SB26, titled the Kentucky Education Equality Protection Act or the KEEP Act, would substantially revise Kentucky education law to prohibit public schools, school districts, the Kentucky Department of Education, and cooperative boards from using public resources for diversity, equity, and inclusion offices, officers, trainings, initiatives, or materials that the bill defines as promoting “discriminatory concepts.” It also bars differential treatment or preferential consideration in employment, contracting, student services, and discipline based on religion, race, sex, color, or national origin, while carving out exceptions for activities required by state or federal law, certain historical instruction, student speech and association, religious freedom, mental health services, single-sex schools, and sex-based bona fide occupational qualifications.
The bill creates enforcement mechanisms allowing the Attorney General to seek mandamus relief and allowing “qualified individuals” — including students, parents, employees, applicants, and denied contractors — to sue for injunctive relief, with attorney’s fees available for intentional and willful violations. It also requires districts, the department, and cooperative boards to eliminate DEI offices and officers, review and terminate noncompliant trainings and contracts, and report compliance information to the Legislative Research Commission and the Attorney General. In addition, the bill repeals statutes tied to minority-representation requirements and removes prior provisions that directed recruitment of minority teachers or required board/council appointments to reflect minority racial composition.
Beyond the anti-DEI provisions, SB26 makes several education-policy changes. It reinforces trauma-informed school practices and school counselor staffing goals, updates school resource officer training and reporting requirements, expands public reporting of employee salary and severance information to the State Treasurer, and revises teacher certification rules to require training on Kentucky education law, including the new anti-discrimination provisions. It also revises academic standards and assessment review processes, school-based decision-making rules, superintendent hiring procedures, and gifted/advanced coursework planning, while preserving existing accountability and assessment structures with updated review cycles.
The general sentiment reflected by the bill text is strongly aligned with a conservative or anti-DEI policy approach, emphasizing equal treatment and prohibiting race-, sex-, and identity-based preferences in public education. Because there were no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of floor debate or bipartisan support/opposition in the available context. The bill’s emergency clause and immediate effective date for most sections suggest sponsors viewed the measure as urgent.
The main points of contention are likely to be the breadth of the DEI prohibitions, the definitions of “discriminatory concepts” and “differential treatment or benefits,” and the repeal of minority-representation provisions. Supporters would likely view the bill as preventing discrimination and ideological programming in schools, while opponents may argue it restricts diversity and inclusion efforts, chills training and curriculum choices, and removes tools intended to improve representation and equity in hiring, governance, and student support.
SB26 would amend multiple chapters of Kentucky education law, especially KRS Chapter 158 and related certification and governance statutes, to prohibit DEI-related offices, officers, trainings, initiatives, and race/sex/religion-based preferences in public education settings. It would also repeal KRS 156.500 and 161.165, eliminating statutory provisions tied to minority representation and minority-teacher recruitment, and it would impose new reporting, compliance, and enforcement duties on school districts, the Department of Education, and cooperative boards. The bill would affect students, parents, employees, applicants, contractors, school councils, superintendents, and education agencies by creating new legal limits, reporting obligations, and private and public enforcement rights.
The bill’s overall sentiment is strongly anti-DEI and pro-equal-treatment in public education, with the text framing the measure as protecting constitutional equal protection. No committee discussion or votes were provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate to gauge bipartisan support or opposition. Based on the bill’s structure and emergency clause, the sponsors appear to have treated the measure as a priority and time-sensitive policy change.
The most notable contention centers on whether the bill prevents discrimination or instead suppresses legitimate diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. Critics are likely to object to the broad definitions of prohibited concepts and the requirement that districts dismantle DEI offices, terminate officers, and review or cancel trainings and contracts. Another likely flashpoint is the repeal of minority-representation and minority-teacher recruitment provisions, which supporters may see as eliminating race-based preferences but opponents may view as reducing efforts to diversify school leadership and staff. The private right of action, waiver of immunity, and Attorney General enforcement authority also make the bill more legally aggressive than a typical policy directive.