Same-sex marriage became legal in Kansas following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, which found the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples unconstitutional. By June 30, all 31 judicial districts and all 105 Kansas counties were issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples or had agreed to do so. Kansas state agencies initially delayed recognition of same-sex marriages for purposes including but not limited to changing names, ascribing health benefits and filing joint tax returns, but began doing so on July 6.
Kansas had previously defined marriage in its constitution as the "union of one man and one woman" and had by statute denied recognition to same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions. Before the Supreme Court resolved the issue, a series of lawsuits had challenged the state's policies with mixed success. In Marie v. Moser, U.S. District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree issued a preliminary injunction barring the Secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Douglas County and Sedgwick County from enforcing Kansas' same-sex marriage ban on November 4, 2014. He temporarily stayed the injunction until November 11 to give state authorities time to appeal. On November 7, 2014, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals denied state officials' request for a stay pending appeal. On November 12, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the state officials' request for a stay pending the appeal of Marie. As the injunction in Marie was set to take effect, the Kansas Attorney General, Derek Schmidt, contended that Crabtree's preliminary injunction only applied to the two counties involved in the lawsuit, not statewide. The American Civil Liberties Union maintained that the injunction applied to all 105 of the state's counties. Some of the state district judges, who issue marriage licenses in Kansas, refused to authorize the issuing of marriage licenses to same-sex couples based on their own interpretation of the legal situation.
On November 18, 2014, the Kansas Supreme Court, acting in Schmidt v. Moriarty, allowed the licensing of same-sex marriages in the state's Tenth Judicial District, which covers Johnson County, to proceed. The court ruled that it was within the jurisdiction of Judge Kevin P. Moriarty, as chief judge of that district, to authorize the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples based on his determination of the law. It left the issue of whether to license same-sex marriages to each judicial district.
Legal restrictions On April 4, 1996, the Kansas State Senate voted 39–1 in favor of a bill banning same-sex marriage and recognition of same-sex marriage performed out of state. The Kansas House of Representatives also passed the bill, and it was signed into law by Governor Bill Graves on April 11, 1996.kansas-senate marriage ban A motion to pull legislation repealing the ban, introduced by representatives Brandon Woodard, Susan Ruiz and Heather Meyer in 2023, out of the Federal and State Affairs Committee and place it on the calendar for debate by the House failed in April 2024 by a 43–61 vote. The language banning same-sex marriage, while unenforceable, remains on the books.
On January 13, 2005, the State Senate voted 28–11 in favor of Kansas Amendment 1, a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and the "rights or incidents of marriage".Kansas gay marriage ban goes to committee The House of Representatives voted 86–37 in favor of the amendment on February 2, 2005.Kansas House Puts Measure On Gay Marriage On Ballot On April 5, 2005, Kansas voters approved the amendment by a margin of more than 2 to 1. On January 26, 2017, Tom Witt, executive director of Equality Kansas, submitted bills to the Kansas Legislature to repeal the state's now-defunct constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and make appropriate changes in statutory law. The measures were unsuccessful.KS HCR5006 | 2017-2018 | Regular SessionKS HB2172 | 2017-2018 | Regular SessionLGBT advocates ask lawmakers to roll back laws they say discriminate The Wichita Eagle
Lawsuits and recognition of some same-sex marriages Nelson v. Kansas Department of Revenue On December 30, 2013, private lawyers in Topeka filed a lawsuit in state court on behalf of two same-sex couples, Roberta and Julia Woodrick of Lawrence and Michael Nelson and Charles Dedmon of Alma, seeking recognition of their marriage licenses from other jurisdictions in order to be allowed to file joint state income tax returns. The lawsuit, Nelson v. Kansas Department of Revenue, stemmed from the June 2013 Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Windsor striking down part of the Defense of Marriage Act, after which the federal Internal Revenue Service began accepting joint income tax returns only if the couple's state of residence recognized the marriage. The plaintiffs' attorneys in Nelson argued that the Kansas Department of Revenue and the Kansas Constitution's definition of marriage made it impossible for the plaintiffs to file their state taxes honestly.
Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals precedent The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear two cases from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals on October 6, 2014, Kitchen v. Herbert and Bishop v. Smith. This left decisions that found Utah's and Oklahoma's bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional as binding precedent on federal courts in Kansas. Legal experts expected Kansas to be required to allow same-sex marriage before long.
Schmidt v. Moriarty On October 8, Judge Kevin P. Moriarty of the 10th Judicial District, covering Johnson County, the most populous in the state, directed the county clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. A statement from Governor Sam Brownback said, "An overwhelming majority of Kansas voters amended the constitution to include a definition of marriage as one man and one woman. Activist judges should not overrule the people of Kansas." Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt said he was prepared for litigation and noted that the Kansas ban on same-sex marriage had not been invalidated in court. Schmidt filed a lawsuit in the Kansas Supreme Court, Schmidt v. Moriarty, asking the court to order Moriarty to stop issuing the licenses. Later that day, Kansas Chief Justice Lawton Nuss issued a temporary injunction suspending Moriarty's order authorizing the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples "[i]n the interest of establishing statewide consistency" on the question of issuing licenses to same-sex couples, but the court allowed for the continued acceptance of applications for marriage licenses.
On November 13, following a federal court decision striking down the state's same-sex marriage ban in Marie v. Moser, Judge Moriarty asked the court to lift its temporary stay and allow him to issue licenses to same-sex couples. On November 18, the court ruled that Judge Moriarty was "within his jurisdiction" in ordering the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples and lifted its stay, leaving other issues, including whether Moriarty's legal judgment was correct, to be resolved pending the final outcome of Marie.
Marie v. Moser Proceedings and judgment Once the decisions of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Kitchen v. Herbert and Bishop v. Smith became binding precedent on federal courts in Kansas, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit, Marie v. Moser, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas on October 10 on behalf of two lesbian couples who had been refused marriage licenses since the Supreme Court declined to review those decisions. The suit named as defendants Robert Moser, Secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE), and two district court clerks. Judge Daniel D. Crabtree heard oral arguments on October 31. On November 4, he ruled that "[b]ecause Kansas' constitution and statutes indeed do what Kitchen forbids, the Court concludes that Kansas' same-sex marriage ban violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution". He stayed enforcement of his ruling until 5 p.m. on November 11 unless the state defendants informed the court before then that they would not appeal the decision. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the state's request for a stay pending appeal. The Westboro Baptist Church sought to intervene in the suit without success. Anticipating the expiration of Judge Crabtree's temporary stay, Chief Judge Wayne Lampson of the 29th Judicial District, covering Wyandotte County, ordered his court's clerks to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples beginning on November 12. The state defendants asked Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, as Circuit Justice for the Tenth Circuit, to issue a stay pending appeal, and on November 10 she granted a temporary stay pending consideration of their request. In their briefs, the parties disputed the significance of the order issued by the Kansas Supreme Court in Schmidt v. Moriarty and of the recent decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in DeBoer v. Snyder. The Supreme Court denied the state's request for a stay on November 12, 2014, allowing the district court order to take effect.Supreme Court denies stay in Kansas gay marriage case Attorney General Schmidt said that order only applied to Douglas and Sedgwick counties.
On November 26, the plaintiffs amended their complaint to include three additional couples as plaintiffs and three additional defendants: the Secretary of the Kansas Department of Revenue, the Director of the Division of Vehicles, and the Director of the State Employee Health Plan. On December 2, the Tenth Circuit denied the state's request for an initial hearing en banc of their appeal. On December 8, the plaintiffs asked the court to extend its order to cover the three additional defendants and "any officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, other persons who are in active concert or participation with them". On December 10, the three original named defendants asked the district court to remove them as defendants. Moser wrote that he had resigned on November 30 after complying with the court's order, though stayed, by modifying the state's marriage license forms to accommodate same-sex couples, leaving no further action to be compelled from his successor. He and the two clerks noted that the plaintiffs had not married even though they were able to do so and that the plaintiffs had no ongoing dispute with the clerks and therefore no longer had standing. The plaintiffs' briefs in reply noted that Moser was named in his official capacity and is therefore succeeded as the principal named defendant by Susan Mosier, Interim Secretary of the KDHE. They noted that the duties of that office extend beyond providing marriage license forms and include "supervising the registration of all marriages" and related activities. They argued that the clerks' compliance with a preliminary injunction does not moot the case and that the "plaintiffs are entirely within their rights in adjusting the timing of their marriage so that their claims do not become moot before final judgment is entered."