Oklahoma Senate Bill SB1925

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26
• Refer: 2/3/26

Caption

Protection from Domestic Abuse Act; modifying penalties for protective order violations. Effective date.

Summary

SB1925 revises Oklahoma’s penalties for violating protective orders under the Protection from Domestic Abuse Act. The bill updates 22 O.S. Section 60.6 to increase and reclassify certain offenses, including making a second or subsequent protective-order violation a Class D1 felony and making violations that cause physical injury or impairment a Class D1 felony as well. It also adjusts the associated imprisonment ranges and fines, while preserving the court’s ability to impose both incarceration and monetary penalties. The bill also retains and clarifies the court-ordered intervention framework for defendants convicted of protective-order violations. Courts must require domestic abuse counseling or treatment, set review hearings to monitor compliance, and may continue or revoke suspended sentences, deferred sentences, or probation if the defendant fails to comply. The measure continues to authorize GPS monitoring, requires protective orders to include notice of the penalties, and preserves special procedures for minor violators in juvenile proceedings. It also repeals a duplicate 2025 version of the same statute and sets an effective date of November 1, 2026.

Impact

SB1925 would amend Oklahoma criminal law governing violations of emergency temporary, ex parte, final, and foreign protective orders. The bill changes the classification and punishment of repeat and injury-causing violations, increasing felony exposure and modifying sentencing language in 22 O.S. Section 60.6. It also updates statutory references, conforms terminology, and repeals a redundant 2025 enactment of the same section to avoid conflicting versions in the Oklahoma Statutes. The practical effect is to strengthen enforcement tools for domestic violence protective orders and expand the consequences for repeat offenders and cases involving physical harm.

Sentiment

The available context shows no committee transcript or recorded vote history, so there is no documented debate to measure directly. Based on the bill text, the measure appears to be framed as a public-safety and domestic-violence enforcement bill, with an emphasis on stronger penalties and continued treatment requirements. The absence of recorded opposition or amendments in the provided materials suggests no clear public sentiment can be inferred beyond the bill’s apparent intent to tighten enforcement.

Contention

The main policy tension in SB1925 is between tougher criminal penalties and the use of treatment-based interventions. The bill increases felony classifications and sentencing ranges for repeat or injury-causing protective-order violations, which may be viewed as a stronger deterrent but also as a more punitive approach. At the same time, it preserves mandatory counseling, review hearings, and probation conditions, indicating a continued focus on rehabilitation and compliance monitoring. Another possible point of concern is the expanded use of GPS monitoring and the court’s authority to impose related costs, which could raise affordability and implementation questions for defendants and courts.