House bill would designate Shawnee County as venue for all challenges to Kansas election laws
Rep. Pat Proctor, seen during a Feb. 3, 2026, meeting of the House Elections Committee, vented frustration with voting rights groups that challenge election laws. (Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)
TOPEKA — The Kansas Secretary of State’s Office wants to block voting rights groups from “forum shopping” legal challenges to election laws by requiring such cases to be filed in Shawnee County District Court, a forum that is often favorable to Republicans.
During a Tuesday hearing on House Bill 2569, Rep. Pat Proctor, the Leavenworth Republican who chairs the House Elections Committee, and J. Christian Adams, president of a Virginia-based conservative legal group, vented animosity toward the American Civil Liberties Union, Loud Light, the League of Women Voters of Kansas, and Kansas Appleseed for their “onslaught of litigation,” as Adams called it, over election laws.
The GOP-led Legislature, fueled by misinformed outrage over the 2020 presidential election, enacted laws over the past five years to strengthen the public perception that Kansas elections are safe and secure. Some of those laws make it more difficult to cast advance ballots or help people register to vote.
Voting rights groups in the past five years have filed two lawsuits over election laws in state court, one in 2021 in Shawnee County and one in 2025 in Douglas County. Both are ongoing. Other cases have been filed in federal court.
Clay Barker, general counsel for the secretary of state, said the idea to set Shawnee County as the venue for election lawsuits was suggested by litigation attorneys retained by Attorney General Kris Kobach.
“We want to ensure that there isn’t what’s known amongst lawyers as forum shopping, which is something every competent litigation lawyer does,” Barker said. “You try to find the best venue, the best district court, for the particular case you’re bringing.”
District court judges “have reputations,” he said.
Barker said there were 15 judges in Shawnee County District Court, and “you don’t know which judge you’re going to get.”
In practice, Shawnee County District Judge Teresa Watson, an appointee of former Gov. Sam Brownback, is one of just three judges who handle civil cases in the district. Watson has sided with Republicans in challenges to state law before being overturned on appeal.
Last year, a Kansas Court of Appeals ruling found that Watson had abused her discretion and committed legal and factual errors in a case involving gender markers on driver’s licenses. The higher court sent the case back with an order that someone other than Watson handle it.
Under HB 2569, the lawsuit filed last year over a change in law to eliminate the three-day grace period for mail-in ballots would be moved from Douglas to Shawnee County.
Democrats on the House Elections Committee accused Barker of trying to cherry-pick the best forum for defending election laws. They noted the burden that would be placed on a plaintiff from, for example, Colby, a five-hour drive from Topeka.
Barker said the plaintiff wouldn’t have to appear in court.
“Has there ever been an instance where a plaintiff wanted to be in the courtroom while their case is being heard? Have you witnessed that before?” said Brooklynne Mosley, a Lawrence Democrat.
Rep. Brooklynne Mosley, seen during a Feb. 3, 2026, legislative hearing, challenged the reason for moving federal voting rights cases to Washington, D.C. (Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)
‘Brazen forum shopping’
Adams, who is president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, appeared by video to testify in support HB 2569.
He claimed that Kansas had been subjected to “a well-funded litigation campaign” against Kansas laws, and that part of the campaign involves “brazen forum shopping.”
“Many Kansans reasonably wonder whether the legal system is being used to advance partisan ends and the programming objectives of large, ideologically driven nonprofits with huge endowments,” Adams said.
Adams’ organization is known for making false claims about the number of noncitizens who vote in elections, and for publishing voters’ Social Security numbers online, falsely accusing them of being fraudulent.
Rep. Heather Meyer, an Overland Park Democrat, asked Adams if he could provide evidence that advocacy groups were targeting Kansas.
“Wait until the opponents are about to testify,” Adams said. “You can listen to all of their cases that they’ve brought. I’m sure they’re in the gallery waiting to tell you. So there will be a steady parade of advocates against this who have brought cases in Kansas.”
Nobody else was waiting to speak to the committee, but Loud Light and Kansas Appleseed submitted written testimony in opposition to the bill.
Adams asserted the groups that bring lawsuits were so well-funded, “they could probably get an Uber for a plaintiff on the farthest west border of Kansas to get them to the court.”
“They have hundreds of millions of dollars,” he said.
According to the latest nonprofit tax filings, the League of Women Voters of Kansas had $36,000 in revenue, Kansas Appleseed had $700,000, Loud Light had $1.2 million, and the ACLU of Kansas had $2.6 million. The Public Interest Legal Foundation, meanwhile, reported $4.9 million in revenue.
Adams also told the committee that the proposed bill would match a provision of the federal Voting Rights Act that requires claims to be handled by the Washington, D.C., circuit. He said that was because judges there “were familiar with litigation involving federal government policies.”
Mosley challenged the claim.
“Is there a historical reason why you would want a Voting Rights Act trial to go through D.C. and maybe not Bayer County, Texas?” Mosley asked. “Is there any historical context? Quick clue, it’s Black History Month, if you need any help on that.”
Adams said Congress made the decision to develop expertise in D.C.
“I’m going to help you out a little bit,” said Mosley, who is Black. “The reason why these cases go through D.C. is because of historical racism that people dealt with down there.”
Proctor, the committee chair, told Mosley to “reserve the speech-making” for when the committee debates the bill.