New California Domestic Violence Law: Coercive Control Now Grounds for Restraining Orders

California has amended the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (DVPA) to clarify that “disturbing the peace of the other party” as a legal basis for obtaining a Domestic Violence Restraining Order now includes coercive control.

This legislative update marks a significant shift in how non-physical abuse is defined and prosecuted under family law. With this change, the legal system recognizes that domestic violence is not limited to physical harm; it can include patterns of behavior that isolate, intimidate, or control a person’s life.

What Does “Coercive Control” Legally Mean?

Coercive control is a pattern of domination that strips a partner of autonomy. It’s not just about one isolated incident but a series of behaviors aimed at undermining the other person’s independence.

According to the amended statute, coercive control includes, but is not limited to:

• Isolating the other party from support systems such as friends, family, and community.
• Depriving the other party of necessities, including access to food, shelter, or medical care.
• Controlling or monitoring the other party’s actions, such as tracking movement, reading communications, or restricting access to financial resources.
• Compelling the other party to act through force or threats, including those involving immigration status or legal consequences.

Interpretation of the New Law: Commentary and Application

The keywords to understand are “unreasonably engaging.”

Therefore, monitoring the other party’s movements by installing a tracker on the vehicle your spouse drives is now considered domestic violence. This could have implications for the use of other location tracking or phone finder apps that were placed on phones before a separation, too. Depriving the other party of necessities could easily mean that refusing to provide voluntary child support and/or spousal support (attempting to starve out the other spouse) is now domestic violence. To the spouse who says I’m not going to pay any support until a Judge orders me to, be careful. You may be committing domestic violence.

When considering “controlling economic resources,” it is doubtful that any Judge would find that arguing over whether the family finances can afford a new vehicle qualifies as domestic violence. However, canceling a cell phone could easily be seen as controlling behavior and an attempt to isolate a person.

At the onset of marital separation or breakup involving children, it is essential to get immediate legal advice. Even if you don’t end up hiring an attorney, you should know your rights and responsibilities to avoid a mistake that could result in a Domestic Violence Restraining Order being issued against you.

How Courts Evaluate Coercive Control Claims

In legal proceedings, judges look for consistent, intentional patterns of control. Here’s how such behavior is typically assessed:

• Intent: Was the action intended to intimidate, restrict, or punish the other party?
• Impact: Did the behavior cause fear, financial dependency, or isolation?
• Evidence: Are there documented examples of repeated attempts to control or surveil the other party?

Evidence That Can Be Presented in Court:

• Text messages showing threats or coercion
• Financial statements that show restricted access to funds
• Records of canceled utilities or cell phone plans
• GPS tracking data
• Witness statements from friends, family, or professionals
• Documentation of threats tied to immigration or employment

Legal Scenarios: What Might Qualify as Coercive Control?

The application of this law is context-specific, but here are examples to help illustrate where courts may rule a behavior as coercive:

• Canceling joint bank accounts or withholding spousal funds without court approval may be viewed as an effort to financially isolate.
• Using children to manipulate the other parent (e.g., refusing visitation as punishment) could constitute psychological coercion.
• Threatening to report immigration status unless demands are met is a form of power-based coercion.
• Unilateral property control, such as locking a spouse out of a shared home, may fall under environmental restriction.

Why This Amendment Matters

Domestic violence laws traditionally focused on physical harm, leaving many victims of emotional, psychological, and financial abuse without recourse. The update to California’s DVPA reflects a broader understanding that abuse can be invisible but devastating.

It aligns California with other progressive jurisdictions that recognize that power imbalances and systemic control are often precursors to physical abuse or long-term psychological harm.

Additional Topics Related to Coercive Control and DVROs

To gain a comprehensive understanding of how coercive control functions within family law, it’s important to explore connected legal and emotional topics:

Psychological Effects of Coercive Control

Victims often experience anxiety, depression, low self-worth, and a diminished sense of agency. These impacts are legally significant when evaluating the need for a restraining order.

Coercive Control vs. Physical Abuse

While physical violence often leaves visible evidence, coercive control is cumulative and pattern-based, making it harder to prove but no less severe in impact.

Legal Response Time and Filing Strategy

• Emergency DVROs can be obtained within 24–48 hours.
• Permanent orders require hearing procedures and evidence submission.
• Legal counsel is essential to navigate timelines and procedural requirements effectively.

California Compared to Other States

Few U.S. states have explicitly integrated coercive control into their domestic violence laws. California’s approach is a model of progressive legal thought and prioritizes prevention before physical harm occurs.

Historical Context

This amendment is part of a broader movement sparked by advocacy groups and high-profile cases where victims lacked legal remedies for non-physical control and manipulation.

FAQs

Can coercive control be proven without physical evidence?

Yes. Testimonies, documented financial behavior, emails, and third-party witness accounts can all help establish patterns of coercive behavior.

Will this affect child custody decisions?

Absolutely. Courts may view coercive control as a red flag in custody disputes, particularly if it endangers the child’s emotional or psychological well-being.

What if I didn’t intend to control, but my actions are viewed that way?

Intent is evaluated, but courts also consider the effect of the behavior on the victim. Legal advice is critical in such ambiguous cases.

Can I lose access to my children or home due to these claims?

Yes. Judges may issue orders that limit parental access or mandate temporary removal from a shared residence if coercive behavior is established.

How quickly can I get a Domestic Violence Restraining Order?

You may be eligible for an Emergency Protective Order issued the same day. Temporary and permanent orders require formal hearings and evidence.

Why Immediate Legal Counsel is Crucial

Coercive control cases often involve subjective interpretation and subtle behaviors that can either be defensible actions or legal liabilities, depending on how they’re presented.

Delaying legal advice increases the risk of a judge misinterpreting your actions, especially during the sensitive periods of separation or child custody negotiations.

Consult the Reape-Rickett Law Firm Today

Whether you’re a potential victim seeking legal protection or someone worried about being falsely accused of coercive control, professional legal guidance is essential.

The Reape-Rickett Law Firm specializes in complex family law cases, including Domestic Violence Restraining Orders, financial disputes, custody battles, and divorce proceedings. We provide:

• Comprehensive case evaluations
• Legal strategy planning
• Representation in emergency and permanent hearings
• Guidance on evidence gathering

Call 888-851-1611 or contact us today to schedule a confidential consultation with a dedicated family law attorney.