New Hampshire Expands Domestic Violence Law, Adds Sexual Assault Protective Order (2026)

New Hampshire Domestic Violence Law Expanded, New Sexual Assault Protective Order Created

Governor Kelly Ayotte signed a package of crime victim protection bills on July 13, 2026, broadening New Hampshire's legal definition of domestic violence and creating a new protective order for sexual assault survivors regardless of their relationship to the offender.

Information last verified on July 15, 2026. This is a developing story; we update it as the record changes.

This article covers New Hampshire law only. Domestic violence definitions and protective order eligibility rules vary significantly from state to state. See our 50 state restraining order guide for how other states handle these protections.

What Happened

On July 13, 2026, Governor Kelly Ayotte signed a package of crime victim protection bills into law, according to a press release from the Office of the Governor. Two bills in the package directly change how New Hampshire defines domestic violence and who can qualify for civil protective orders.

HB 1576 expands New Hampshire's legal definition of domestic violence and abuse. Under the new law, coercive control, isolating a victim from family or friends, and the nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images (sometimes called image-based sexual abuse) are added to the list of behaviors that can qualify as domestic violence or abuse. Advocates and lawmakers have said these behaviors are commonly used to manipulate and control victims but were not always reflected in the state's prior statutory definition.

HB 1651 creates a new sexual assault protective order. Previously, survivors generally needed a qualifying relationship with the offender, such as being married, related, living together, or in a dating or intimate relationship, to obtain a civil protective order under New Hampshire's existing domestic violence statute. HB 1651 closes that gap by allowing sexual assault survivors to seek a protective order regardless of their relationship to the offender.

New Hampshire Public Radio, the Concord Monitor, and the New Hampshire Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence each reported on the signing, describing it as part of a broader legislative effort to strengthen the state's response to domestic violence and sexual assault.

What the Law Actually Says

New Hampshire's core civil protective order statute for domestic violence is RSA 173-B. Historically, to petition for a protective order under this chapter, a person generally needed to show both a pattern or incident of abuse as defined by statute and a qualifying relationship with the defendant, such as a current or former spouse, a family or household member, a co-parent, or a current or former intimate or dating partner. Someone who was assaulted by an acquaintance, coworker, or stranger, without one of those qualifying relationships, could not use RSA 173-B, even if the underlying conduct was a serious sexual offense.

New Hampshire already had one protective order that did not require a qualifying relationship: the stalking protective order under RSA 633:3-a. A stalking victim can petition for that order against a coworker, former supervisor, acquaintance, stranger, or anyone else, without needing to show a family, household, or intimate relationship. HB 1651 borrows that same no-relationship structure and applies it to sexual assault, giving survivors a dedicated protective order option even when RSA 173-B's relationship requirement would otherwise have excluded them.

HB 1576 works differently. Rather than changing who can petition for an order, it changes what conduct counts as domestic violence or abuse in the first place. New Hampshire's abuse definition now recognizes coercive control, meaning patterns of controlling, monitoring, or intimidating behavior that fall short of physical violence but are used to dominate a victim's decisions and freedom. It also recognizes isolating a victim from family or friends as its own form of abuse, and it adds the nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images to the categories of conduct that can support a protective order or otherwise qualify as domestic violence under state law.

Both changes are add-ons to New Hampshire's existing family and criminal law framework rather than replacements for it. Criminal statutes addressing assault, stalking, and related offenses remain separate from the civil protective order process, and survivors can generally pursue both criminal charges and a civil protective order depending on the facts of their situation.

Analysis: Why This Matters

The following is analysis from the Recording Law Editorial Team. New Hampshire's protective order system, like most states, has long drawn a line between domestic violence cases, which are relationship-based, and sexual assault cases, which are not always relationship-based. That line meant a survivor's access to a civil protective order could depend heavily on how the offender happened to be connected to them, rather than on the severity of what occurred. HB 1651 narrows that gap for sexual assault specifically, following the same structural approach New Hampshire has used for stalking orders under RSA 633:3-a for years.

HB 1576's addition of coercive control and image-based abuse to the domestic violence definition reflects a broader, multi-state legislative trend of recognizing non-physical forms of control as abuse in family and protective order law, rather than limiting the definition to physical violence or direct threats. Taken together, the two bills address different stages of the domestic violence and sexual assault response system, one widening the definition of abuse and the other widening who can seek protection, rather than a single isolated fix.

How This Affects You

These changes apply to protective order petitions and domestic violence determinations made under New Hampshire law going forward. Survivors of sexual assault who previously could not qualify for a civil protective order because they lacked a qualifying relationship with the offender may now be able to petition for one under HB 1651's new sexual assault protective order. Similarly, someone experiencing coercive control, isolation from family or friends, or the nonconsensual sharing of private sexual images by a partner or family member may now have a stronger basis to seek a protective order or support a domestic violence finding under HB 1576's expanded definition.

Exact eligibility depends on the specific facts of a case, the final statutory language as codified, and the effective dates set for each bill. Anyone considering a protective order petition in New Hampshire should review the current text of RSA 173-B, RSA 633:3-a, and the newly enacted bills on the New Hampshire General Court's website, or consult with a New Hampshire family law attorney or victim advocate, before filing.

For general background on how New Hampshire's protective order and restraining order system works, see our New Hampshire restraining order guide. Coercive control and isolation tactics can also come up in custody disputes; our New Hampshire child custody laws guide covers how courts weigh domestic violence and controlling behavior in custody decisions. Domestic violence findings can likewise be relevant in support obligations; see our New Hampshire alimony laws guide for related family law context.

This article is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws change and effective dates can shift after a bill is signed, so verify current statutory text before relying on it for a specific situation. If you are in immediate danger, call 911, and if you need confidential support related to domestic violence or sexual assault, the National Domestic Violence Hotline is available at 1-800-799-7233; this is general safety information, not legal advice.

Last updated: 2026-07-15. This is a developing story; details verified as of 2026-07-15.