ELLY GRIMM

   • Leader & Times

A lawsuit between Gov. Laura Kelly and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach regarding federal overreach has come to a conclusion, according to a release from the State of Kansas.

On March 27, the Kansas Supreme Court issued its ruling on Kelly v. Kobach. The ruling affirms the governor’s constitutional authority to protect Kansas from unlawful federal overreach, a State of Kansas release noted.

“The court’s majority opinion recognizes that the Office of the Governor indeed does have an independent voice in litigation regarding matters that impact the executive branch and state agencies overseen by the governor,” Gov. Kelly noted in the State of Kansas release. “This opinion acknowledges the attorney general conceded his blatant partisanship cannot undermine my administration’s efforts to protect and stand up for Kansans. If the attorney general continues to refuse to stand up for the state, Kansans can be assured I will.”

Gov. Kelly had filed the lawsuit against Kobach in the Kansas Supreme Court to protect the State of Kansas and the constitutional powers of the Office of the Governor in October 2025.

“Time and again, Attorney General Kobach’s blatant partisanship is on display, harming and embarrassing Kansas,” Gov. Kelly noted in an October 2025 State of Kansas release. “While he was quick to sue the previous presidential administration, alleging he would protect Kansans from federal overreach, he has not once followed through on that claim now that the Trump Administration has repeatedly done just that. Not only has the attorney general’s willful ignorance undermined my administration’s efforts to protect Kansans, but it has also cost our state millions of dollars for essential programs and services. If the Attorney General refuses to stand up for Kansas, at least Kansans can rest assured knowing I will.”

The court’s majority opinion states:

“For his part, the attorney general also made crucial concessions at oral argument that make clear he does not contest the governor’s constitutional authority to represent the legal interests of her office or of the executive agencies she oversees:

‘[The court]: The question is, who is the client? And if the client is only the governor in her own name, her own official capacity, and the executive agencies . . . which she has authority over by law, if those are the clients that she is seeking to represent, you wouldn’t have a problem with that would you? Or maybe you would?

‘[Attorney General Kobach]: Actually, no I wouldn’t, your honor ... If they’re retreating to the position she still can sue on behalf of her office, then we are in 100 percent agreement. And that’s what she’s doing today. She’s suing on behalf of her office.’

“The attorney general followed this up by explaining that what he does object to is a characterization of the legal interests of the Office of Governor that is so broad it swallows the interests of Kansas as a whole – interests he believes only he, as the attorney general, is authorized to represent in court. These concessions and developments prove immensely consequential to the outcome of this case. In fact – at least for purposes of this case – they eliminate from our consideration the most important question this case initially presented: who speaks for the State? The governor expressly disclaimed any effort to represent the interests of the sovereign State of Kansas in litigation and conceded that this responsibility lies with the attorney general as the State’s chief legal officer. While the constitutional underpinnings of that conclusion remain cloudy at best – they are no longer part of this case and we need not delve into them here. Likewise, Attorney General Kobach’s concessions make clear what he more obliquely admitted in his amicus brief – that he agrees with the basic principle we outlined above how the governor is empowered to litigate on behalf of the legal interests of her office and those of the executive agencies she oversees – however broad or narrow those legal interests may be.”

This ruling allows Gov. Kelly to continue her involvement in the lawsuit seeking to prevent the federal administration from unlawfully terminating congressionally approved funds for several public health and safety programs including testing for lead in schools and child care facilities, environmental cleanup, ensuring the safety of dams, and financing to improve drinking water safety, the State of Kansas release concluded.