Kansas House Bill HB2322

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/7/25
• Refer: 2/7/25

Caption

Prohibiting law enforcement officers and agencies from engaging in motorcycle profiling and requiring police training programs to include training on motorcycle profiling.

Summary

HB 2322 would prohibit law enforcement officers and agencies in Kansas from engaging in “motorcycle profiling,” defined as using the fact that a person rides a motorcycle or wears motorcycle-related paraphernalia as a basis for stopping, questioning, searching, arresting, or otherwise taking enforcement action, whether or not there is a legal basis. The bill creates a new statutory section establishing this prohibition and applies it to both individual officers and agencies. The bill also requires every law enforcement agency in the state to adopt a written policy banning motorcycle profiling and to specify disciplinary consequences for violations. In addition, agencies would have to provide annual training on motorcycle profiling, and the state’s police training curriculum would be amended to require instruction on the topic. The bill further directs the director of police training to include information on motorcycle profiling in basic and ongoing law enforcement training under K.S.A. 74-5604a, which the bill amends and then repeals in its existing form.

Impact

HB 2322 would add a new statewide anti-profiling rule specific to motorcyclists and would impose new policy, training, and enforcement obligations on Kansas law enforcement agencies. It would also create a private right of action for aggrieved persons to seek actual and punitive damages, injunctive relief, and attorney fees in district court, while also allowing complaints to the attorney general, who could require additional training if a violation is found. The bill would therefore affect law enforcement practices, agency discipline policies, police training standards, and civil liability exposure for alleged profiling incidents.

Sentiment

The available context suggests the bill is aimed at addressing a perceived fairness issue affecting motorcyclists and was requested on behalf of the National Coalition of Motorcyclists, indicating support from rider advocacy interests. No committee transcript or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the supplied materials. Based on the bill’s structure, the overall tone appears preventive and remedial rather than punitive, focusing on training and policy compliance as well as remedies for violations.

Contention

The main potential points of contention are the bill’s creation of a specific protected category for motorcyclists, the broad definition of motorcycle profiling, and the enforcement mechanisms. Law enforcement stakeholders may object to the private right of action, punitive damages, and mandatory annual training and policy adoption requirements, while supporters are likely to emphasize the need to prevent discriminatory stops based on motorcycle use or biker-related clothing. Another possible issue is whether the bill duplicates or expands existing anti-profiling rules by singling out one group rather than addressing profiling more generally.