CaliforniaSome domestic violence survivors could seek limits on abusers’ filings
Survivors in pending California cases with a court finding of domestic violence or a qualifying protective order issued after a hearing could seek limits on an abuser’s filings and evidence requests.
What it does
In a pending California case, survivors with a court finding of domestic violence or a qualifying protective order issued after a hearing could seek limits on an abuser’s filings and evidence requests. A judge would grant an order after a hearing if the required abuse and court tactics are proven.
Once a judge issues an order, the person who committed abuse would need court permission before filing a case, adding a claim, or seeking evidence against the survivor in civil, family, or small claims court.
Survivors would pay no fees for papers filed under these rules. Either party could file online for free, and parties, lawyers, support people, and witnesses could join related hearings remotely without charge.
If a person under an order files a case or seeks evidence against the survivor without permission, the case or request would pause. A judge would award penalties, lawyer fees, and case costs if the survivor asks and the person can pay or is reasonably likely to be able to pay.
Argument forA survivor who gets an order could face fewer abusive filings and evidence requests because the other party would need a judge’s permission.
Argument againstA person under an order might face delays bringing even a valid claim against the survivor because a judge must approve it first.
More detail
An eligible survivor could ask a judge to limit another party’s filings and evidence requests against them. The survivor must be a party to a pending California case and have a court finding of domestic violence or a qualifying protective order issued after a hearing. After notice and a hearing, the judge must find that the other party committed domestic violence and used baseless or abusive filings or evidence requests. The evidence must show this is more likely than not. The pending case and evidence requests would pause while the judge considers the request. The survivor could ask any time before a final judgment in that case.
A person under the order would need court permission before filing claims or seeking evidence against the survivor. The rule covers new cases, new claims in pending cases, and evidence requests against the survivor in civil, family, and small claims courts. A judge could allow the filing or evidence request only if it has merit, is neither baseless nor abusive, and is not meant to harass or delay. If that person filed the pending case or has pending evidence requests against the survivor, the judge would review them. The judge would dismiss the case or require withdrawal of requests that fail that test. The permission requirement would begin when the judge issues the order.
Courts would waive survivors’ filing fees and allow free online filing and remote hearing appearances. Either party could file papers under these rules online for free. Parties, lawyers, support people, and witnesses could join hearings under these rules remotely without charge.
Courts would pause unauthorized cases and evidence requests and award penalties and legal costs when the required conditions are met. This applies when a person under an order files a case or seeks evidence against the survivor without first getting court permission. The survivor must request the award. Before ordering payment, the judge must find that the person can pay or is reasonably likely to be able to pay. The unauthorized case or evidence request would pause automatically until the court orders otherwise.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed Assembly
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- Sep 30Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 847, Statutes of 2026.Latest
- Sep 30Approved by the Governor Gavin Newsom.Became Law
- Aug 28Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.To Governor
- Aug 20Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 30. Noes 0. Page 5576.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.Major
- Vote recorded Unfinished Business SB1192 Rubio et al. Concurrence. Result: pass.Upper
- Aug 19In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
- Vote recorded SB 1192 Rubio Senate Third Reading By Stefani. Result: pass.Lower
- Aug 19Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 6265.) Ordered to the Senate.Passed Assembly
- Aug 13Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Vote recorded Do pass. Result: pass.Lower
- Aug 13From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (August 13).Minor
- Aug 13Assembly Rule 63 suspended.
- Aug 5August 5 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.
- Jun 25Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.Major
- Jun 24From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (June 23).Major
- Jun 23
- Vote recorded Do pass as amended, and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. Result: pass.Lower
- Jun 17From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.Major
- Jun 8June 16 hearing postponed by committee.
- Jun 1Referred to Com. on JUD.Minor
- May 22In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.Minor
- Vote recorded Special Consent. Result: pass.Upper
- May 22Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 33. Noes 0. Page 4420.) Ordered to the Assembly.Passed Senate
- May 20Ordered to special consent calendar.
- May 14Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Vote recorded Do pass. Result: pass.Upper
- May 14From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 4268.) (May 14).Minor
- May 12Set for hearing May 14.
- May 11May 11 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
- Vote recorded Placed on suspense file. Result: pass.Upper
- May 4Set for hearing May 11.
- Apr 23Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.Major
- Apr 22From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 13. Noes 0. Page 3979.) (April 21).Major
- Apr 21
- Vote recorded Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar. Result: pass.Upper
- Apr 13Set for hearing April 21.
- Apr 6From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.Major
- Mar 4Referred to Com. on JUD.Minor
- Feb 20From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 22.
- Feb 19Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.Introduced
Public SafetyCriminal Justice