Did George Floyd have a restraining order against him?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
No reliable reporting or the public court records cited in the assembled reporting indicate that George Floyd was the subject of a civil restraining order; instead, the word “restraining” in available sources overwhelmingly refers to the police restraint used on Floyd during his arrest and to later court orders and legislation limiting police chokeholds, not to any protection order filed against him [1] [2] [3]. Claims online that conflate Floyd’s criminal history with a restraining order are not supported by the sources provided here and appear to be part of broader efforts to shift focus away from the conduct of officers at the scene [4] [5].
1. What the record actually shows about “restraining” in Floyd’s case
The documents, news timelines and court filings assembled for this query describe restraint as a physical act by police — Derek Chauvin and other officers — who pinned George Floyd face-down and kneeled on his neck during an arrest, and they record subsequent legal consequences and rulings about police use of neck restraints; those materials do not show any civil or criminal restraining order filed against Floyd himself [1] [2] [6]. The county medical examiner and independent pathologists, criminal indictments, and federal press materials all use the word “restraint” to describe law-enforcement actions and medical cause of death — cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression — not a court-issued protective order naming Floyd as a restrained party [2] [7] [8].
2. Where confusion likely arises: restraint of a person vs. restraining orders
Reporting and legal language around the case repeatedly use “restrain” and “restraining” in two distinct senses: physical restraint during the arrest and judicial or legislative restraints on police tactics. A Hennepin County judge’s later approval of orders and multiple state and municipal bans on chokeholds are examples of judicial/legislative restraint that concern police conduct — not an injunction against Floyd [3] [9]. The CNN timeline explicitly notes a restraining order to ban chokeholds by police officers in the aftermath, which likely feeds confusion for readers who conflate that phrase with a protective order involving Floyd himself [3].
3. Misinformation patterns and the temptation to weaponize a subject’s past
After Floyd’s death, official and union statements highlighted his criminal history; fact-checking outlets and documentation show Floyd had prior convictions and time served, but diligent fact-checkers such as Snopes and PolitiFact explain that these records were repeatedly exaggerated or distorted in social media posts and partisan messaging — again, none of that reliable analysis documents a restraining order against him [4] [5]. Those attempts to foreground Floyd’s past have an implicit agenda: to recast public attention from the officers’ actions and systemic policing practices to the victim’s biography, a rhetorical pivot that can create confusion about legal facts not in evidence in the public files [4] [5].
4. Limits of the available sources and honest uncertainty
The sources provided include major news outlets, court documents, Wikipedia summaries, fact-checking sites and government press releases, and none record a restraining order naming George Floyd as respondent or protected person; however, these sources do not represent an exhaustive search of every local civil filing nationwide, and the assembled record does not include a public docket or index explicitly searching for any unrelated protective orders in jurisdictions tied to Floyd’s past. Given those limits, the most responsible conclusion from the cited material is that there is no evidence in these primary and secondary sources that George Floyd had a restraining order against him [1] [2] [4] [6].
5. Bottom line
Based on the reporting and court materials compiled here, “restraining” in connection with George Floyd refers to how police restrained him and to subsequent legal limits on police chokeholds — not to a civil restraining order against George Floyd; no credible source provided documents such an order [3] [6] [9]. Where claims appear to say otherwise, they trace back to conflation, exaggeration of Floyd’s criminal past, or rhetorical moves aimed at shifting blame away from law-enforcement conduct [4] [5].