SB1205 would amend the Illinois Criminal Code of 2012 to create a new offense called domestic assault. A person would commit this offense by knowingly, and without lawful authority, engaging in conduct that places a family or household member in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm, permanent disability, or disfigurement. The bill incorporates the existing statutory definition of “family or household member” from the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The bill also adds a mandatory court order for defendants arrested for domestic assault. Upon release pending trial, the court would be required at the preliminary examination to order the defendant to have no contact or communication with the victim and to stay away from the victim’s residence for at least 72 consecutive hours. Domestic assault would be classified as a Class A misdemeanor.
Impact
SB1205 would add a new domestic-violence-related offense to Illinois criminal law and create a new statutory section in the Criminal Code of 2012. It would expand prosecutorial tools by allowing law enforcement and courts to address threatening conduct toward family or household members even where physical injury has not occurred, and it would impose a short-term no-contact and residence exclusion requirement after arrest. The bill would affect defendants accused of domestic assault, victims of domestic violence, and courts handling preliminary examinations and pretrial release conditions.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be framed as a victim-protection and public-safety proposal aimed at addressing domestic threats before they escalate into physical violence. The absence of voting history or discussion prevents a reliable assessment of legislative sentiment beyond the bill’s protective intent.
Contention
The main policy questions likely concern whether creating a separate domestic assault offense is necessary given existing assault and domestic battery laws, and whether the conduct standard—placing a family or household member in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm—is sufficiently clear. Another likely point of contention is the mandatory 72-hour no-contact and stay-away order after arrest, which may raise concerns about judicial discretion, due process, and the practical impact on defendants and shared residences. No specific objections or supporters are identified in the provided record.