plastic, resulting in a waste crisis. The original case was dismissed and a similar case filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri with both Ford County and individual plaintiffs. The complaint seeks damages and an injunction to bar the companies from advertising plastic products as recyclable. It says that between 1950 and 2015, more than 90% of plastics were 'landfilled, incinerated or leaked into the environment.' 'Plastic waste is ubiquitous — from our rivers, lakes and oceans to roadways and coastlines,' the lawsuit says. While manufacturers knew recycling was 'neither technically nor economically viable,' the lawsuit says, they 'engaged in fraudulent marketing and deceptive public education campaigns' to promote it as a solution to plastic waste. The companies have successfully protected their plastic production and stalled government efforts to address plastic waste, the lawsuit says. 'Fossil fuel and other petrochemical companies have used the false promise of plastic recycling to exponentially increase virgin plastic production over the last six decades, creating and perpetuating the global plastic waste crisis and imposing significant costs on communities that are left to pay for the consequences,' the complaint says. The lawsuit says plaintiffs seek to hold plastic producers accountable where government has failed and calls the problems outlined in the complaint 'a national crisis' that requires a 50-state solution 'to stamp out their nationwide scheme.' But Kobach's motion claims Ford County lacks the legal authority to represent states and their political subdivisions. 'Ford County — an entity created by Kansas with limited authority — is fundamentally undermining Kansas' sovereignty in this action,' the motion says. 'Kansas does not currently possess enough credible information to assess Ford County's underlying claims and determine whether a (legitimate) statewide suit is needed, but Kansas seeks intervention to protect its ability to make similar factual allegations and claims against the plastics defendants if Kansas determines that any such claims exist.' Kobach's filing says the state would seek to dismiss Ford County's complaint 'without prejudice,' meaning it could be filed again 'because Kansas may choose to bring or participate in a legitimate 'national, 50-state solution' 'to hold plastics producers and manufacturers accountable' if or when concrete facts show violations of Kansas or federal law.' Chevron's attorney — Theodore Boutrous, Jr., of Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher LLP — said in a statement that the lawsuit 'fails to include a single allegation of wrongdoing by Chevron.' 'From the face of the complaint, it is apparent that there is no basis for Chevron to be in this baseless lawsuit,' Boutrous said. Ross Eisenberg, president of America's Plastic Makers, which is affiliated with the American Chemistry Council, said the complaint includes claims that 'are inaccurate, misleading and out of date.'
