§2265 — Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedure | U.S. Code

Summary

Courts and police in one State, Indian tribe, or territory must treat and enforce a protection order from a court in another State, tribe, or territory as if it were their own when the order meets certain rules. The rules are: the issuing court had legal authority over the people and the matter, and the person the order is against was given reasonable notice and a chance to be heard. If an order was issued without the other person present (an ex parte order), the person must be given notice and a chance to be heard within the time the issuing law requires, and in any event soon enough to protect their due process rights. An order against someone who had also filed for protection is not given the same treatment unless a cross‑petition was filed or the court made specific findings for each party. The enforcing State, tribe, or territory does not have to tell the person the order is registered there unless the protected person asks. An order still must be treated the same even if it was not registered. States, tribes, and territories must not post online information about registering, filing, or issuing an order if doing so would likely reveal the protected person’s identity or location, though secure government registries may share information for enforcement. A tribal court has full civil authority to issue and enforce protection orders within its Indian country (as defined in section 1151), including using civil contempt, excluding violators from tribal land, and other remedies.

Title 18, §2265

Crimes and Criminal Procedure — Source: USLM XML via OLRC

(a)Any protection order issued that is consistent with subsection (b) of this section by the court of one State, Indian tribe, or territory (the issuing State, Indian tribe, or territory) shall be accorded full faith and credit by the court of another State, Indian tribe, or territory (the enforcing State, Indian tribe, or territory) and enforced by the court and law enforcement personnel of the other State, Indian tribal government or Territory 11 So in original. Probably should not be capitalized. as if it were the order of the enforcing State or tribe.

(b)A protection order issued by a State, tribal, or territorial court is consistent with this subsection if—

(1)such court has jurisdiction over the parties and matter under the law of such State, Indian tribe, or territory; and

(2)reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard is given to the person against whom the order is sought sufficient to protect that person’s right to due process. In the case of ex parte orders, notice and opportunity to be heard must be provided within the time required by State, tribal, or territorial law, and in any event within a reasonable time after the order is issued, sufficient to protect the respondent’s due process rights.

(c)A protection order issued by a State, tribal, or territorial court against one who has petitioned, filed a complaint, or otherwise filed a written pleading for protection against abuse by a spouse or intimate partner is not entitled to full faith and credit if—

(1)no cross or counter petition, complaint, or other written pleading was filed seeking such a protection order; or

(2)a cross or counter petition has been filed and the court did not make specific findings that each party was entitled to such an order.

(d)(1)A State, Indian tribe, or territory according full faith and credit to an order by a court of another State, Indian tribe, or territory shall not notify or require notification of the party against whom a protection order has been issued that the protection order has been registered or filed in that enforcing State, tribal, or territorial jurisdiction unless requested to do so by the party protected under such order.

(2)Any protection order that is otherwise consistent with this section shall be accorded full faith and credit, notwithstanding failure to comply with any requirement that the order be registered or filed in the enforcing State, tribal, or territorial jurisdiction.

(3)A State, Indian tribe, or territory shall not make available publicly on the Internet any information regarding the registration, filing of a petition for, or issuance of a protection order, restraining order, or injunction in either the issuing or enforcing State, tribal or territorial jurisdiction, if such publication would be likely to publicly reveal the identity or location of the party protected under such order. A State, Indian tribe, or territory may share court-generated and law enforcement-generated information contained in secure, governmental registries for protection order enforcement purposes. The prohibition under this paragraph applies to all protection orders for the protection of a person residing within a State, territorial, or Tribal jurisdiction, whether or not the protection order was issued by that State, territory, or Tribe.

(e)For purposes of this section, a court of an Indian tribe shall have full civil jurisdiction to issue and enforce protection orders involving any person, including the authority to enforce any orders through civil contempt proceedings, to exclude violators from Indian land, and to use other appropriate mechanisms, in matters arising anywhere in the Indian country of the Indian tribe (as defined in section 1151) or otherwise within the authority of the Indian tribe.

Notes & Related Subsidiaries

Editorial Notes

Amendments

2022—Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 117–103 struck out “restraining order or injunction,” after “a protection order,” and inserted at end “The prohibition under this paragraph applies to all protection orders for the protection of a person residing within a State, territorial, or Tribal jurisdiction, whether or not the protection order was issued by that State, territory, or Tribe.” 2013—Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 113–4 added subsec. (e) and struck out former subsec. (e). Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “For purposes of this section, a tribal court shall have full civil jurisdiction to enforce protection orders, including authority to enforce any orders through civil contempt proceedings, exclusion of violators from Indian lands, and other appropriate mechanisms, in matters arising within the authority of the tribe.” 2006—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 109–162, § 106(a)(1), (b), substituted “, Indian tribe, or territory” for “or Indian tribe” wherever appearing and “and enforced by the court and law

Enforcement

personnel of the other State, Indian tribal government or Territory as if it were” for “and enforced as if it were”. Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 109–162, § 106(a)(2), substituted “State, tribal, or territorial” for “State or tribal” in introductory provisions. Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 109–162, § 106(a)(1), substituted “, Indian tribe, or territory” for “or Indian tribe”. Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 109–162, § 106(a)(2), substituted “State, tribal, or territorial” for “State or tribal”. Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 109–162, § 106(a)(2), substituted “State, tribal, or territorial” for “State or tribal” in introductory provisions. Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 109–162, § 106(a), substituted “, Indian tribe, or territory” for “or Indian tribe” in two places and “State, tribal, or territorial” for “State or tribal”. Subsec. (d)(2). Pub. L. 109–162, § 106(a)(2), substituted “State, tribal, or territorial” for “State or tribal”. Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 109–271, which directed amendment of section 106(c) of Pub. L. 109–162 by substituting “the registration, filing of a petition for, or issuance of a protection order, restraining order or injunction” for “the registration or filing of a protection order”, was executed by making the substitution in par. (3), which was added by section 106(c) of Pub. L. 109–162, to reflect the probable intent of Congress. Pub. L. 109–162, § 106(c), added par. (3). 2000—Subsecs. (d), (e). Pub. L. 106–386 added subsecs. (d) and (e).

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Special Rule for the State of Alaska Pub. L. 113–4, title IX, § 910, Mar. 7, 2013, 127 Stat. 126, which provided that, in the State of Alaska, the

Amendments

made by section 904 and 905 of Pub. L. 113–4, which related to tribal jurisdiction over crimes of domestic violence and over issuance of protection orders, applied only to the Indian country of the Metlakatla Indian Community, Annette Island Reserve, was repealed by Pub. L. 113–275, Dec. 18, 2014, 128 Stat. 2988.

§2265 Full faith and credit given to protection orders

Summary

Title 18, §2265

Notes & Related Subsidiaries

Editorial Notes

Amendments

Enforcement

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Amendments

Citations & Metadata