All bills

HB 1158-FN

relative to the definition of intimate partner.

Filed 2026 · Killed · Criminal Justice and Public Safety · Crimes, Crim.Proc. & Corr.

Official record at gencourt.state.nh.us ↗

Open this bill in the searchable view →  ·  Follow this bill by RSS

On the record

Quoted from the General Court bill status page, not worked out from the docket.

StatusHOUSE
In the HouseINEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE
Introduced1/7/2026
Floor date3/5/2026
LSR number2629
Local government impactno
Committee codeH26

Bill text (PDF) ↗

Where it stands

House: INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE

Every floor vote on this bill was a voice or division vote, so there is no record of how individual legislators voted.

A bill goes on the consent calendar when the committee vote was unanimous or nearly so, and any members who dissented did not object to placing it there. It then passes without floor debate. Ten members may file a petition to pull a bill off the consent calendar and have it debated and voted on separately.

Sponsors

Alexander, Joe(R) Hills 29, Kuttab, Katelyn(R) Rock 17, Manos, Zoe(D) Rock 12, Perkins Kwoka, Rebecca(D) Rock 21, Reardon, Tara(D) Merr 15, Rombeau, Catherine(D) Hills 2, Turer, Eric(D) Rock 6
Prime sponsor in bold. From the General Court sponsor file.

What happened

Every action recorded in the official docket, in order. Each line ends with the journal or calendar that recorded it; where we have the document, that citation links to it.

Votes

Roll call tallies and individual votes from the General Court roll call files. Presiding, excused and absent are shown separately: one member presides over each House roll call and does not vote except to break a tie.

Inexpedient to Legislate

March 5, 2026 · House · None–None, adopted

Decided on a voice vote. Only the outcome was recorded — there is no count of how any member voted.

Committee reports

Reproduced from the House Calendar in the committee’s own words.

Committee — INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE

Rep. Jennifer Rhodes

The bill introduces a redundant and overly broad classification that threatens the due process rights of New Hampshire citizens. Current law under RSA 173B is designed to address domestic violence within the context of family, household, or established romantic relationships. By specifically adding “sexual relationship” as a standalone category—separate from “romantic relationship” this bill seeks to bring casual, non-domestic encounters under the umbrella of domestic violence law. The committee found this expansion unnecessary because New Hampshire already provides robust protections for victims of violence or harassment in non-domestic settings through RSA 633:3-a, stalking, and civil restraining orders. Domestic violence orders carry unique, immediate penalties, including the summary loss of Second Amendment rights and inclusion in domestic violence databases, often based on a “preponderance of evidence” rather than the higher standards of criminal court. Broadening the “intimate partner” definition to include any person from a singular or casual sexual encounter effectively transforms casual social friction into a domestic violence event. This creates a “legal trap” where a citizen could face the life-altering consequences of a domestic violence order for a relationship that was never domestic in nature. We believe the current statutes correctly distinguish between domestic abuse and other forms of criminal conduct, and that maintaining this distinction is vital to protecting both victims of domestic violence and the fundamental rights of all Granite Staters. Vote 13-0.

Hearings and recordings

Recordings are the General Court’s own, on YouTube. Start times are estimates unless stated otherwise, and the player opens early.

Page generated 2026-09-03 from data published by the New Hampshire General Court. Granite Record is an independent project, not affiliated with the General Court. The official record always takes precedence. Corrections: [email protected]