New York's Legislature delivered Kyra's Law (A.6194-C/S.5998) to Governor Hochul on June 15, 2026, after a decade-long fight. If signed, the bill forces family and supreme courts to treat credible domestic-violence and child-abuse allegations as a threshold safety determination before issuing any custody or visitation order — a fundamental shift for the roughly 200,000 custody matters New York courts handle each year.
Key Facts
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| What happened | Kyra's Law (A.6194-C/S.5998) passed both NY chambers and was sent to the Governor |
| When | Delivered to Gov. Hochul on June 15, 2026; she has until year-end to act |
| Where | New York State (family and supreme courts statewide) |
| Who's affected | Parents in custody/visitation disputes, especially those raising abuse allegations |
| Key statute affected | Amends N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240 custody standards |
| Impact | Safety becomes a threshold test; court-ordered reunification programs restricted |
The bill is named for Kyra Franchetti, a 2-year-old killed by her father during a court-ordered unsupervised visit in 2016, as reported by Spectrum News. Advocates spent nearly ten years moving the legislation through Albany.
Why this matters legally
Kyra's Law reorders the sequence of custody decision-making in New York. Under current practice, courts weigh abuse allegations as one factor within the broad "best interests of the child" analysis, alongside factors like parental stability, the child's wishes, and each parent's caregiving history. Kyra's Law elevates credible safety concerns to a threshold determination — meaning a court must resolve the safety question first, before any custody or visitation order issues.
This is a structural change, not a cosmetic one. When safety is a threshold test rather than a balancing factor, a credible abuse finding can no longer be outweighed by a parent's employment stability or willingness to co-parent. The bill also restricts court-ordered reunification programs — controversial interventions that compel a resistant child to restore a relationship with an estranged parent, sometimes over the objection of the primary caregiver. Critics, including many family-law advocates, have argued these programs lack scientific validation and can retraumatize children.
The bill does carry a meaningful caveat: "credible" is doing significant work. Courts will still need evidentiary hearings to determine whether allegations meet the threshold, and defense advocates have warned that vague standards could be weaponized in high-conflict divorces. The final regulatory guidance from the Office of Court Administration will shape how judges apply the credibility screen in practice.
How New York law handles this
New York custody law currently flows from N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240, which directs courts to determine custody and visitation according to the best interests of the child, and N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 70, which governs habeas custody petitions. Neither statute presently makes safety a gatekeeping requirement — abuse is one consideration among many under the totality-of-circumstances test New York courts apply.
Domestic violence already receives statutory attention in New York. Under existing N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1)(a), courts must consider proven domestic violence when making custody determinations and must state on the record how that finding affected the decision. Kyra's Law strengthens this framework by converting consideration into a threshold gate: rather than merely factoring abuse in, courts would be required to determine whether the child faces a safety risk before proceeding to allocate custody.
New York already provides related protective mechanisms. Family Court can issue orders of protection under N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 842, and supervised visitation is available where a court finds unsupervised contact unsafe. Kyra's Law works alongside these tools by requiring the safety inquiry to happen earlier and more rigorously, and by limiting the reunification-therapy remedies that have drawn national scrutiny. New York would join a small but growing group of states — including Colorado, which enacted a similar reform in 2024 — moving toward safety-first custody frameworks influenced by the federal "Kayden's Law" incentives in the 2022 Violence Against Women Act reauthorization.
Practical takeaways
-
Document safety concerns thoroughly now. If you are raising abuse or domestic-violence allegations in a custody matter, preserve evidence — police reports, medical records, photographs, and dated communications. A threshold safety test rewards contemporaneous, corroborated documentation over uncorroborated claims.
-
Understand the timeline. Governor Hochul has until the end of 2026 to sign, veto, or negotiate amendments to the bill delivered June 15, 2026. Custody orders issued before any effective date will follow current law; monitor the bill's status before relying on its provisions.
-
Reassess pending reunification orders. If your case involves a court-ordered reunification program, consult counsel about how the bill's restrictions could affect an existing or proposed order. The bill signals legislative skepticism toward these programs.
-
Do not assume the bill lowers your burden of proof. "Credible" allegations still require an evidentiary showing. Filing an unsupported allegation to gain leverage can damage your credibility and, in some cases, expose you to sanctions under existing New York court rules.
-
Get jurisdiction-specific advice. Custody law is highly fact-dependent, and how a New York judge applies a threshold safety test will vary by county and by the strength of the record. A local family-law attorney can assess how the reform — if signed — interacts with your specific facts.
If you are navigating a custody dispute in New York and want to understand how a safety-first standard might affect your case, connecting with a qualified New York family-law attorney is a sensible next step. You can explore New York custody resources and find local counsel through our directory.
This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.