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)

Sponsor: Rep. Daniel Fister, with 62 co-sponsors. Signed by Governor: April 2, 2026. Effective date: July 14, 2026 (90 days after session adjournment, no emergency clause). KRS amended: 439.3401 (violent-offender parole eligibility), 439.3406 (mandatory reentry supervision), 504.150 (mental-health petitions following guilty but mentally ill), 532.025 and 532.030 (life without parole), 532.110 (consecutive sentencing), and 540.020 (insanity defense).

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. The legislature responded by rewriting how Kentucky handles violent offenders at the back end of a sentence.

What Logan’s Law changes for defense practitioners:

• Parole eligibility on life sentences: The minimum service period before parole consideration for certain violent offenders sentenced to life moves from 25 years to at least 30 years. For intentional murder convictions, courts no longer need to find aggravating circumstances to impose life without parole, and for some classes of offense the minimum increases to 35 years.
• Violent-offender definition expanded: KRS 439.3401’s list of offenses qualifying as violent for parole-restriction purposes is broader. Sentencing letters, plea negotiations, and parole-eligibility calculations for newly indicted cases all need to be redone with the amended list.
• Mandatory reentry supervision narrowed: A person convicted of a Class B felony, or designated a violent offender under KRS 439.3401, and denied discretionary parole, is now ineligible for MRS. The loophole that triggered the bill is closed.
• Consecutive sentencing on multiple-victim cases: When a defendant commits violent offenses against more than one victim in separate incidents, the sentences must run consecutively. The prior rule allowing concurrent stacking in some posture is gone.
• Insanity defense reformed: KRS 540.020 is rewritten with tighter standards. The bill also creates a structured path to civil commitment proceedings for defendants found guilty but mentally ill upon completion of their criminal sentence (KRS 504.150). For cases approaching the insanity-defense line, the new framework changes both trial strategy and the post-sentence picture.

For cases already pending, plea offers and parole projections need to be reviewed against the bill’s effective date. For cases indicted after July 14, 2026, the new framework applies in full. If you are evaluating a felony charge with any violent-offender potential — assault, robbery, manslaughter, certain sex offenses, intentional murder — Logan’s Law changes the back-end math that drives nearly every meaningful plea decision.

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 14, 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 511.080) to include threatening workplace conduct after notice has been given to leave. Employers asked for this. Defense counsel handling a workplace incident should read it 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 14, 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 14, 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 14, 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 14.

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 under KRS 403.270, domestic violence under KRS 403.290 and 403.315, juvenile dispositions under KRS 610.340, and Kentucky’s involuntary-hospitalization law (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)

Sponsor: Sen. Julie Raque Adams, with co-sponsors B. Storm and G. Neal. Signed by Governor: April 10, 2026. Effective date: July 14, 2026. KRS amended: a new section of KRS Chapter 533 (caretaker sentencing); KRS 610.340 (juvenile records); KRS Chapters 202A and 202C (involuntary hospitalization, as added by House Floor Amendment 1); and KRS 403.270, 403.290, and 403.315 (custody and domestic violence in family court, also via HFA 1).

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

1. Caretaker sentencing alternatives. A new section of KRS Chapter 533 directs courts, when sentencing a defendant convicted of a nonviolent offense, to consider whether the defendant is the primary caretaker of a dependent child. Where the defendant qualifies, the court is authorized to impose probation or conditional discharge with conditions designed to support the parent-child relationship, including participation in programs and services intended to preserve that relationship. Violent offenses are carved out. The statute does not create a presumption against incarceration — it creates a structured opportunity to argue for an alternative sentence on a record specific to the caretaker role.

2. Custody and domestic violence (HFA 1). The House Floor Amendment added language to KRS 403.270 (custody best-interest factors), KRS 403.290 (in camera interviews of children), and KRS 403.315 (modification standards). The custody amendments work in the direction of giving courts more explicit authority to consider findings of domestic violence and abuse when weighing best interest, and tighten the procedural framework for in camera interviews where a child’s testimony is needed. KRS 403.315 modification procedure was clarified for cases where new evidence of abuse comes to light after the initial decree.

For family practitioners, the SB 122 custody amendments do not replace the joint-custody and equal-parenting-time framework of KRS 403.270 — that framework remains the default. What changes is the weight and procedural posture of protective findings within the best-interest analysis, particularly in cases where one parent has been the subject of a DVO or where 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.

4. Juvenile records (KRS 610.340). The amendment cleans up confidentiality rules for juvenile records to track the broader reforms in HB 778 (below).

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 14, 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 14, 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 14, 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

This is the section where I have to be honest with you: the 2026 Regular Session did not produce significant new legislation in the core estate-planning statutes — KRS Chapter 391 (intestate succession), KRS Chapter 394 (wills), or KRS Chapter 395 (probate administration). No bill amending those chapters was signed into law in the 2026 RS.

That is not a complaint — Kentucky’s wills and probate framework is well settled, and most of what changes at the margin comes through case law rather than statute. But it does mean that for clients asking “what changed in 2026 about my will, my probate filing, or my estate plan?” the honest answer is: at the level of black-letter statute, nothing in 2026 RS.

There were two adjacent items worth knowing about, and there is one bill from a prior session that takes on new significance after 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 includes such data in the definition of “sensitive data.” 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.

What did NOT pass on the estate side

Several digital-asset-related and probate-procedure proposals were introduced and did not advance to enactment in the 2026 RS. There were also proposals to modernize the small-estate threshold under KRS 391.030 (the “dispense with administration” statute) that did not move. If clients are asking whether the small-estate cap changed or whether new digital-asset statutes were adopted, the answer for 2026 RS is no. Plans to revisit some of these items appear likely for the 2027 short session.

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.
• In camera interviews (SB 122). The amendments to KRS 403.290 affect how Family Courts conduct in camera interviews of children in custody and DVO proceedings. The relevant evidentiary backdrop — KRE 611, KRE 614, and the in camera framework I covered in my DNA case law update — remains in place, but the procedural posture in 403 cases now gets a direct statutory hook.
• 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 eFlex eFiling system continues to expand. As of mid-2026, eFiling is required in all Circuit Courts, all Family Courts, and most District Courts for civil filings, with mandatory criminal eFiling rolling out across counties on a schedule managed by the Administrative Office of the Courts. Brad Bussell and I have been filing electronically across our central Kentucky counties (Scott, Fayette, Woodford, Bourbon, Franklin, Jessamine, Harrison, Anderson, Nicholas, and Mason) for some time; the 2026 RS did not change the underlying statutory framework, but the AOC’s deployment schedule 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.

Failed: House Bill 418 (custody and domestic violence)

HB 418, sponsored by Rep. Jason Nemes, 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 modifications based solely on improvement of the parent-child relationship when domestic violence findings exist, required specialized training for paid visitation supervisors and guardians ad litem, and allowed victim advocates at protective-order hearings involving minors. The bill passed the House 96-1 on March 4, 2026, but was returned to Senate Committee on Committees on March 25 and did not advance. HB 418 is not law.

For practitioners: the policy direction HB 418 represents (heightened scrutiny of joint custody in DV cases) was partially picked up by SB 122 in its enacted form — but only partially. The rebuttable presumption against joint custody after multiple DV acts did not pass. The current best-interest analysis in KRS 403.270 still governs, supplemented by the SB 122 amendments.

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 the charge is a violent offense (murder, robbery, certain assault and sex offenses), Logan’s Law (HB 422) has materially raised the back-end stakes. The parole calculation that drove plea decisions in 2025 is different now. Pleading guilty to a Class B felony with the expectation of mandatory reentry supervision at the back end is no longer a reliable strategy — MRS is off the table for many violent offenders denied parole. If you are pending or recently indicted, a fresh look at the plea offer with the new statute in front of you is worth the consultation. If you are also the primary caregiver to a dependent child and the charge is nonviolent, SB 122 gives your defense lawyer a 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 to KRS 403.270, 403.290, and 403.315 give your family-court judge more explicit authority to weigh protective findings in the best-interest analysis and to handle in camera interviews of children. The status quo of joint custody and equal parenting time has not been replaced — KRS 403.270’s 2018 framework is intact — but the procedural and evidentiary handles for cases involving a DVO or a DNA history have changed. 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

The 2026 RS did not amend KRS 391, 394, or 395. Your existing will, durable power of attorney, and advance directive remain governed by the same statutory framework as before. Two things to think about anyway: (1) review the digital-asset access language in your documents in light of the broader 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 14, 2026, unless the act itself specifies a different effective date. Consult counsel regarding the facts of your matter.

Related Reading

• 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