Relative to protection of persons from domestic violence and military protective orders.
Summary
HB 62 makes two targeted changes to New Hampshire law. First, it requires the adjutant general to provide financial assistance to current and former National Guard members who were victims of sexual assault or sexual harassment while serving, so they can participate in related adverse administrative proceedings or New Hampshire Code of Military Justice proceedings. The assistance is limited to reasonable travel expenses and does not expand a victim’s underlying rights to participate in those proceedings.
Second, the bill adds “military protective order” to the domestic violence chapter and defines the term as an order issued by a commanding officer against a member of the U.S. Armed Forces or National Guard. It also makes military protective orders admissible evidence in civil domestic violence protective order proceedings. The bill takes effect January 1, 2026.
Impact
The bill amends RSA 110-B:8 and RSA 173-B:1 and 173-B:3, expanding the statutory framework for military-related victim support and domestic violence proceedings. It creates a new state obligation for the Adjutant General to fund travel-related assistance for certain National Guard victims, and it broadens the evidence courts may consider in protective order cases by expressly allowing military protective orders into the record. The fiscal note anticipates no revenue impact and an indeterminable but likely limited expenditure increase, with the Judicial Branch estimating a cost of less than $10,000.
Sentiment
The available record suggests generally supportive, noncontroversial treatment of the bill. The measure was adopted by both bodies, and the fiscal note describes the expected impact as limited. No committee transcript or recorded vote details were provided, so there is no evidence in the supplied materials of organized opposition or divided sentiment. The bill appears to have been viewed as a narrow public-safety and victim-support measure.
Contention
The main policy questions raised by the bill are practical rather than ideological. One point is the scope of the new financial assistance: it is limited to reasonable travel expenses for participation in proceedings, and the Department of Military Affairs and Veterans Services noted that the number of affected victims is likely small but not predictable. Another issue is the evidentiary change allowing military protective orders in civil domestic violence cases, which may be seen as helpful to courts and petitioners but also raises questions about how such orders should be weighed alongside other evidence. No specific opposition is documented in the provided materials.