Broken Protections: Recently passed Kansas legislature banning gender-affirming care mirrors the executive order signed by President Donald Trump

The Kansas Legislature passed a bill banning gender-affirming care on Feb. 18. This bill mirrors the executive order, currently going through the federal courts, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” signed by President Donald Trump on Jan. 28.

This bill states that in Kansas it’s illegal for anyone under 18 to receive gender-affirming care. Doctors could be sued for performing any gender-affirming treatments like hormones, puberty blockers or surgeries, according to Taryn Jones, policy director of Equality Kansas, a statewide advocacy organization.

Governor Laura Kelly initially vetoed the bill, but her veto was overridden by Republican senators and representatives who now have a supermajority in both houses. Kansas is one of 27 states that have proposed a bill like this. The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding a similar bill in Tennessee last December and the court ruling will be released this summer. Legal experts believe that the court is most likely to uphold the ban in Tennessee, increasing the chances it will be upheld in other states, according to AP News.

Erin Woods, founder of Six Degrees of Activism, a newsletter advocating for Kansas schools, opposes the bill and federal order and believes that parents should be able to get care for their children.

“Each [piece of legislation passed] is just a step towards devaluing an important group of people,” Woods said. “Everyone deserves respect and deserves to live an authentic life and it just feels like we are focusing on this really small, vulnerable community. I just have a hard time understanding why.”

However, Heritage Foundation representative Jay Richards gave testimony in Kansas in support of the bill.

“There’s no reliable scientific evidence that these treatments improve the long-term health of these minors, let alone that the benefits outweigh the many risks,” Richards said in his testimony.

At the federal level, the order states that any organization providing gender-affirming care to those under 19 will have federal funding withdrawn. Kansas defines minors as under 18, while the federal government defines minors under 19, meaning the policies have different age limitations.

“It doesn’t outright ban gender-affirming care, it just restricts any federal funds from being used for gender-affirming care,” Jones said.

This includes both federally funded healthcare organizations as well as insurance programs like Medicaid and TRICARE.

On Feb. 13 and 14, two federal courts issued a temporary injunction on the order, meaning the government cannot enforce it for at least 14 days, or more if extended by the courts. This injunction was on section 4 of the order — the section that takes away federal funding — on the grounds that it’s unconstitutional.

Jones also mentioned that without the federal order, a Kansas minor seeking care could travel to another state. But, if the order goes through the federal courts and is upheld, this no longer would be possible.

For the time being, medical providers can continue to give gender-affirming care. The results of the executive order will be determined by the Supreme Court. However, this doesn’t change Kansas’s laws — the statewide ban still applies for those under 18.

Similarly, an executive order, titled “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” was signed on Feb. 5 preventing transgender females from participating in women’s athletics and entering women’s bathrooms or locker rooms. This order mirrors the legislation put in place in 2023 in Kansas, according to the Kansas High School Activities Association executive director Bill Faflick.

“The impact is really negligible because state law followed by [KSHSAA] already directs the action included in the executive order,” Faflick said.

Another order he signed, entitled “Defending women from gender ideology extremism and restoring biological truth to the federal government” defines “sex” as the gender assigned at birth and does not include gender ideology. This changes the interpretation of Title IX, reinforcing the prior executive order.

A disclaimer has been added to the top of Title IX stating it should be read according to the executive order where all references to gender are changed to sex.

“It just puts a target on their backs for all sorts of things and I just feel like it must be hard to feel safe in that community right now as each and every executive order or new law goes into place,” Woods said.