MCL 600.1021(1)(k) provides the family division of circuit court with sole and exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving foreign protection orders enforceable in Michigan under MCL 600.2950l.
MCL 600.2950h(a) defines a foreign protection order as “an injunction or other order issued by a court of another state, Indian tribe, or United States territory for the purpose of preventing a person’s violent or threatening acts against, harassment of, contact with, communication with, or physical proximity to another person.” Note that MCL 600.2950h(a)’s definition of the term foreign protection order does not include an order issued in another country.
“[A] [f]oreign protection order includes temporary and final orders issued by civil and criminal courts (other than a support or child custody order issued pursuant to state divorce and child custody laws, except to the extent that such an order is entitled to full faith and credit under other federal law), whether obtained by filing an independent action or by joining a claim to an action, if a civil order was issued in response to a complaint, petition, or motion filed by or on behalf of a person seeking protection.” MCL 600.2950h(a).
A.Validity of Foreign Protection Order
A foreign protection order is deemed valid if it meets all of the following conditions:
“(a) The issuing court had jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter under the laws of the issuing state, tribe, or territory.[1]
(b) Reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard is given to the respondent sufficient to protect the respondent’s right to due process. In the case of ex parte orders, notice and opportunity to be heard must be provided to the respondent within the time required by state or tribal law, and in any event within a reasonable time after the order is issued, sufficient to protect the respondent’s due process rights.” MCL 600.2950i(1).
“A valid foreign protection order shall be accorded full faith and credit by the court and shall be subject to the same enforcement procedures and penalties as if it were issued in this state.”2 MCL 600.2950j(1). Law enforcement officers, prosecuting attorneys, and courts must enforce a foreign protection order using the same procedures used to enforce a PPO issued in Michigan.3 MCL 600.2950l(1). For a detailed discussion of enforcement procedures for PPOs issued in Michigan, see Section 5.12.
Note: MCL 600.2950l(10) provides a “law enforcement officer, prosecutor, or court personnel acting in good faith [] immun[ity] from civil and criminal liability in any action arising from the enforcement of a foreign protection order.” “This immunity does not in any manner limit or imply an absence of immunity in other circumstances.” MCL 600.2950l(10).
A party may assert any of the following as affirmative defenses when responding to enforcement proceedings:
“(a) Lack of jurisdiction by the issuing court over the parties or subject matter.
(b) Failure to provide notice and opportunity to be heard.
(c) Lack of filing of a complaint, petition, or motion by or on behalf of a person seeking protection in a civil foreign protection order.” MCL 600.2950i(2).
A violation of a foreign protection order may also subject the offender to federal criminal prosecution under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), 34 USC 12291 et seq.4See also 18 USC 2261 et seq. The VAWA specifically provides for protections against:
•a person traveling in interstate or foreign commerce or entering or leaving Indian country “or is present within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States,” with the intent to violate the part of a protection order “that prohibits or provides protection against violence, threats, or harassment against, contact or communication with, or physical proximity to, another person or the pet, service animal, emotional support animal, or horse of that person, or that would violate such a portion of a protection order in the jurisdiction in which the order was issued . . . .” 18 USC 2262(a)(1).
•“[a] person who causes another person to travel in interstate or foreign commerce or to enter or leave Indian country by force, coercion, duress, or fraud, and in the course of, as a result of, or to facilitate such conduct or travel engages in conduct that violates the portion of a protection order that prohibits or provides protection against violence, threats, or harassment against, contact or communication with, or physical proximity to, another person or the pet, service animal, emotional support animal, or horse of that person, or that would violate such a portion of a protection order in the jurisdiction in which the order was issued . . . .” 18 USC 2262(a)(2).
Penalties for violations of 18 USC 2262(a)(1) or (2) are found in 18 USC 2262(b).
1.Presenting Officer With Copy of Foreign Protection Order
MCL 600.2950l(3) addresses enforcement requirements where a law enforcement officer is presented with a copy of a foreign protection order:
“A law enforcement officer may rely upon a copy of any protection order that appears to be a foreign protection order and that is provided to the law enforcement officer from any source if the putative foreign protection order appears to contain all of the following:
(a) The names of the parties.
(b) The date the protection order was issued, which is prior to the date when enforcement is sought.
(c) The terms and conditions against [the] respondent.
(d) The name of the issuing court.
(e) The signature of or on behalf of a judicial officer.
(f) No obvious indication that the order is invalid, such as an expiration date that is before the date enforcement is sought.”
In determining whether a presented order is valid, MCL 600.2950l(4) permits a law enforcement officer to rely on:
•a petitioner’s statement that the foreign protection order that the petitioner is presenting is effective, and
•the petitioner’s or the respondent’s statement verifying that the respondent received notice of the protection order.
Note: “The fact that a putative foreign protection order that an officer has been shown cannot be verified on [LEIN] or the NCIC national protection order file is not grounds for a law enforcement officer to refuse to enforce the terms of the putative foreign protection order, unless it is apparent to the officer that the putative foreign protection order is invalid.” MCL 600.2950l(4).
“When enforcing a foreign protection order, the law enforcement officer shall maintain the peace and take appropriate action with regard to any violation of criminal law. The penalties provided for under [MCL 600.2950] and [MCL 600.2950a] and . . . the probate code of 1939, . . . MCL 712A.1 to [MCL] 712A.32, may be imposed in addition to a penalty that may be imposed for any criminal offense arising from the same conduct.” MCL 600.2950l(8).
2.No Copy of Foreign Protection Order Provided
MCL 600.2950l(5) addresses requirements when a law enforcement officer is asked to enforce a foreign protection order but is not presented with such an order:
“If a person seeking enforcement of a foreign protection order does not have a copy of the foreign protection order, the law enforcement officer shall attempt to verify through [LEIN], or the NCIC protection order file, administrative messaging, contacting the court that issued the foreign protection order, contacting the law enforcement agency in the issuing jurisdiction, contacting the issuing jurisdiction’s protection order registry, or any other method the law enforcement officer believes to be reliable, the existence of the foreign protection order and all of the following:
(a) The names of the parties.
(b) The date the foreign protection order was issued, which is prior to the date when enforcement is sought.
(c) Terms and conditions against [the] respondent.
(d) The name of the issuing court.
(e) No obvious indication that the foreign protection order is invalid, such as an expiration date that is before the date enforcement is sought.”
If a person seeking enforcement of a foreign protection order does not have a copy of the foreign protection order, “the law enforcement officer shall enforce the foreign protection order if the existence of the order and the information listed under [MCL 600.2950l](5) are verified, subject to [MCL 600.2950l](9).” MCL 600.2950l(6).
“If a person seeking enforcement of a foreign protection order does not have a copy of the foreign protection order, and the law enforcement officer cannot verify the order as described in [MCL 600.2950l](5), the law enforcement officer shall maintain the peace and take appropriate action with regard to any violation of criminal law.” MCL 600.2950l(7).
3.No Evidence of Respondent Being Served Foreign Protection Order
A law enforcement officer must serve a respondent with a copy of a foreign protection order if the respondent has not already been served:
“If there is no evidence that the respondent has been served with or received notice of the foreign protection order, the law enforcement officer shall serve the respondent with a copy of the foreign protection order, or advise the respondent about the existence of the foreign protection order, the name of the issuing court, the specific conduct enjoined, the penalties for violating the order in [Michigan], and, if the officer is aware of the penalties in the issuing jurisdiction, the penalties for violating the order in the issuing jurisdiction.” MCL 600.2950l(9).
Once notice is given, the law enforcement officer must:
•“enforce the foreign protection order[;]”
•“provide the petitioner, or cause the petitioner to be provided, with proof of service or proof of oral notice[;]”
•“provide the issuing court, or cause the issuing court to be provided, with a proof of service or proof of oral notice, if the address of the issuing court is apparent on the face of the foreign protection order or otherwise is readily available to the officer[;]”
•“provide the [LEIN] or the NCIC protection order file entering agency, or cause the [LEIN] or NCIC protection order file entering agency to be provided, with a proof of service or proof of oral notice” where “the foreign protection order is entered into LEIN or the NCIC protection order file.” MCL 600.2950l(9).
“If there is no evidence that the respondent has received notice of the foreign protection order, the respondent shall be given an opportunity to comply with the foreign protection order before the officer makes a custodial arrest for violation of the foreign protection order[,]” and if the respondent fails to immediately comply with the foreign protection order, the law enforcement officer has grounds to make an immediate custodial arrest. MCL 600.2950l(9).5
A valid foreign protection order must be afforded full faith and credit and is subject to the same enforcement procedures and penalties as a PPO issued in Michigan. MCL 600.2950j(1).6 See also 18 USC 2265(a), a VAWA provision that states: “Any protection order issued that is consistent with [18 USC 2265](b)[7] by the court of one State, Indian tribe, or territory (the issuing State, Indian tribe, or territory) shall be accorded full faith and credit by the court of another State, Indian tribe, or territory (the enforcing State, Indian tribe, or territory) and enforced by the court and law enforcement personnel of the other State, Indian tribal government or Territory as if it were the order of the enforcing State or tribe.” 18 USC 2265(a).8 Note that prior registration in the enforcing jurisdiction and notice of such registration to the restrained individual are not prerequisites to according full faith and credit under 18 USC 2265(d)(2).
Note: For additional information on implementing the full faith and credit provisions of the VAWA, including a checklist the court issuing a PPO could follow to help facilitate enforcement of its PPOs in other jurisdictions, see the National Council of Juvenile & Family Court Judges’s publication A Passport to Safety at http://www.ncjfcj.org/resource-library/publications/passport-safety.
1.Orders for Child Custody or Support
A child custody or support provision contained within a valid foreign protection order must be afforded full faith and credit and is subject to the same enforcement procedures and penalties as any provision within a PPO issued in Michigan. MCL 600.2950j(2). Note, however, MCL 600.2950j(2) is not to be “construed to preclude law enforcement officers’ compliance with the child protection law, . . . MCL 722.621 to [MCL] 722.638.” See also 18 USC 2265(a), a VAWA provision requiring courts to give full faith and credit to qualified protection orders issued in other states and in tribal jurisdictions that contain child custody and support provisions. 18 USC 2266(5)(B) defines the term protection order to include “any support, child custody or visitation provisions, orders, remedies or relief issued as part of a protection order, restraining order, or injunction pursuant to State, tribal, territorial, or local law authorizing the issuance of protection orders, restraining orders, or injunctions for the protection of victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, or stalking.”
A mutual foreign protection order is entitled to full faith and credit and is enforceable against the respondent where the court issued the mutual protection order against both parties, and the respondent was the petitioner’s spouse or intimate partner. MCL 600.2950k(1). However, a mutual foreign protection order is not enforceable against the person who petitioned for the order unless the petitioner’s spouse or intimate partner (the respondent) filed a separate written pleading seeking the foreign protection order, and the issuing court made specific findings supporting relief for both parties. MCL 600.2950k(2)(a)-(b). See also 18 USC 2265(c), a VAWA provision that contains substantially similar requirements.
Note: MCL 600.2950(8), MCL 600.2950a(8), and MCR 3.706(B) prohibit the court from issuing mutual PPOs in Michigan. However, correlative separate orders are permitted if both parties properly petition the court, and the court makes separate findings that support an order against each party. MCL 600.2950(8); MCL 600.2950a(8). See Section 5.7 for additional information on procedures for issuing PPOs.
1 [18 USC 2265(e)] “authorizes Indian tribal courts to issue and enforce civil protection orders against any person—Indian or non-Indian, tribal member or non-tribal member—in matters arising in the Indian country of an Indian tribe.” Spurr v Pope, 936 F3d 478, 486 (CA 6, 2019) (upholding the tribal court’s issuance of a civil PPO against an individual who was neither an Indian nor a tribal member).
2 See 18 USC 2265. See Section 5.16(C) for more information on full faith and credit.
3 Note that “[a] foreign protection order that is a conditional release order or a probation order issued by a court in a criminal proceeding shall be enforced pursuant to [MCL 600.2950m], [MCL 764.15(1)(g)], the uniform criminal extradition act, . . . MCL 780.1 to [MCL] 780.31, or the uniform rendition of accused persons act, . . . MCL 780.41 to [MCL] 780.45.” MCL 600.2950l(2). See Section 3.5 for additional information on conditional releases, and Section 3.6 for additional information on probation orders.
4 Formerly classified to 42 USC 13925 et seq. The VAWA was reauthorized, effective October 1, 2022.
5 MCL 600.2950l(9) “does not preclude an arrest under . . . MCL 764.15 [or] [MCL] 764.15a, or a proceeding under . . . MCL 712A.14.”
6 For enforcement procedures and penalties related to PPOs issued in Michigan, see Section 5.12.
7 Under 18 USC 2265(b), “[a] protection order issued by a State, tribal, or territorial court is consistent with 18 USC 2265(b) if[:] (1) such court has jurisdiction over the parties and matter under the law of such State, Indian tribe, or territory; and (2) reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard is given to the person against whom the order is sought sufficient to protect that person’s right to due process [and in] the case of ex parte orders, notice and opportunity to be heard must be provided within the time required by State, tribal, or territorial law, and in any event within a reasonable time after the order is issued, sufficient to protect the respondent’s due process rights.”
8 “A State, Indian tribe, or territory according full faith and credit to an order by a court of another State, Indian tribe, or territory shall not notify or require notification of the party against whom a protection order has been issued that the protection order has been registered or filed in that enforcing State, tribal, or territorial jurisdiction unless requested to do so by the party protected under such order.” 18 USC 2265(d)(1).