WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 222

An Act relating to workplace violence protective orders; relating to attorney fees; relating to the crime of violating a protective order; relating to the powers of district judges and magistrates; amending Rules 4 and 65, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure, and Rule 9, Alaska Rules of Administration; and providing for an effective date.

34th Legislature (2025-2026) Introduced by Carolyn Hall

Alaska HB 222 creates workplace violence protective orders allowing judges to issue civil restraints against work-related threats while clarifying attorney fees and violation penalties.

(H) REFERRED TO LABOR & COMMERCE
#attorneygeneral #attorneys #civilprocedure #courtrules #courts #crimes #criminalprocedure #employment #hearings #judges #lawenforcement #publicsafety #safety
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 222

Legislative bill overview

HB 222 establishes a new civil protective order mechanism in Alaska specifically for workplace violence situations. The bill amends civil procedure rules to allow district judges and magistrates to issue these orders and modifies penalties for violations, while also addressing attorney fee provisions in protective order cases.

Why is this important

Workplace violence is a significant occupational safety concern that affects employee wellbeing and workplace productivity. This legislation creates a specific legal tool for employers and employees to seek court protection before violence escalates, potentially filling a gap in existing protective order statutes that may not adequately address workplace-specific threats.

Potential points of contention

  • Scope and definition disputes: Disagreement over what constitutes "workplace violence" and whether the order applies to all work environments (remote, contract, gig economy) or specific traditional settings
  • Attorney fee allocation: Questions about who pays legal fees (employer, employee, or case-by-case) and whether fee-shifting could discourage frivolous orders or legitimate claims depending on the structure
  • Due process concerns: Balancing swift protective relief against respondents' rights to fair notice and opportunity to be heard, especially in urgent ex parte situations
  • Judicial resource burden: Questions about whether district judges and magistrates have capacity and training to handle these specialized orders efficiently

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.