Kansas House Bill HB2692

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/4/26
• Refer: 2/4/26
• Refer: 3/16/26

Caption

Establishing standards of conduct for agents of the United States immigration and customs enforcement (ICE) prohibiting facial covering of agents, requiring vehicles be clearly marked, requiring judicial search warrants, prohibiting raids in places of worships, schools, daycare centers, hospitals and courts, requiring minimum training.

Summary

HB2692 would establish a set of conduct rules for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents operating within Kansas. The bill requires ICE agents to be identifiable by uniform markings and prohibits them from wearing masks or other facial coverings. It also requires ICE vehicles to be clearly marked, directs agents to identify themselves when asked, and bars certain surveillance activities without a judicial warrant. The bill further limits where ICE may conduct enforcement actions. It prohibits raids at schools, places of worship, daycare centers, hospitals, and courts unless supported by a judicial warrant, and it bans door-to-door raids in neighborhoods, apartments, and other residential dwellings. In addition, the bill would require ICE agents to complete a minimum training regimen comparable to the 14-week training required for Kansas law enforcement officers. The bill is intended to protect civil rights, ensure respectful treatment of noncitizens, and promote the use of the least amount of force necessary.

Impact

If enacted, HB2692 would create state-level operational restrictions on federal immigration enforcement activity within Kansas, even though ICE is a federal agency. It would not change federal immigration law itself, but it would impose Kansas standards on how ICE agents may conduct visible enforcement actions in the state, including identification, vehicle markings, warrant requirements for certain actions, and limits on raids in sensitive locations. The bill would also establish a state-defined training expectation for ICE agents operating in Kansas.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee discussion or votes, the available context suggests the measure is framed by its sponsors as a civil-rights and public-safety bill rather than a punitive immigration measure. The stated purpose emphasizes transparency, accountability, and minimizing force. Because there are no transcripts or vote records provided, there is no documented legislative sentiment beyond the bill’s sponsor-driven framing.

Contention

The main points of contention are likely to be the bill’s attempt to regulate the conduct of a federal agency and its restrictions on immigration enforcement tactics. Supporters would likely argue that the bill protects civil rights, prevents fear and confusion during enforcement actions, and safeguards sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals, and houses of worship. Opponents would likely argue that Kansas cannot or should not impose operational rules on ICE, that the bill could hinder federal immigration enforcement, and that the warrant and identification requirements may interfere with federal priorities and officer safety.