Kansas House Bill HR6016

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/13/25
• Refer: 3/13/25
• Enrolled: 3/27/25
• Passed: 3/27/25

Caption

Denouncing the planned satanic worship ritual scheduled to take place on March 28, 2025.

Summary

House Resolution 6016 is a nonbinding resolution that denounces a planned satanic worship ritual, described in the resolution as a “black mass,” scheduled to occur on the grounds of the Kansas State Capitol on March 28, 2025. The resolution states that the Kansas House respects First Amendment rights of assembly and speech, but expresses strong disagreement with conduct it characterizes as mocking or desecrating sacred beliefs. It frames the event as offensive to Catholics and Christians, calls it contrary to the state’s spiritual heritage, and urges Kansans to promote unity and mutual respect. The resolution also specifically calls on Governor Laura Kelly to condemn the planned activity and refers to its “implicit use of stolen property.” Because it is a resolution, HR 6016 does not change substantive state law or create new legal obligations; instead, it expresses the House’s official position and moral condemnation. The measure was adopted by the House on emergency final action by a vote of 101-15, indicating substantial support but not unanimity.

Impact

HR 6016 does not amend the Kansas statutes or regulate conduct directly. Its legal effect is limited to a formal statement of the House’s views, including denunciation of the planned event and a request that the governor condemn it. The resolution may influence public messaging, political pressure, and the handling of events on capitol grounds, but it does not itself alter First Amendment protections, property law, or criminal law.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment in the House was strongly negative toward the planned ritual, with the resolution using highly condemnatory language and emphasizing religious offense, community values, and the state’s spiritual heritage. The vote of 101-15 shows broad support for the resolution, though a meaningful minority opposed it. The available record does not include committee debate, so the principal evidence of sentiment comes from the resolution text and the floor vote.

Contention

The main point of contention is the balance between religious offense and constitutional protections for speech and assembly. The resolution acknowledges First Amendment rights while still condemning the event, suggesting disagreement over whether the state should formally denounce protected expression. Another likely point of dispute is the resolution’s religious framing, including references to anti-Catholic bigotry, blasphemy, and the state and nation being “under God,” which may have been viewed by opponents as sectarian or inappropriate for an official legislative statement. The 15 dissenting votes indicate that some members objected either to the substance, the tone, or the use of legislative time for a symbolic condemnation.