Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Military Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Georgia House approves bill letting military judge issue enforceable protective orders for National Guard members
Summary
The House passed House Bill 325 to create an enforceable military protective-order process for Georgia National Guard service members accused of stalking other service members, authorizing military-judge contempt powers and civilian enforcement mechanisms.
The Georgia House on a unanimous vote passed House Bill 325, a measure to create a statutory process by which the Georgia National Guard and the state's military judge can issue and enforce military protective orders for service member-on-service member stalking.
Proponents say the bill fills enforcement gaps in current military protective order (MPO) practice and extends protection to service members when they are not in military status. Representative Jason Martinez, the bill's sponsor, said the measure gives the Georgia National Guard "a mechanism to issue military protective orders to prevent, deter, and punish service member on service member stalking and protect the good order and discipline within the organization." Martinez credited Georgia National Guard legal staff for drafting the measure.
The bill lets the state's military judge consider verified petitions and to issue protective orders modeled on similar authority in Georgia superior courts. MPO violations would be lawful military orders and could be punished under the Georgia Code of Military Justice; the statute as presented gives contempt authority to the military judge with penalties up to 30 days in confinement and fines up to $1,000. Martinez said MPOs would be enforceable through courts-martial and through civilian contempt authority where appropriate. The bill also includes integration with the Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC) for enforcement information.
Supporters argued the change closes a practical enforcement gap: current MPOs typically apply only while a service member is in military status or on a military installation, while about 85% of Guard members serve in a traditional status and live off-installation. During debate, members asked whether the bill limited civilian protective orders; the sponsor said it did not prevent service members from pursuing civilian relief in the courts.
House passage: The bill passed by a recorded vote of 168–0 and was reported as having attained the constitutional majority needed to pass the House.
What happens next: The measure will proceed to the Senate for consideration. The bill language, as presented on the House floor, applies only to service member-on-service member allegations and does not expand the statute to civilian-on-service member matters.
