Kansas House Bill HB2348

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/7/25
• Refer: 2/7/25
• Refer: 2/17/25
• Refer: 2/19/25

Caption

Providing that tenure at postsecondary educational institutions shall not be defined, awarded or recognized as an entitlement, right or property interest in a faculty member's current, ongoing or future employment by an institution.

Summary

HB 2348 would change Kansas law governing tenure at postsecondary educational institutions by stating that tenure is discretionary and conditional, and not an entitlement, right, or property interest in a faculty member’s current, ongoing, or future employment. The bill applies to the Kansas Board of Regents and institutions under its authority, and it directs that neither the board nor any institution may define or recognize tenure as creating such an employment interest. The bill also provides that any special benefits, processes, or preferences associated with tenure may be revoked, limited, altered, or otherwise modified by the awarding institution or by the Board of Regents. At the same time, it includes a savings clause stating that nothing in the act may be used to infringe or abrogate a faculty member’s constitutionally protected rights or interests. The bill defines key terms such as “faculty,” “institution,” and “tenure” for purposes of the new section.

Impact

If enacted, HB 2348 would affect Kansas postsecondary institutions and the Board of Regents by limiting how tenure is understood in state law and by reducing any argument that tenure itself creates a protected property interest in continued employment. This could affect faculty employment disputes, grievance procedures, and any legal claims tied to tenure-based expectations, while preserving separate constitutional protections.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript, vote tally, or recorded debate, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the materials provided. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a policy choice favoring institutional control and flexibility over tenure protections, but the overall sentiment from legislative discussion cannot be determined from the available context.

Contention

The main point of contention likely concerns whether tenure should be treated as a protected employment interest or instead as a revocable, conditional status controlled by institutions and the Board of Regents. Faculty members, higher education employees, and advocates for academic freedom may view the bill as weakening job security and due-process expectations, while university administrators and supporters may see it as clarifying that tenure does not create an enforceable property right in employment. No specific objections or supporters are identified in the provided materials.