2026 Kentucky Legislative Updates

The 2026 Regular Session of the Kentucky General Assembly convened on January 6, 2026, and adjourned sine die on April 15, 2026. It was a 60-day “long” budget session. Governor Beshear used his veto pen on more than thirty bills during the recess period, and the legislature overrode nearly all of those vetoes when it returned on April 14 and 15.

This page covers the bills from that session that actually became law and that affect a Kentucky family law, criminal defense, or estate planning practice. I have written about each bill with the chapter number from the Acts of Kentucky, the KRS sections amended, the effective-date framework, and what the change means in practice. I have also flagged the bills that were introduced and drew attention but did not make it to the governor’s desk — you will hear about them, and it helps to know they are not yet law.

Criminal Defense

The 2026 session was particularly active on the criminal-justice side. The signature bill is Logan’s Law, which rewrites parole eligibility for serious offenders and reworks the insanity defense. Around it sit several other measures: a new grooming statute, a comprehensive stalking restructure, an 85% time-served requirement for child sexual exploitation cases, and a provisional concealed-carry license for 18- to 20-year-olds enacted over the governor’s veto. None of these are small changes. Several affect cases that are already pending.

House Bill 422 — Logan’s Law (Acts Ch. 14)

Signed by Governor: April 2, 2026. Effective date: July 15, 2026 (no emergency clause). KRS amended as enacted: 439.3406 (mandatory reentry supervision), 504.030, 504.060, 504.120, 504.150 (insanity and guilty-but-mentally-ill framework), and 540.020.

The bill is named for Logan Tipton, a 6-year-old killed in Versailles in 2015. The catalyst was the 2025 release of the man convicted in that case under mandatory reentry supervision (MRS), despite multiple parole-board denials.

What Logan’s Law changes, as enacted:

• Mandatory reentry supervision narrowed: A person convicted of two or more violent offenses no longer qualifies for mandatory reentry supervision (KRS 439.3406). The loophole that triggered the bill is closed.
• Insanity definition tightened: KRS 504.060(7) now defines insanity as, “as a result of mental illness or intellectual disability,” lacking substantial capacity to appreciate the nature and quality of one’s conduct.
• No split insanity verdicts: A jury may no longer find a defendant not guilty by reason of insanity on one count while returning guilty or guilty-but-mentally-ill on another count arising from the same course of conduct tried in the same trial, and courts must instruct juries on this prohibition (KRS 504.120).
• Guilty but mentally ill, at sentence expiration: Where the treating professional determines a guilty-but-mentally-ill defendant still needs treatment when the sentence expires, a petition for involuntary hospitalization or admission under KRS Chapter 202A or 202B must be filed with the sentencing court (KRS 504.150). For cases approaching the insanity-defense line, this changes both trial strategy and the post-sentence picture.

One important correction from earlier coverage of this bill (including an earlier version of this page): the versions of HB 422 that would have raised violent-offender parole eligibility on life sentences from 25 to 30-plus years, expanded the KRS 439.3401 violent-offender list, and mandated consecutive sentencing in multiple-victim cases were removed in the Senate and did not become law. The enacted bill is the narrower MRS-and-insanity measure described above. Parole-eligibility math under KRS 439.3401 is unchanged.

House Bill 521 — Stalking Restructure (Acts Ch. 67)

Sponsor: Rep. Steven Rudy, with 12 co-sponsors. Signed by Governor: April 10, 2026. Effective date: July 15, 2026. KRS amended: 508.130, 508.150, 508.155 (the stalking statutes themselves); plus 14.300, 23A.208, 24A.178, 431.005, 411.220, 456.010, 500.092, 500.120, 506.160, and 532.080 to align the broader code.

This is the biggest change to Kentucky stalking law in a decade. The bill collapses the prior degree structure (first-degree and second-degree stalking) and makes stalking a Class D felony across the board, with a Class C felony enhancement when aggravating circumstances are present. Aggravators include: violation of a protective order; a pending criminal complaint between the parties; a prior conviction for a similar offense; use or display of a deadly weapon; or conduct that causes the victim to fear sexual contact, physical injury, or death.

The definition was modernized. “Course of conduct” now explicitly covers communications through social media platforms, text messaging, internet applications, location tracking, and electronic surveillance. The bill removes any ambiguity about whether a series of Instagram messages, repeated TikTok posts targeting a specific person, or AirTag-style location tracking counts as stalking conduct. It does.

What this means in practice:

• A stalking arrest is now a felony at the front end. There is no misdemeanor floor. Bond, preliminary hearing, and pretrial release look different.
• Stalking commonly travels with a domestic violence order or EPO/IPO. After HB 521, a stalking charge on top of a DVO violation moves the analysis straight to Class C territory. Plea negotiation strategy is different than it was in 2025.
• Defense practitioners need to scrutinize the “course of conduct” element on every case. The new definition is broad. So is the new aggravator list. Both sides will be testing where this lands.
• HB 521 also amends KRS 532.080 (the persistent felony offender statute) to align the felony classes. A prior stalking conviction now sits in a different place for PFO purposes — another reason to look hard at any older record before pleading anything out under the new regime. See our Class D felony page for the broader sentencing framework.
• The bill also expands second-degree criminal trespass (KRS 511.070) to include knowingly entering or remaining in a workplace while engaging in threatening behavior after notice against trespass, with a second or subsequent offense within three years a Class A misdemeanor — and a second or subsequent third-degree trespass within three years becomes a Class B misdemeanor (KRS 511.080). Defense counsel handling a workplace incident should read both before assuming a simple trespass.

House Bill 4 — Grooming Offense (Acts Ch. 65)

Sponsor: Rep. Matt Proctor, with 40 co-sponsors. Signed by Governor: April 10, 2026. Effective date: July 15, 2026. KRS amended: Created a new section in KRS Chapter 510, and amended KRS 510.010 to add definitions for “course of conduct,” “grooming behavior,” and “sexual conduct.”

HB 4 creates a stand-alone grooming offense. Until now, conduct that prosecutors would describe as grooming had to be charged as some attempted or completed underlying sex offense, with all the proof problems that come from charging an inchoate offense. The new statute makes the grooming itself a crime.

Penalty structure:

• Baseline grooming of a minor: Class A misdemeanor.
• Grooming if the minor is younger than 12: Class D felony.
• Grooming by a person in a position of trust or authority (teacher, coach, clergy, family member, household resident): Class D felony.
• Grooming by a person in a position of trust where the minor is younger than 12: Class C felony.

The bill specifically excludes age-appropriate conversations between siblings about human sexuality and certain communications by volunteers acting within official duties. The Senate Committee Substitute added that a sentence for grooming will run concurrently with any sentence for a related Chapter 510 offense arising from the same victim and the same course of conduct, so the bill is not designed to double-charge.

For defense practitioners: the definitions in KRS 510.010 control. “Course of conduct” means a pattern, not a single message. “Grooming behavior” has a statutory definition. The position-of-trust enhancements are facially serious, and a single status determination (was the defendant in a teacher role at the time, was there a coaching relationship, was a non-family-member adult cohabitating in the home) can shift the offense from misdemeanor to felony. These cases will turn on the record, on text-message preservation, and on whether the alleged conduct actually fits the statutory pattern.

House Bill 366 — Sexual Performance Materials and 85% Service (Acts Ch. 109)

Sponsor: Rep. DJ Johnson, with co-sponsors D. Grossberg and K. Moser. Signed by Governor: April 13, 2026. Effective date: July 15, 2026. KRS amended: 531.335.

HB 366 makes two changes to the statute on possession or viewing of material depicting sexual performance by a minor:

• Computer-generated images included. The statute now reaches computer-generated images of a minor, regardless of whether an actual identified minor was used to produce the image. The legislature took aim at AI-generated and synthetic CSAM.
• 85% time-served requirement. A person convicted under the amended statute must serve at least 85% of the imposed sentence before becoming eligible for probation, parole, or any other form of conditional release.

The 85% requirement is a meaningful change. KRS 531.335 was previously a Class A misdemeanor for a first offense and a Class D felony for a second or subsequent. Felony convictions for KRS 531.335 used to draw parole eligibility at roughly 15% of the sentence (per 501 KAR 1:030). After HB 366, that calculation moves to 85%. For a 5-year sentence, the practical floor goes from about 9 months to about 51 months before any release consideration.

This shift drives plea analysis. Where the Commonwealth offers a Class D felony plea on a possession case, the “cost” of acceptance is much higher than it was last year. Pre-trial diversion under KRS 218A.14151 does not apply to KRS 531.335. The decision tree for these cases is different now.

House Bill 312 — Provisional Concealed Carry, 18 to 20 (Acts Ch. 173)

Sponsor: Rep. Savannah Maddox, with 27 co-sponsors. Vetoed: April 3, 2026. Veto override: April 14, 2026 (House 81-18, Senate 28-9). Effective date: July 15, 2026 (no emergency clause). KRS amended: Created a new section in KRS Chapter 237.

Kentucky has had permissive constitutional carry for adults aged 21 and older since 2019. HB 312 creates a provisional concealed carry license for residents between 18 and 20. The Kentucky State Police is directed to issue the provisional license upon completion of a firearms-safety and training course (up to eight hours) and a state and federal background check, applying the same eligibility criteria used for licensed carry by those 21 and older. A House Floor Amendment added a reporting requirement to the Legislative Research Commission on gun-related incidents involving holders of the new provisional license.

For criminal defense practitioners, the change matters at the margin: a person aged 18 to 20 with a valid provisional license is now authorized to carry concealed in places where licensed carry is permitted. A young defendant cited or arrested under KRS 527.020 or 527.040 in the past would now need that fact pattern reanalyzed under the new framework. KSP has to build the application system, so the practical rollout of who actually holds a provisional license will take time after July 15.

Family Law

The headline family-law-related enactment is Senate Bill 122, which started as a narrow caretaker-sentencing measure and grew, through floor amendments, into a multi-topic statute touching custody and parenting time under KRS 403.270 and 403.315, visitation supervision under KRS 403.290, protective-order proceedings under KRS 403.727 and 456.035, and Kentucky’s involuntary-hospitalization and incompetency laws (KRS 202A and 202C). Beyond SB 122, the legislature enacted HB 778 on child welfare and foster placement, and HB 134 on the statewide sexual-assault-nurse-examiner system, which touches the SANE evidentiary infrastructure that supports DVO and prosecution cases.

Senate Bill 122 — Caretakers, Custody, and Mental Health (Acts Ch. 92)

Signed by Governor: April 10, 2026. Effective date: July 15, 2026, with certain court data-collection provisions effective October 1, 2026, and the visitation-supervisor training requirement effective January 1, 2027. KRS amended: KRS 533.010 (caretaker sentencing); a new section of KRS Chapter 403 plus KRS 403.270, 403.290, 403.315, 403.727, and 456.035 (custody, parenting time, and protective-order proceedings); and KRS Chapters 202A and 202C (involuntary hospitalization and incompetency proceedings).

SB 122 is, in its final form, three bills in one. Each piece matters.

1. Caretaker sentencing alternatives. KRS 533.010 now requires the court, upon conviction, to consider the defendant’s status as a caretaker — someone who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, education, safety, or support of a dependent child, family member, or other person reliant on the defendant, or a woman who has given birth or remains pregnant while awaiting sentencing. The court may order alternative-sentence programming (substance-use treatment, domestic-violence education, parenting classes, anger management, vocational and educational training, case management, counseling, and restorative practices where safe), and may revoke or modify if the defendant fails to abide. It is not a presumption against incarceration — it is a structured opportunity to argue for an alternative sentence on a record specific to the caretaker role.

2. Custody, parenting time, and domestic violence. This is the piece every family practitioner needs to read closely, because it moves real weight:

• KRS 403.270 now requires the court to consider allegations of domestic violence or abuse by one party against the other party or the child and make written findings on the record before considering the other custody factors. Malicious false allegations of child abuse are added as a custody factor.
• KRS 403.315 now establishes a rebuttable presumption that joint custody and shared equal parenting time are not in the best interests of the child where the court finds a party has committed two or more acts of domestic violence or abuse against another party — and a parent with such findings must undergo counseling or treatment before being awarded custody.
• A new section of KRS Chapter 403 prohibits removing custody or reducing parenting time from a party solely to improve the child’s relationship with the other party where the court has found domestic violence or abuse, and requires that orders remediating a child’s resistance to contact with a violent or abusive parent primarily address that parent’s behavior.
• KRS 403.727 and 456.035 now allow victim advocates to attend evidentiary hearings in protective-order proceedings involving minors.
• Effective January 1, 2027, paid visitation supervisors and parenting coordinators in custody proceedings must receive specialized training (KRS 403.290).

For family practitioners: where there are no domestic-violence findings, the joint-custody and equal-parenting-time framework of KRS 403.270 remains the default. But in cases with repeated findings of domestic violence, SB 122 flips the presumption — and in every custody case it moves the domestic-violence analysis to the front of the order, in writing. That matters most where one parent has been the subject of a DVO or the family has been through a dependency, neglect, and abuse proceeding.

3. Involuntary hospitalization (KRS 202A and 202C). The bill modernizes Kentucky’s involuntary-hospitalization framework, with attention to the rights of the respondent in 202A proceedings (mental illness) and 202C proceedings (intellectual disability). The amendments coordinate with Logan’s Law on the post-sentence civil-commitment pathway for defendants found guilty but mentally ill. Practitioners who handle Casey’s Law petitions or any 202A petition should read both bills together — the procedural overlap is significant.

For divorce, custody, and criminal cases involving parents of minor children, SB 122 is the bill of the session. It is also the bill most likely to be invoked in places the drafters did not specifically anticipate, because each piece of it sits at an intersection — criminal sentencing meets custody meets mental-health civil commitment meets juvenile records. Read it carefully before assuming the prior framework still applies.

House Bill 778 — Child Welfare and Foster Placement (Acts Ch. 68)

Sponsor: Rep. Nancy Wilson, with co-sponsors S. Heavrin, D. Grossberg, and S. Stalker. Signed by Governor: April 10, 2026. Effective date: July 15, 2026. KRS amended: 199.462, 199.801, 600.020, 610.030, 610.345, 620.050, 620.055, 620.140, 508.090, 508.100, 508.110, 508.120, 15.440, 218A.205, plus new sections in KRS Chapters 211 and 625.

HB 778 is a comprehensive child-welfare statute. The highlights for family practitioners:

• Sex offender registry exclusion. KRS 199.462 is amended to prohibit any person on the adult or juvenile sex offender registry from being approved as a foster parent, relative caregiver, fictive-kin placement, or adoptive parent. This codifies what Cabinet for Health and Family Services policy had long required, and it removes any room for case-by-case override. KRS 199.801 (placement requirements for children in state custody) is conformed.
• Substance-exposed infants. The bill creates a framework for plans of safe care for substance-exposed infants, with reporting and monitoring requirements under KRS 218A.205 and new sections in KRS Chapters 211 and 625. Parents of newborns testing positive for controlled substances face structured CHFS engagement that does not automatically equal a DNA petition — but it is close.
• Enhanced child-abuse penalties involving controlled substances. KRS 508.090 through 508.120 (criminal abuse statutes) are amended to add aggravators for abuse involving controlled substances administered to or in the presence of a child.
• Juvenile diversion and informal adjustment. KRS 600.020, 610.030, and 610.345 are updated to refine the definitions of “diversion agreement,” “eligible youth,” and “informal adjustment,” and to expand the notification list when a child is adjudicated guilty of an offense classifying that child as a youthful offender — school superintendents, directors of pupil personnel, and school resource officers now must be notified.
• Cabinet investigations. KRS 620.050, 620.055, and 620.140 are amended to expand access to child-abuse reports for specified individuals and to set new procedural requirements around emergency removals.
• Adoption counseling for biological parents. The bill adds requirements for counseling and legal representation safeguards for biological parents in voluntary termination of parental rights and consent to adoption.

For parents facing CHFS investigation, for relatives seeking kinship or relative placement, and for adoptive parents in private adoptions, HB 778 changes the procedural landscape across most of a DNA case’s life cycle. Read it together with the 2024-2025 case law I summarized in my Kentucky DNA Case Law Updates 2026 page — the statutory and judicial currents are flowing in similar directions.

House Bill 134 — Statewide SANE Coordinator (Acts Ch. 66)

Sponsor: Rep. Rachel Roarx Raymer, with co-sponsors C. Aull, S. Bratcher, B. Chester-Burton, D. Grossberg, K. Moser, S. Stalker, and P. Stevenson. Signed by Governor: April 10, 2026. Effective date: July 15, 2026, with the statewide SANE registry to be operational by December 1, 2026. KRS amended: a new section of KRS Chapter 211; KRS 314.142; and KRS 403.707 (via Senate Committee Substitute).

The bill creates a statewide Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) coordinator within the Kentucky Board of Nursing and directs the development of a strategic plan to ensure SANE coverage across Kentucky hospitals. A statewide SANE registry, accessible to hospitals and to other SANEs through the Board of Nursing’s website, is required by December 1, 2026. The amendment to KRS 403.707 conforms the Sexual Assault Response Team Advisory Committee membership provisions.

HB 134 is an infrastructure statute rather than a substantive criminal change. But it touches Larmour Law’s practice in two concrete ways. First, it improves the evidentiary record available in DVO/IPO petitions and criminal-court prosecutions involving sexual assault, because the SANE process is the single most important evidentiary capture point in a sex-offense case. Second, the amendment to KRS 403.707 squarely affects how the SART Advisory Committee operates, which in turn affects how cases are screened and built.

Senate Bill 101 — Mandatory Expulsion for Assault on School Personnel (Acts Ch. 50)

Sponsor: Sen. Mike Nunn, with 22 co-sponsors. Signed by Governor: April 7, 2026. Effective date: July 15, 2026. KRS amended: 158.150 (expulsion), 158.155 (mandatory reporting of school violence), 158.990 (reporting penalties), and 159.170 (student information system records).

SB 101 requires local boards of education to expel a student in grades 6 through 12 for at least twelve months when the student intentionally physically assaults, batters, or abuses school personnel without just cause. The bill creates exceptions for students whose disabilities directly affected the conduct, and it includes pathways for an expelled student to return early upon successful evaluation and referral.

The bill also requires school employees to report intentional assault or attempted assault to law enforcement, with penalties for failure to report under KRS 158.990.

For families with a child facing potential expulsion under SB 101, the case picks up juvenile court and school-discipline dimensions in parallel. The mandatory-reporting piece all but guarantees law-enforcement contact, which means a juvenile petition is usually right behind. The exception for disability-related conduct is the most likely defense in many cases — the student’s IEP, 504 plan, and any prior behavioral assessments will matter.

Estate Planning, Wills & Probate

Correction (August 1, 2026): an earlier version of this page reported that the 2026 session did not amend Kentucky’s core estate statutes. That was wrong. Senate Bill 50, effective July 15, 2026, is the most significant rewrite of Kentucky probate and intestate succession law in decades, and it deserves the top of this section.

Senate Bill 50 — Probate and Estate Reform

Effective date: July 15, 2026. KRS amended: 391.010, 392.020, 394.300, and multiple sections of KRS Chapter 395.

• Intestate succession reordered. KRS 391.010’s order of succession now prioritizes the surviving spouse, adds stepchildren, and removes more distant relatives, and the bill specifies the surviving spouse’s share of real property in an intestate estate.
• Surviving spouse’s share revised. KRS 392.020 now identifies surplus personalty and surplus real estate and the spouse’s share of each.
• Recorded wills. KRS 394.300 sets how long a county clerk holds a recorded will and to whom it is returned when that period expires.
• Probate administration streamlined. Amendments across KRS Chapter 395 establish fiduciary appointment requirements, confidentiality protections for estate assets, when an appointment hearing may be waived, and a written declaration under penalty of perjury in lieu of a sworn oath where the court accepts it.

If a client dies without a will on or after the effective date, the people who inherit — and in what shares — can be different from what the old statutes provided. Blended families are affected most directly. Full client-oriented coverage is in our post on the new laws now in effect.

Beyond SB 50, there was one adjacent item worth knowing about, and one overlap with Logan’s Law.

Digital privacy as estate-planning context: House Bill 692

Sponsor: Rep. Daniel Fister and others. Signed by Governor: April 13, 2026 (Acts Ch. 118). Effective date: July 1, 2027.

HB 692 is the 2026 amendment to Kentucky’s Consumer Data Protection Act. It defines “automatic content recognition” and, as enacted, prohibits controllers from collecting automatic content recognition data without consumer consent. The bill is squarely a privacy-law statute, not an estate statute. But it matters for digital-asset planning because the “sensitive data” framework affects what custodians of online accounts will and will not turn over to a fiduciary under Kentucky’s adoption of the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (KRS 395.605–395.671). When you draft a will or a durable power of attorney that grants digital-asset access, the practical scope of that access keeps shifting as the underlying privacy statutes change. HB 692’s July 1, 2027 effective date gives executors and powers of attorney a runway, but the language in estate documents should be reviewed.

Mental-health civil commitment as a probate-court overlap

Section 2 of Senate Bill 122 (above) rewrites pieces of KRS Chapters 202A and 202C. Kentucky’s involuntary-hospitalization petitions are filed in district court, which is the same court that handles most probate matters in non-Family-Court counties. Practitioners who handle guardianships and probate filings will see the SB 122 amendments most often in disputed-capacity contexts — when a contested guardianship petition runs parallel to a 202A hold, or when a Casey’s Law petition is pending alongside an estate matter.

Where estate practice goes from here

SB 50 is the headline, and its practical reach will become clearer as courts and clerks implement it. For clients, the immediate takeaways are the ones above: the intestacy order changed, the surviving spouse’s position improved, stepchildren entered the line of succession, and several probate filings got procedurally simpler. Anyone whose plan — or lack of one — was built on the old rules should review it now.

Court Procedure and Practice

The 2026 RS did not produce a single comprehensive court-procedure bill. The major statutory court-procedure changes worth highlighting are embedded inside the substantive bills above:

• Stalking criminal complaints (HB 521). The bill amends KRS 23A.208 (Circuit Court criminal jurisdiction) and KRS 24A.178 (District Court criminal jurisdiction) to coordinate with the felony reclassification. A stalking complaint that previously could be examined in District Court at preliminary now flows entirely through Circuit Court at the indictment stage.
• Supervised visitation professionalized (SB 122). Effective January 1, 2027, paid visitation supervisors and parenting coordinators in custody proceedings must receive specialized training under KRS 403.290. Where supervised parenting time is part of a custody order, who supervises — and whether they are qualified under the new requirement — becomes a live question.
• Juvenile notification (HB 778). KRS 610.345 now requires notification to school superintendents, directors of pupil personnel, and school resource officers when a youthful offender adjudication occurs. Practitioners handling youthful-offender matters should incorporate that notification step into the standard post-disposition checklist.
• Reporting violations of mandatory school assault reports (SB 101). A school employee who fails to make the mandatory KRS 158.155 report is subject to penalties under KRS 158.990. The criminal-defense overlay is real if a parent or staff member is asked to provide a statement; counsel should be careful about advising witnesses in any case that fits the new framework.

On the technology side, Kentucky’s KCOJ eFiling system continues to expand across the state on a deployment schedule managed by the Administrative Office of the Courts. The 2026 RS did not change the underlying statutory framework, but the AOC’s rollout does affect day-to-day practice. If you are a self-represented party, the AOC’s public-filer portal is the place to start.

What Was Vetoed or Failed

Several bills relevant to family, criminal, and estate practice received attention in the 2026 RS but did not become law. Knowing what did not pass is almost as important as knowing what did, because clients and other practitioners hear about these bills, often assume they are now law, and proceed on that assumption.

House Bill 418 (custody and domestic violence) — failed as a bill, enacted in substance

HB 418 would have created a rebuttable presumption against joint custody where a party has committed two or more acts of domestic violence or abuse, restricted custody changes based solely on improvement of the parent-child relationship when domestic violence findings exist, required specialized training for paid visitation supervisors, and allowed victim advocates at protective-order hearings involving minors. The bill passed the House 96-1 on March 4, 2026, but stalled in Senate Committee on Committees and never advanced as a stand-alone bill.

The substance passed anyway. HB 418’s core provisions were amended onto Senate Bill 122 and enacted there — including the rebuttable presumption against joint custody and shared equal parenting time after two or more findings of domestic violence or abuse. An earlier version of this page reported that the presumption did not pass; that was wrong, and it has been corrected. See the SB 122 section above for the full breakdown of what is now law.

Failed: Senate Bill 290 (Automatic Expungement Act)

SB 290, sponsored by Sen. Brandon Storm and known as the “Clean Slate Kentucky” bill, would have created an automatic expungement process for eligible misdemeanor and Class D felony convictions (for offenses committed on or after January 1, 2027), allowed Commonwealth’s and county attorneys to object to halt expungement of certain offenses, waived filing fees for eligible applicants, and created a searchable portal for individuals to determine if convictions had been expunged. The bill cleared committee and advanced in the Senate but did not reach final passage in 2026 RS. SB 290 is not law.

The takeaway: Kentucky’s expungement framework in 2026 remains what it has been — petition-based under KRS 431.073 (Class D felony expungement, five-year waiting period) and KRS 431.076 (dismissed/acquitted charges expungement). If you are eligible, you still file. The automatic process is not in place. See our Kentucky expungement page for the petition-based procedure as it stands.

Failed: House Bill 30 (charged-but-dismissed expungement)

HB 30, sponsored by Rep. Lindsey Burke, would have amended KRS 431.073 and 431.078 to provide for expungement of offenses which were charged but later dismissed or amended, and would have amended KRS 532.080 (PFO) to clarify that PFO enhancements do not alter the underlying felony classification. The bill was referred to House Judiciary in January and did not advance. HB 30 is not law.

Failed: House Bill 198 (cannabis decriminalization)

HB 198, sponsored by Reps. Nima Kulkarni and Al Gentry, would have made possession of a personal-use quantity of cannabis exempt from civil or criminal penalty, redefined trafficking and possession statutes in KRS 218A.010 through 218A.1423, and created retroactive expungement of certain cannabis convictions. The bill stayed in House Judiciary. HB 198 is not law.

Cannabis remains a controlled substance in Kentucky under KRS Chapter 218A, with medical cannabis available under the 2023 framework (KRS Chapter 218B) for qualifying conditions. Possession charges continue to be prosecuted under existing law.

Failed: Senate Bill 281 (grandparent visitation)

SB 281, sponsored by Sen. Rick Girdler, would have updated KRS 405.021 to set a clear standard for grandparent-visitation cases. The bill went through several committee substitutes (changing the evidentiary standard between “clear and convincing” and “preponderance” depending on the version) and was recommitted to House Appropriations and Revenue on April 15 without reaching final passage. SB 281 is not law.

The current Kentucky standard for grandparent visitation under KRS 405.021 still applies, with the constitutional overlay of Troxel v. Granville and the Kentucky cases interpreting it.

What This Means for Kentucky Clients

The 2026 session is a busy one to summarize because the changes are not all in the same direction. Here is how I would translate the year’s legislative output for the clients I see most often.

For a parent facing a serious criminal charge

If you have prior violent-offense convictions, Logan’s Law (HB 422) changed the back end: a person convicted of two or more violent offenses no longer qualifies for mandatory reentry supervision. If your case sits anywhere near the insanity-defense line, the tightened KRS 504 framework and the bar on split verdicts change trial strategy too. If you are pending or recently indicted, a fresh look at the plea offer with the enacted statute in front of you is worth the consultation. And if you are the caretaker of a dependent child or other reliant family member, SB 122 now requires the sentencing court to consider that status — a genuinely new tool to argue for an alternative sentence aimed at preserving the parent-child relationship.

For a parent in a contested custody case where domestic violence is in the record

The SB 122 amendments changed this analysis in a real way. Your family-court judge must now address domestic-violence allegations first, with written findings, before weighing the other custody factors — and if the court finds a party committed two or more acts of domestic violence or abuse, the presumption flips: joint custody and shared equal parenting time are presumed not to be in the child’s best interests, and the parent with those findings must complete counseling or treatment before being awarded custody. Where there are no such findings, the joint-custody default is intact. If you have an active custody modification or new divorce filing with these issues, it is worth a review.

For someone considering an expungement petition

SB 290 is not law. The automatic expungement process is not in place. The path remains the petition-based process under KRS 431.073 (Class D felony expungement, with a five-year waiting period after sentence completion) or KRS 431.076 (dismissed, acquitted, or not-prosecuted charges). The mechanics, eligibility analysis, and timeline are unchanged from 2025. Our expungement page walks through the petition framework.

For a person facing stalking or grooming charges

Both offenses look different after the 2026 RS. Stalking under HB 521 is a Class D felony floor with a Class C aggravator. Grooming under HB 4 is a stand-alone offense that scales from misdemeanor to Class C felony depending on the relationship and the age of the minor. In both, the “course of conduct” element controls, and both reach electronic communications explicitly. Document preservation is the single most important defense step at intake — do not delete texts, social media, or location data without counsel.

For a family navigating a CHFS investigation or foster placement

HB 778 changes the procedural landscape around dependency, neglect, and abuse cases. Sex-offender-registry placements are categorically prohibited. Substance-exposed-infant cases now run through structured plans of safe care. School notification on youthful-offender adjudications is broader. The Cabinet’s investigatory authority and the parent’s procedural rights both moved — in different directions on different issues. The right time to call counsel is when the first call from CHFS comes in, not after the petition is filed.

For an 18- to 20-year-old who wants to carry concealed

HB 312 makes a provisional concealed-carry license available, with training and background-check requirements. The Kentucky State Police has to stand up the application system. Until that happens, the prior legal regime applies. After it is live, a person 18 to 20 with a valid provisional license is in the same general posture as a licensed carry holder 21 and older. If you are arrested with a firearm in the meantime, the fact pattern matters — do not assume the law has changed in your favor before checking with counsel.

For a client thinking about their will or estate plan

Senate Bill 50 changed the rules that apply when there is no will: the intestacy order now prioritizes the surviving spouse, includes stepchildren, and drops more distant relatives, effective July 15, 2026. If you have a valid will, your plan still controls — but if you have been relying on the old intestacy defaults, or you are part of a blended family, the defaults changed underneath you. Two more things to think about: (1) review the digital-asset access language in your documents in light of the evolving privacy-statute environment, and (2) if you have a family member with capacity issues, the SB 122 amendments to KRS 202A and 202C may affect any future commitment proceeding, which can intersect with guardianship and POA planning.

This summary is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. Bill numbers, sponsors, chapter assignments, KRS section references, and effective dates are drawn from the official record of the 2026 Regular Session of the Kentucky General Assembly and from the Acts of Kentucky as filed with the Secretary of State, and are current as of the publication date above. Bills enacted as Acts Chapters without an emergency clause take effect ninety days after the session adjourned sine die on April 15, 2026, which is generally July 15, 2026, unless the act itself specifies a different effective date. Consult counsel regarding the facts of your matter.

Related Reading

• New Kentucky Laws Now in Effect (July 15, 2026)
• Kentucky DNA Case Law Updates 2026
• Kanabroski v. Kanabroski: DVOs Protecting Children
• Family Law Overview
• Criminal Defense Overview
• Estate Planning Overview
• Class D Felony in Kentucky
• Kentucky Expungement & Record Sealing
• Orders of Protection (DVO/IPO/EPO)
• Casey’s Law (Involuntary Substance-Abuse Treatment)
• First-Offense DUI in Kentucky
• Kentucky Probate Process
• Wills in Kentucky
• How to File for Divorce in Kentucky