The rest of what we have written about Maine. Every figure is quoted from Maine’s own statute or its courts’ own published schedule, and carries the date we last checked it.
Protective orders in Maine.
Who can ask for one, what you have to show, what a judge can order, what it costs, and what happens if it is broken — quoted from Maine’s own statutes, not summarized.
See a different stateMaine
Maine issues protection from abuse orders under chapter 103 of title 19-A. One housekeeping point first: Maine recodified this chapter in 2021, so a guide citing 19-A M.R.S. s. 4001 and following is working from the old numbering. The current sections run from s. 4101. What stands out about Maine is the extension power — an order may be extended more than once, and without limitation on how long each extension lasts.
The order after a hearing
Extensions without limit
Maine’s protection from abuse orders are extended rather than made permanent, but the extension power has no ceiling on it at all.
Two separate freedoms in one sentence. More than once — there is no cap on the number of extensions. And without limitation on the duration — there is no cap on how long any single extension runs. A Maine court extending an order is not choosing from a menu of fixed periods.
What the court weighs when deciding is set out in the section, and it is unusually favorable to a person whose order has worked:
— the underlying reasons for the order, including earlier abuse and the history of abuse;
— conduct occurring since the order was entered;
— the continued effect of the abuse on the plaintiff; and
— all other relevant factors, in the discretion of the court.
Notice what the first and third of those do. The history that led to the original order still counts at the extension hearing, and so does the continuing effect on you — which is not the same as requiring something new to have happened. A quiet year is not evidence that you no longer need protection.
If the order has already expired
Maine provides for this, which many states do not. Where an order has lapsed, a plaintiff may seek reinstatement on showing good cause, provided the request is filed "within a reasonable amount of time based upon the underlying circumstances".
So a missed date is not necessarily fatal in Maine. It is still far better to move before expiry — reinstatement requires you to justify the delay, and extension does not — but if you have already missed it, ask, and ask promptly.
If they break it
What a violation is, and what it carries
Maine grades violations by what the person did, not only by how many times.
A violation is a Class D crime where the defendant had prior actual notice of the order.
It rises to a Class C crime in two situations: where the violation is committed "through conduct that is reckless and that creates a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury", and where the person has two or more prior convictions under the section or for equivalent conduct elsewhere.
Where the breach concerns only certain of the relief provisions — those at s. 4110, subsections K to U — the violation is treated as contempt rather than as a crime.
The arrest power is broad and worth knowing about:
That applies whether or not the violation happened in the officer’s presence, and an officer may confirm that the order exists by telephone or radio. So an officer who cannot see the paperwork can still verify it on the spot and act. Carry a copy anyway, but the absence of one is not the end of the conversation.
The order after a hearing
Two years — the figure the earlier version of this page could not confirm
Two years. Together with the extension power quoted above — more than once, and without limitation on the duration of each extension — that gives Maine one of the more workable structures in the country: a long first order, then extensions with no cap on either number or length.
What the judge can actually order
The relief, including social media and weapons
Maine’s relief list is modern in one specific respect that matters:
Social media is named in the statute. Contact through a platform, and indirect contact generally, is inside the order rather than something to be argued about afterwards.
The weapons provision is also drawn more widely than most:
And there is a deadline attached. The defendant must relinquish, within 24 hours after service of the final protection order — or earlier if the court specifies — all firearms and weapons, to law enforcement or another designated person.
Beyond that the court may exclude the defendant from your residence or direct alternative housing; award temporary parental rights or contact; order support for dependants and child support under the Maine guidelines; require attendance at a domestic violence intervention program; and:
The section closes with a catch-all: any other orders determined necessary or appropriate in the discretion of the court. If something specific would make you safer, ask for it.
Does this cover me? Maine’s definition of abuse
19-A M.R.S. § 4102(1)
“A. Attempting to cause or causing bodily injury or offensive physical contact, including sexual assaults …;”
“B. Attempting to place or placing another in fear of bodily injury through any course of conduct, including, but not limited to, threatening, harassing or tormenting behavior. When the course of conduct violates this paragraph based on the content of the actor’s speech, the actor must have consciously disregarded a substantial risk that the speech would place a reasonable person in fear of bodily injury;”
“C. Compelling a person…” by force, threat of crime, or intimidation.
Paragraph B is worth reading closely. “Offensive physical contact” in paragraph A is a lower threshold than injury — being grabbed, shoved or spat at qualifies. And paragraph B reaches a “course of conduct, including … threatening, harassing or tormenting behavior”, so a pattern counts even where no single incident would.
The speech qualifier in paragraph B is a First Amendment safeguard added by the Legislature: where the conduct is words rather than acts, the person must have “consciously disregarded a substantial risk that the speech would place a reasonable person in fear of bodily injury.” It does not affect conduct cases; it affects cases built purely on what was said.
The Maine timetable
Temporary orders — § 4108
The court may make temporary orders “on good cause shown in an ex parte proceeding, which the court shall hear and determine as expeditiously as practicable after the filing of a complaint. Immediate and present danger of abuse to the plaintiff or minor child constitutes good cause.” A temporary order “remains in effect pending a hearing.”
Since 2025, in deciding good cause “the court may consider the existence of an active military protective order” — useful where the respondent is serving.
When the courthouse is shut — § 4108(4)
“When there is no judge available in the District Court having venue or the District Court courthouse is closed and no other provision can be made for the shelter of an abused family or household member or minor child, a complaint may be presented to another District Court Judge or Superior Court Justice.” The complaint and any order are then forwarded to the proper court for filing, and the order “remains in effect pending a hearing.”
If a judge is going to say no — § 4108(5)
This is a small provision with real value, and few states have it:
“Before a request for temporary, emergency or interim relief is denied, the judge shall: A. Allow the plaintiff the opportunity to be heard in person to support the complaint. The plaintiff may be accompanied by a person of the plaintiff’s choice; and B. Advise the plaintiff of reasons for the denial.”
You cannot be refused on the papers alone. You are entitled to be heard in person first, to bring someone with you, and to be told why. If a Maine clerk hands you a denial without a hearing, this is the section to ask about.
Twenty-one days to the full hearing — § 4109(1)
“Within 21 days of the filing of a complaint, a hearing must be held at which the plaintiff must prove the allegation of abuse … by a preponderance of the evidence. If a request for temporary, emergency or interim relief is denied, the hearing must be held as soon as practicable within the 21-day period.”
Note the second sentence: being refused a temporary order does not slow your case down. It speeds it up — the full hearing must then come as soon as practicable inside the 21 days.
▸ See how this compares — all 50 states, side by side
The part that is the same in every state
An order from one state works in all of them
This is federal law and it does not change at a state line. An order issued by one state, tribe or territory must be enforced by every other as if that state had issued it. And you do not have to register it in the new state first — registration is optional, not a precondition to enforcement.
The same section also says the enforcing state must not tell the restrained person that the order has been registered there unless the protected person asks it to, and must not publish anything online that would be likely to reveal the protected person’s identity or location.
The federal firearms rule needs a hearing first
This is the single most misunderstood point in the whole subject, and it cuts against what most people assume. The federal prohibition at 18 U.S.C. s. 922(g)(8) reaches a person subject to an order only where three things are true: the order was made after a hearing of which they had actual notice and at which they had a chance to take part; it restrains them in relation to an intimate partner or that partner’s child; and it either carries a credible-threat finding or expressly forbids the use of force.
So an emergency or ex parte order does not trigger the federal prohibition on its own — there has been no hearing yet. State law may go further, and many states do, which is why the state rule is set out on this page separately. In United States v. Rahimi (2024) the Supreme Court upheld s. 922(g)(8), holding that “When an individual has been found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another, that individual may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment.”
This rule is narrower than it looks, and the detail matters. Who counts as an “intimate partner” is a defined term that excludes dating partners you never lived with; the two halves of the third condition are not equally settled after Rahimi; and there is a separate federal route based on convictions rather than orders, which does reach dating partners. We set all of it out, quoted from the United States Code, on one page: Guns and protection orders — the federal rule.
How does this state compare? Ten states do nothing at all about firearms on a protection order; fourteen prohibit possession but give the court no way to collect them. All fifty side by side: which states actually take the guns.
You should not be charged for this — in any state
This is settled, and it is worth knowing before you walk into a courthouse. Under 34 U.S.C. s. 10450, a state applying for STOP grant funding must certify to the Attorney General that its "laws, policies, and practices do not require" a victim to bear the costs associated with the filing, issuance, registration, modification, enforcement, dismissal, withdrawal or service of a protection order or a petition for one — nor the costs of filing criminal charges, or of warrants and witness subpoenas. A jurisdiction that does charge has its funds withheld and redistributed to the states that do not.
Every state receives STOP funding and every state has certified compliance. The practical consequence, in the words of the National Center on Protection Orders and Full Faith & Credit, is that victims "should not be required to pay such costs in any state". That covers having the papers served on the other person, which is the charge people are most often asked for.
Two honest qualifications. The provision does not stop a court charging the respondent — many states order costs against them, and that is permitted. And it is a funding condition rather than a direct federal ban, so what a clerk does on a given day can still be wrong. If you are asked to pay a fee for any of the things listed above, you can say that your state has certified under 34 U.S.C. s. 10450 that it does not charge for them. Advocates can also raise it with the National Center on Protection Orders and Full Faith & Credit on 1-800-903-0111, prompt 2.
Where this state’s own statute says so expressly, that is quoted above.
Authority: 19-A M.R.S. ch. 103, "Protection from Abuse." Relief and duration at s. 4110. Modifying and extending orders at s. 4111. Violation at s. 4113. The criminal offense of violating a protective order also appears at 17-A M.R.S. s. 506-B. Maine recodified this chapter in 2021, so older citations to 19-A M.R.S. s. 4001 and following are out of date. Checked 29 Aug 2026.
How we checked this page
Every quotation above was read in the source named in the Authority line, not taken from a summary or another website. Where a source would not open, we say so at the point we relied on something else.
On this date we also re-checked every section cited above for repeal, renumbering or amendment since 2024. That sweep is not decorative: it is what caught North Dakota’s protection order chapter being repealed and replaced, Nebraska’s moving to an entirely new title, and a dozen 2025 and 2026 amendments that most published guidance has not yet picked up.
Nothing is outstanding on the main questions for Maine. What we cannot promise is that nothing has changed since this date. Quote the words with confidence; check a section number before you put it in a filing. And if anything here does not match what a clerk or judge tells you, the court is right and we are wrong — tell us and we will fix it.
We keep a public record of every time we have got the law wrong on these pages, what caused it, and how long it was live: where we were wrong.
If there are children
What Maine presumes about custody, and the emergency jurisdiction that exists when someone has to leave the state.