She Changed Her ID to Comply with Kansas’ New Anti-Trans Law. Now, the State is Trying to Put Her in Jail for Having an 'Inaccurate' License.

A Kansas trans woman is being charged with driving with an invalid license after a police officer refused to believe the license the state is forcing her to carry was valid. She won’t be the last.

The Kansas State Capitol in Topeka | Image: Wikimedia Commons

Update 11:25 a.m.: Good news: the charge against Ripper has been dismissed by the county prosecutor! The original story, which details the case itself, has been preserved below. Regardless of the outcome, it’s worth a read.

On March 25th, 2026, Kris Ripper walked into a Kansas DMV and replaced her driver’s license. Like other transgender Kansans, Ripper was forced to change the gender marker on her license back to ‘M’ because of Senate Bill 244, which invalidated all licenses that don’t display a person’s ‘biological sex.’

On May 5th, Ripper was driving home from work in the rain. Because it was sunny, her car’s headlights had automatically turned off. That caught the attention of a cop, and she was pulled over.

“After seeing my license, he spent like 10 minutes questioning me on if my license was real before I explained to him that I am a transgender woman,” Ripper said. “It has to say ‘M’ legally.”

“He just awkwardly gave it back to me and sent me on my way with a verbal warning,” she added. Ripper maintains that she wasn’t issued a citation of any kind.

But yesterday, she received a notice in the mail that she had failed to appear before her county’s court for an arraignment.

Her charge? Operating a motor vehicle without a valid license, a class B misdemeanor that carries 6 months of jail time and/or a $1,000 fine, as well as a permanent criminal record.

If she doesn’t appear within 30 days, the notice, which Transitics has reviewed, said, her license will be revoked. Although it isn’t the first time this year that the state is threatening her license, it’s safe to say that the consequences are much more severe this time around. And worse, she says she wasn’t informed that she was being charged at all.

“I literally got this notice in the mail after getting back from work so I can’t even call anyone to double-check,” she said. “Everything I know about the case itself is from searching the case number on the notice,” she added.

“I’m just a little scared and freaking out.”

Although the charge might eventually be dismissed, the damage is done: Ripper is now forced to take on the stress of being threatened with jail time over a crime she knows she didn’t commit. Incredibly, the notice itself even lists the number that corresponds to her new driver’s license. But to her, the most infuriating part is that she’s only in this mess because she complied with the law—a law that has forced her and thousands of other trans Kansans to carry around IDs that don’t reflect who they are. Ironically, the crime she’s being charged with is the exact crime that the Kansas Department of Revenue used to strongarm trans Kansans into turning over their licenses this past February.

But while Kansas’ law might be the most extreme example—initially aiming to revoke trans people’s licenses just a week after its passage before a court challenge delayed its implementation to late March—what it accomplishes isn’t unique. Just this year, a record 6 states have passed laws or adopted policies restricting gender markers on driver’s licenses, bringing the total number of states with these policies from 4 to 10. Here’s a map of those policies:

Dark red denotes states that ban gender marker changes, while stripes denote the states that adopted their policies in 2026. For sources, tables, and more maps, head to Transitics’ CATPALM page.

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach recently defended SB 244 in court, saying that Kansas driver’s licenses must “contain objective, accurate [sex] information” because they are used to “identify the individual in a variety of situations, including interactions with law enforcement.” The irony isn’t lost on Ripper, who, after hearing the quote, said that “they just don’t believe trans people can actually pass as their preferred gender.”

And that may very well be true. After all, Ripper received scrutiny for not appearing male—a situation the state is effectively arguing is impossible. She isn’t alone, either: across the country, trans people have reported having similar interactions with law enforcement when presenting IDs that don’t fully reflect their identities. At the same time, the number of states taking on positions similar to the one taken by Kobach has only grown.

However, for the trans people who do receive scrutiny, their law enforcement interactions usually start and end with harassment. Kris Ripper may very well be the first to end in criminal charges.

But, given the growing number of states with these restrictions, she likely won’t be the last.