Are DANCOS Unconstitutional? (DANCO = Domestic Abuse No Contact Order)

Well, this is really interesting from a legal perspective and it sure has huge implications for victims of domestic violence, law enforcement and those against whom Domestice Abuse No Contact Orders (DANCOS) are enforced in Minnesota.  There is a news segment on MPR News about how the issue of whether a court issuing a DANCO without any due proces to the person against whom they would be enforced is unconstitutional, and therefore any resulting DANCO violation is void.  This is a big deal!

From the article:

The Minnesota Supreme Court has agreed to consider the constitutionality of a state law designed to protect the victims of domestic abuse.

An attorney for Bryan Ness is challenging the law, which allows judges to impose domestic abuse no-contact order s that prevent someone suspected of abuse from contacting the victim.

Authorities say Ness, 33, struck his wife in the head several times during a January 2011, argument at their Moorhead apartment. When he appeared in court the next day to face charges for the assault, a Clay County judge ordered him not to have any contact with his wife.

Such court orders are popular with prosecutors. According to court records, Minnesota judges issued nearly 11,000 DANCO orders last year.

The news segment (audio and text) is found here” “Law Protecting Domestic Abuse Victims Challenged in [Minnesota] State Supreme Court“.


Filed under Audio, News

3 responses to “Are DANCOS Unconstitutional? (DANCO = Domestic Abuse No Contact Order)

  1. Brandon

    I believe that they unconstitutional me n my girlfriend been together 4 years it all started over an argument I went to jail and got a DANCO when there wasn’t no violence whatsoever I’m looking at prison a long time for violating it when we just wanna be together we love eachother but why does this gotta stop us!!

  2. Susanna

    Me and my guy have been together four years too. Alcohol is symptom of problem. The situation is that, should he plead guilty, he has conditional release, 5 years, probation. They want to enforce the DANCO for 5 years. A difference in your case was there was no violence with yours. There was with ours, mostly him. I engaged in some too, I state openly (working on that). I trust his resolve to go through treatment and therapy in order to understand and change what’s going on. I just found out about this, and I really feel offended that the “State of Minnesota” would try to interrupt our personal right to be together–at all–for 5 years. I feel legislated and “Why does this gotta stop us,” too.

  3. Susanna

    He’s also a veteran with PTSD, and that adds more complexity to the situation. But we just wanna be together, too.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s