Prepared for the 136th Ohio General Assembly · June 2026

The law is written.
The enforcement is missing.

Fifteen documented gaps across Ohio's Revised Code, Constitution, and procedural rules allow domestic violence, coercive control, and family-court abuse to continue without consequence. This site is the public record of those gaps — and the specific legislation that closes each one.

15
Documented gaps
7
Critical-severity
4
DV Enforcement amendments
3
Accountability amendments

Summary of findings

The pattern is the system operating as written.

What follows is not a list of bad actors. It is a list of statutory choices the General Assembly has the authority to reverse.

01

Police discretion swallows the duty to arrest

ORC § 2935.03(B)(3)(b) makes arrest 'preferred' — not mandatory. Officers may decline with a written reason filed internally that the survivor never sees.

02

Prosecutors confer 'to the extent practicable'

Four words in ORC § 2930.06 swallow the whole duty. No timeline, no format, no consequence for refusing to meet with the victim before a plea or dismissal.

03

Constitutional victim rights with no remedy

Marsy's Law sits in the Ohio Constitution. ORC § 2930.19(B) bars any claim for damages when a public official violates it. A right without a remedy is not a right.

04

Psychological & coercive control are uncriminalized

Ohio's DV statute requires bodily harm. Coercive control, economic abuse, and digital surveillance — recognized as harmful by the Ohio Supreme Court itself — remain civil matters.

05

Family court as a weapon

The vexatious-litigator statute doesn't reach mid-case abuse. CSPOs can be filed the day before trial without screening. Perjury in custody proceedings is prosecuted at a rate approaching statistical zero.

06

No mandatory firearms surrender after a protection order

Federal law prohibits possession. Ohio has no statute that requires the surrender to happen. The gap between federal prohibition and state enforcement is where survivors die.

A note to every member

"The pattern Ohioans experience — police inaction, prosecutor refusal to meet, constitutional rights violated with no consequence — is not a failure of individual officials. It is the system operating exactly as these statutes permit it to operate."

— Excerpt from the DV Enforcement Act, § I

Master priority matrix

Ranked by urgency, ease of passage, and impact.

#Amendment targetVehicleDifficultyImpact
1Marsy's Law civil remedy + AG enforcement (§ 2930.19)Standalone or SB174ModerateActivates rights passed by 83% of voters
2Mandatory perjury referral (§ 2921.11(G))Family Court Integrity ActLowActivates existing F3 classification
3Mandatory arrest in DV cases (§ 2935.03)Standalone HBModerateMeasurably reduces repeat incidents
4Mandatory prosecutor conference (§ 2930.06)SB174 amendmentLowRestores victim voice in case decisions
5Custodial-interference pattern elevation (§ 2919.23)Standalone HBLowRemoves prior-conviction prerequisite
6Criminal coercive control (new § 2919.251)Standalone HBHighCloses the foundational gap

To every member of the General Assembly

None of these amendments are ideological.

They activate felony statutes that already exist. They require courts to write down their reasoning. They require law enforcement to document what happens. These are accountability measures with no reasonable opposition argument that doesn't amount to defending concealment.