New Jersey Assembly Bill A1724

New Jersey 2024-2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/9/24
• Refer: 1/9/24

Caption

Requires court to consider results of domestic violence assessment before dissolving certain domestic violence restraining orders.

Impact

The implementation of A1724 would alter existing procedures related to the dissolution of restraining orders in New Jersey's family court system. By codifying the need for domestic violence assessments, the bill aims to create a more robust mechanism for ensuring victims' safety when considering applications for the dissolution of restraining orders. This could lead to more informed decisions by judges and potentially prevent further domestic violence incidents. It establishes that defendants who wish to dissolve restraining orders are financially responsible for the costs associated with the assessments, which adds a layer of accountability.

Summary

Assembly Bill A1724 aims to enhance the safety and protection of victims of domestic violence by requiring the court to consider the results of a domestic violence assessment before dissolving any final restraining orders against defendants who have been issued two or more such orders. The bill mandates that if a defendant seeks to dissolve a restraining order, the court must evaluate whether the defendant poses a future risk by considering a comprehensive assessment conducted by qualified professionals, including psychiatrists and counselors. This assessment will help courts determine the likelihood that the offender will commit further acts of violence or abuse against the victim or others identified at risk.

Contention

While proponents of A1724 argue that it enhances the protection of victims and helps ensure that courts are making decisions based on comprehensive evaluations, critics may express concern regarding the financial burden placed on defendants who could already be in precarious situations. Additionally, there may be worries about the potential delays in accessing justice for both victims and defendants due to the required assessments, possibly prolonging situations of conflict and tension. Overall, the balance between ensuring safety and maintaining fairness in the judicial process will be a critical point of debate as the bill moves through the legislative process.