Claire and Lola’s Law (SB 28, 2019) — Kansas’s Only Cannabis-Related Medical Pathway

Last verified: May 2026

The Hartley Sisters

Claire and Lola Hartley were sisters from Hutchinson, Kansas with microcephaly and asparagine synthetase deficiency — an extremely rare genetic disorder producing severe seizures. Claire died in December 2018 at age 17. Lola, who experienced up to 30 seizures a day, became the public face of the campaign for medical-cannabis access in Kansas. Parents Gwen and Scott Hartley lobbied for years, working with reform advocates and legislators across multiple sessions.

The Two-Step Legislative Path: SB 282 (2018) and SB 28 (2019)

SB 282 (2018) — Zero-THC CBD First

Kansas’s first sliver of cannabis reform came in May 2018, when Republican Gov. Jeff Colyer signed SB 282. The bill removed CBD products containing zero percent THC from the state’s criminal definition of marijuana. Limited and primarily symbolic, but it established that Kansas could carve out exceptions to its 1927 prohibition framework.

SB 28 / HB 2244 (2019) — Claire and Lola’s Law

The 2019 SB 28 (companion HB 2244), signed by Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly, took the next step. The bill, universally known as Claire and Lola’s Law, creates an affirmative defense under K.S.A. § 21-5706 for possession of a "cannabidiol treatment preparation" — CBD oil with up to 5% THC content, verified by an independent third-party laboratory — for persons with a "debilitating medical condition" that produces seizures (including but not limited to spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, severe epilepsy, and asparagine synthetase deficiency).

The Statutory Requirements

Under the codified version (now K.S.A. § 21-5706(d)), to invoke the affirmative defense a patient must:

1. Have a medically diagnosed debilitating medical condition.
2. Possess a CBD treatment preparation with no more than 5% THC, tested by a third-party lab.
3. Carry, at all times while in possession, a signed letter from a Kansas-licensed physician, dated within the preceding 15 months, identifying the patient and the debilitating condition.
4. Produce the letter on demand to law enforcement.

Practical Limits

• It is an affirmative defense, not legal possession. A patient can still be arrested, booked, and prosecuted; the defense is raised in court at trial.
• There is no in-state legal supply. Kansas does not license production or distribution of CBD oil with THC. Patients must source out of state — typically from Colorado dispensaries — and bring it across state lines. That importation is itself a federal Controlled Substances Act violation.
• The prescribing physician must be Kansas-licensed — the patient cannot use a Colorado physician’s recommendation.
• It does not cover smokable flower, vapes, or edibles with more than 5% THC.

Utility in Practice

The Marijuana Policy Project describes the defense bluntly: "Affirmative defenses prevent convictions, but they don’t necessarily prevent a person from being arrested and hauled into court." No state agency tracks or registers patients using the pathway, so there is no authoritative count of how many Kansans rely on it.

The Epidiolex Displacement

The FDA-approved zero-THC seizure medication Epidiolex (cannabidiol oral solution), available by prescription since 2018, has displaced much of the original need for Claire and Lola’s Law. Epidiolex is FDA-cleared for Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, Dravet syndrome, and tuberous sclerosis complex. It is fully legal in Kansas, covered by most insurance, and dispensed through standard pharmacies.

However, families like Lola Hartley’s report that pure CBD without THC does not provide adequate symptom control for their children. The 5%-THC carve-out under Claire and Lola’s Law was specifically designed to provide access to CBD oil with the minimal therapeutic THC content that some severe-seizure patients require — access that Epidiolex’s zero-THC formulation cannot replicate.

What Claire and Lola’s Law Did NOT Do

• Did not create a Kansas medical-cannabis registry.
• Did not authorize in-state production or distribution.
• Did not protect against arrest or charging — only against conviction at trial after raising the defense.
• Did not cover other debilitating conditions (cancer, MS, ALS, chronic pain, PTSD, etc.).
• Did not cover product forms other than CBD oil ≤5% THC.
• Did not permit out-of-state physician certifications.

The Comparison with Other State Programs

Kansas’s narrow affirmative defense contrasts sharply with neighboring state programs:

• Missouri — full medical program since 2018; recreational since Feb 2023.
• Colorado — full medical + recreational since 2014.
• Oklahoma — expansive medical program since 2018.
• Nebraska — voter-approved medical 2024 (implementation contested).

Of Kansas’s four neighbors, only Nebraska shares the dysfunctional-implementation problem; Colorado, Missouri, and Oklahoma all have functioning regulated programs.

The Continuing Hartley Family Voice

The Hartley family has continued to advocate publicly for full medical-cannabis legalization in Kansas. Their voice has been a recurring presence in committee testimony, legislative hearings (when bills get hearings), and Kansas media coverage. The family’s framing — that Lola’s right to access medication that controls her seizures shouldn’t depend on whether Kansas’s Senate President allows a vote — has been particularly compelling for moderate Republicans considering the policy.

Related on this site: Kansas Medical Cannabis Legislative H..., Why Kansas Has No Medical Cannabis Pr..., Send a Message.