Senate backs protection order legislation, 31-3

The Senate has voted 31-3 in favor of Sen. Grant Burgoyne’s bill to allow protection orders to be issued in cases where the victim isn’t related to or in a romantic relationship with the harasser – something not allowed under current Idaho law. That’s been an issue in several serious Idaho cases, including a Boise woman who was shot by a disgruntled business client against whom she was unable to secure a protection order.

Sen. Jim Rice, R-Caldwell, spoke out against the bill, saying, “I don’t think this is a well-written bill. I think it has problems. I think the problems are sufficiently serious as to reject the bill.” He noted that the law referred to telephone harassment and mentioned “profane language,” and said, “Profane language is cussing. So if you call someone up and you use a cuss word, that’s telephone harassment. You do it again, and got this. .. .That’s the problem, it’s over-broad.” Burgoyne disputed that, and said the bill follows existing domestic violence laws.

Sen. Maryanne Jordan, D-Boise, said she’s spoken with police officers concerned about the lack of options under current law. “They respond and respond and respond in the same place and the answer’s the same,” she said – there’s nothing they can do. “I have great confidence in our police officers and our judicial system that they can differentiate between someone using the phone and using a swear word and someone being in fear for their life and having to hide their children.”

Rice also said he practices family law, and he often sees people seek protection orders on false grounds, in an effort to influence custody cases.

In something of a debate of the Senate lawyers, Sen. Curt McKenzie, R-Nampa, also criticized the bill; but Sen. Todd Lakey, R-Nampa, spoke in favor of it. Sen. Sheryl Nuxoll, R-Cottonwood, said, “I really think this is something that’s really needed, but I would like to see more consensus with the lawyers here. … So I’m going to vote no.”

Sen. Jim Patrick, R-Twin Falls, “I’m very familiar with a case involving this type of a situation. … Being harassed on and on and on, go to the sheriff, go to the prosecutor, and there’s nothing you can do about it. Something needs to be done in those cases. She feared for her life, she feared for her job. … I can tell you there’s a great need for some protection. If there’s a domestic dispute that’s easy to figure out, but when it’s not, there’s no protection at all, and I think there should be.”

SB 1373 now moves to the House side.