Part ofCrime →

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.

HB 836KENTUCKYSession 2026RSState Billdead

Did Not Advance

Kentucky HB 836 establishes the crime of malicious distribution of images without consent

Original title: AN ACT relating to malicious distribution of images without consent.

Last action · March 10, 2026: to Judiciary (H)Sponsor: Samara Heavrin

Bill progressHistory & official text ↓

Introduced

Committee

Floor Vote

Passed

Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Public stanceCommunity reactions are separate from the official record and reporting.

What This Bill Proposed

Kentucky HB 836 creates a new for intentionally distributing non-consensual images via computer to websites or apps with sexual, abusive, or degrading intent. The measure exempts internet service providers and telecommunications companies, and explicitly states that a conviction does not require sex offender registration.

Why it matters

Residents face potential criminal charges for unauthorized online sharing of images, while internet providers are shielded from liability for user-submitted content.

Who It Would Have Affected

Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

Individuals depicted in images distributed online

Individuals receive new legal protections against the unauthorized online distribution of their images.

Directly affected

Internet service providers and telecommunications services

These entities are explicitly exempted from criminal liability for third-party content hosted or transmitted on their platforms.

Key Facts

You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this bill require offenders to register as sex offenders?

No. Despite the sexual intent criteria listed in the bill, a conviction under this section explicitly does not result in the offender being required to register as a sex offender.

Does consenting to have a photo taken mean someone consented to its distribution?

No. The bill specifies that consent to the creation of an image does not, by itself, constitute consent to the distribution of the image.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Follow the record

Votes, people, money & the original source

Where This Stands

This bill did not become law - Died at adjournment · in House committee.

Procedural history

2 actions

Mar 10, 2026HouseCommittee
to Judiciary (H)
Mar 3, 2026HouseIntroduced
introduced in House to Committee on Committees (H)

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Connected Entities

General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Samara Heavrin

OrganizationGeneral Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky“Legislative body enacting the bill”Map →

PersonSamara Heavrin“Primary sponsor of HB 836”Map →

Sources

Open source document

apps.legislature.ky.gov

Analysis Score

0–100

Significance20
Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 65)
Controversy40
Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
Entertainment10
Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
Buzz35
Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools