Kansas House overrides governor veto on bill restricting gender-related care for minors

The Kansas House voted on Feb. 18 to override the governor’s veto of Senate Bill 63, a bill that would place new limits on gender-identity–related medical care for minors and create civil and professional penalties for providers who deliver such care.

Supporters said the bill protects children; opponents called it punitive and harmful to families and clinicians. The House overrode the governor’s veto with an 84–35 vote after a late morning reading of the governor’s veto message and an extended floor discussion.

Why it matters: The override makes state law restricting certain gender-identity–related treatments for minors despite executive opposition. Backers said the measure clarifies protections for children; opponents warned it will harm families, prompt legal challenges and push health professionals from the state.

The governor’s veto and the Senate The governor transmitted a veto message that said the Legislature should focus on cost-of-living issues rather than “government interference in Kansans’ medical decisions,” and declared: “Therefore, I hereby veto Senate Bill 63.” The Senate subsequently recorded a motion to pass SB 63 notwithstanding the governor’s veto; that Senate motion carried earlier with a recorded vote of 31 yays and 9 nays.

Floor arguments and vote Representative Bryce moved the House to pass the bill notwithstanding the veto. Supporters argued the measure was necessary to prevent what they described as unsafe or experimental care for minors. Representative Bryce summarized his position before the vote and urged colleagues to “follow what is effective, what is safe and not follow an ideology.”

Opponents urged sustaining the veto. Representative Susan Ruiz, speaking against the override, called the measure “one of the most egregious and cruel bills we have so far” and said it would jeopardize medical practice and family stability in Kansas. She warned the bill would deter pediatricians and other specialists from practicing in the state.

Representative Schreiber, who spoke earlier in the debate, urged colleagues to avoid rhetoric that frames gender dysphoria as ideology rather than a medical condition. Representative Meyer appealed for the House to give families and clinicians time and patient support rather than immediate restriction.

Representative Woodard, the House Democratic leader, framed the vote as a misplaced priority and said the Legislature should concentrate on measures that help Kansans with living costs and workforce shortages rather than restricting medical care. The roll call to override ended 84 in favor, 35 opposed; the motion carried and the bill was declared passed over the governor’s veto.

What the bill does As described on the floor, SB 63 would (among other provisions described in the enacted text) restrict certain gender-identity–related treatments for minors, authorize civil causes of action against providers who provide such treatments to minors, and add professional-discipline consequences. The House debate referenced both the health‑care and legal implications of the change.

Where it goes next Because the House has overridden the governor’s veto, SB 63 will be enacted into law. Opponents indicated they expect litigation and continued political pushback. Supporters said the new statute reflects state policy priorities and would be defended in court if necessary.

Ending: The override marks a major policy shift made by the 2025 Legislature. Lawmakers on both sides warned the vote would have consequences for Kansas health care access and the state’s political landscape.