[44 AMP]

Well.....isn't this....interesting....

At this point, with only the very basic information of who, and what, and no shred (yet) of how and why, one cannot get any kind of accurate idea what is actually going on.

Based on what the report said, and seemed to infer, it seems the law is not being abused, so much as tested, at this point.

Let us consider for a moment the basis of the law, and what it allows, in general. First, at the root, it is a protection order. So, there must be testimony that there is some level of threat the court (judge) can find credible.

Now, that "threat" may only be "your Honor, he HAS guns and he's mad at me!..." IF the court decides it is enough, then it issues the order. Depends on the Judge, doesn't it??

Next this law is an "enhanced (or extended??) order, and so defines those people who have standing to file as a larger group than the "traditional" protection order.

Now, here's where we get into speculation. What we know, assuming it is fact, from the very brief report is;
Woman had filed for the order against a man.
The man is a police officer.
That police officer shot and killed the woman's son in 2017.

2017

The law give you standing to file if you "have a child in common"
IT seems, based on what the reporter said the woman said, that she has her own definition of "child in common" and will argue that before the court.

We don't know anything else, with certainty. Right now all we have is the fact that a request was filed, and the court will hear it. Until more information is released, there is nothing more to be said.
So, this one is being closed. IF/when more information becomes available, it could be reopened, or a new thread started, when there is actually something that can be discussed.