MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Kan. (KWCH) – A 34-year-old man is dead after an accident with a semi-truck in southeast Kansas.

The Kansas Highway Patrol says on Saturday morning, around 3:30 a.m. Dakota Hinman from Parsons was driving on County Road 2800 in Montgomery County.

KHP says that Hinman did not yield to oncoming traffic at the intersection of Highway 169.

A semi struck Hinman’s vehicle on the driver’s side. Hinman was reportedly not wearing a seatbelt.

Copyright 2026 KWCH. All rights reserved. To report a correction or typo, please email news@kwch.com

• Kansas lawmakers are considering a new bill to ban gender marker changes on state identification.
• The proposed legislation follows court rulings that allowed gender marker changes to resume, despite a 2023 law.
• Attorney General Kris Kobach argues the new bill is needed to remove ambiguity that courts found in the previous law.
• The bill would also invalidate previously approved gender marker changes on driver’s licenses and birth certificates.

Kansas lawmakers have new legislation under consideration to ban gender marker changes on state identification.

The introduction of House Bill 2426 comes after the Kansas Supreme Court denied a petition for review filed by Attorney General Kris Kobach following a Kansas Court of Appeals decision.

That move meant the Kansas Department of Revenue could resume gender marker changes on driver’s licenses and other state ID cards for transgender people, despite Kobach’s assertion that a 2023 law known as Senate Bill 180 banned such changes.

That law, also known as the Women’s Bill of Rights, strictly defines sex based on reproductive anatomy at birth. The text of the law is a little over one page and lacks details.

Jason Long, a senior assistant revisor of statutes, told lawmakers that HB 2426 would “address the issues” raised by the courts with SB 180.

While SB 180 never made explicit reference to driver’s licenses or gender, Kobach told lawmakers the court rulings “defeated the intent of SB 180” and the law now “does nothing, it has no practical effect on anything.”

“So what this bill does is remove the wiggle room that the Kansas Court of Appeals seized upon,” he said.

The new bill would define gender to mean biological sex at birth for purposes of statutory construction. It would also direct the Revenue Department to invalidate licenses that have already had gender marker changes approved. A similar directive would be given to the Office of Vital Statistics to invalidate any birth certificates that have been changed.

With its first committee hearing of 2026, the House Judiciary Committee held a bill hearing on HB 2426 on Jan. 13. The bill was sponsored by the committee chair, Rep. Susan Humphries, R-Wichita, who said the committee was “starting off with a bang” and predicted a hearing “filled with emotion.” Two Capitol Police officers were posted in the room.

A day before the meeting, the agenda item was listed on the House calendar as an “informational discussion on driver’s license gender marker policy.” At some point, it was converted into a bill hearing.

House Minority Leader Brandon Woodard, D-Lenexa, told reporters there was than 24 hours notice to the public and even less time for people to submit testimony.

“They do those sorts of things in an attempt to shield,” Woodard said. “They know that the public’s not on the side with them.”

“We’re only doing this because Kobach keeps losing in court,” he said of the bill.

None of the written testimony was immediately available to attendees or on the Legislature’s website. A committee assistant indicated there was so much opposition testimony that it couldn’t be uploaded before the hearing because it is “a huge undertaking.”

In addition to Kobach, there were a handful of other supporters. Several opponents testified in person, including some who are transgender Kansans or have relatives who are.

“I’m sure there will be people who want to debate the merits of SB 180 all over again, and that’s not really my job,” Kobach said.

Humphries said there is no fiscal note quantifying the cost of the bill because staff “haven’t had time” to produce one.

New bill would address ambiguity in law

Kobach said the new bill “will remove any ambiguity” in the law.

“Courts oftentimes see ambiguity in statutes, and no statute is perfect, and sometimes you can’t remove ambiguity because of the nature of the subject matter,” Kobach said. “But in this particular case, the Court of Appeals, I believe, twisted the ambiguity to create a meaning that renders the law a dead letter.”

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach and the legal team for Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly presented oral arguments to the Supreme Court in a case that could decide if the governor has authority to join legislation on her office’s behalf.

Kelly sued Kobach in October after Kobach filed an amicus brief, a legal document offering information or experience, in a lawsuit Kelly signed on as a party to. Kelly joined the suit, which is against the Trump administration over its collection of data from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, but Kobach’s brief said Kelly doesn’t have the right to enter a lawsuit representing Kansas.

“This case is about whether the Governor can intrude into the area where the Kansas Constitution says the Attorney General is the official who’s in charge, namely, litigating in court on behalf of Kansans,” Kobach told reporters after court adjourned.

The governor’s position in court is that she has a right to participate in legislation if it pertains to her duties as governor.

“What we’re simply asking for is that the governor be allowed to have a voice in litigation when the matters or the issues affect the executive branch and the agencies she’s in charge of,” said Stephen McAllister, an attorney for Kelly.

Kobach said the distinction between representing the state and representing the interest of Kansas’s executive agencies is usually nonexistent.