Kansas legislature overrides Kelly veto on 'lawfare' bill, limiting public nuisance lawsuits

The legislation focuses on public nuisance law and who can bring certain lawsuits. It limits the ability to file broad public nuisance claims and gives more power to the state attorney general in cases that extend beyond a single local jurisdiction.

Supporters say the change is necessary to prevent what they call lawfare. It happens when organizations file lawsuits to push policy goals they cannot pass through the legislature.

“This is a monumental win for consumers,” O.H. Skinner, executive director of Alliance for Consumers Action, said in a statement provided to The Center Square. “We have seen ideological activists try and hijack the direction of our country by invading corporate boardrooms, classrooms, and hospitals. What is less well known is that the same left-wing campaign to reshape our society has set out to invade our courtrooms too.”

“By using lawfare to force their agenda, activists are able to circumvent the lawmakers and voters who have refused to go along with an activist, ideological agenda,” Skinner added. “Kansas lawmakers have made it clear that policymaking belongs to elected representatives, not activists attempting to weaponize the court system for political purposes.”

Backers of the bill argue that public nuisance lawsuits have increasingly been used to target entire industries, including energy producers, firearms manufacturers, and other lawful businesses. The new law blocks lawsuits that attempt to label lawful products as a public nuisance and requires a more direct connection between harm and legal claims.

It also includes sections aimed at limiting lawsuits from individuals injured while committing crimes, preventing them from seeking damages tied to their own illegal actions.

Kelly said the measure would shift power away from local governments and concentrate power at the state level.

“This bill would transfer the underlying authority from the locals to the Attorney General,” Kelly said in her veto message. “There is no good reason for this usurpation of power.”

SB 462 is part of a growing effort across multiple states to restrict the use of public nuisance laws in policy disputes. States like Utah and Indiana have approved similar measures. 

Supporters say the goal is to return policymaking to elected officials rather than the courts.

Opponents argue the changes could make it harder for local governments and consumers to challenge harmful practices through the legal system.