Loading
Loading
Your feedback directly shapes Sporos.
Sign in to track your feedback history
Specifies that a party to a protective order proceeding has a duty to inform the court of any military protective orders issued by a military commander in effect between the parties. Allows the court to consider evidence of a military protective order in effect against a respondent for the protection of the petitioner. Amends provisions concerning facially valid foreign protection orders to include certain protection orders issued by a Canadian court.
Introduced
Jan 6, 2026
Last Action
Mar 4, 2026
Session
IN 2026
Sponsors
2 primary · 2 co
Public Law 90
Signed by the Governor
Signed by the President Pro Tempore
Signed by the President of the Senate
Signed by the Speaker
Returned to the House with amendments
House concurred with Senate amendments; Roll Call 376: yeas 95, nays 0
Motion to concur filed
Third reading: passed; Roll Call 251: yeas 47, nays 0
Amendment #1 (Freeman) prevailed; voice vote
Second reading: amended, ordered engrossed
Committee report: do pass, adopted
First reading: referred to Committee on Judiciary
Referred to the Senate
Third reading: passed; Roll Call 181: yeas 93, nays 0
Senate sponsor: Senator Carrasco
Second reading: ordered engrossed
Representative Zimmerman added as coauthor
Committee report: amend do pass, adopted
Representative Bauer added as coauthor
First reading: referred to Committee on Judiciary
Authored by Representative Lauer
HB 1286 was introduced on Jan 6, 2026 by Ryan Lauer in IN session 2026. It is currently signed. Most recent action on Mar 4, 2026: Public Law 90.
Get a plain-English explanation of what this bill does, who it affects, and why it matters.
Public Law 90