What did the court specify in the final ruling about Erika Kirk’s parenting time schedule?
Executive summary
The supplied reporting does not include any final court order specifying Erika Kirk’s parenting time schedule; the public pieces provided focus on a pretrial protective order and broader family-law scheduling guidance rather than a finalized custody timetable for Kirk [1] [2]. Absent a cited final ruling, the only verifiable facts in these sources are that a pretrial protective order has been issued and that courts commonly rely on standard parenting-time frameworks like Rule 23A when setting schedules [2] [3].
1. No final parenting-time order for Erika Kirk appears in the provided reporting
The articles supplied about Erika Kirk address the criminal case and a pretrial protective order but do not report a family-court “final ruling” spelling out a parenting time schedule for her; People’s profile and the ABC4 report both discuss the protective order and criminal proceedings without listing any parenting-time terms [1] [2]. Because the available pieces do not contain a text of a final parenting-time decree, there is no basis in these sources to state that a court specified parenting days, holiday allocations, or other schedule details for Erika Kirk.
2. The immediate, documented court action in these sources was a protective order — not a custody decree
What is explicitly documented in the reporting is that a Utah district court issued a pretrial protective order in connection with the criminal prosecution and that prosecutors filed that order ahead of a virtual hearing [1] [2]. Those pieces note the prosecutorial and criminal-process context — including mentions of upcoming hearings and criminal charges — but do not extend to family-court parenting-time rulings or modifications [1] [2].
3. If a family court were to set parenting time, Rule 23A and local practices provide common templates
In the absence of a reported final order in this case, the only related, verifiable guidance in the supplied materials comes from standard parenting-time frameworks: Rule 23A outlines a prescriptive schedule intended to ensure frequent and consistent contact with both parents and prescribes allocations for holidays, spring break, and similar periods [3]. Family-law resources and county procedural guides emphasize that parenting-time schedules should be customized to child development and that courts may issue temporary orders while cases proceed through the system [4] [5].
4. How this context matters to interpreting any future or unreported ruling
Because courts often use established templates like Rule 23A or local equivalents, a final parenting-time order — if and when issued and reported — would likely reference those norms, or else set a tailored schedule based on the children’s needs and either parent’s circumstances [3] [4]. Reporting that focuses on criminal protective orders can obscure separate family-court proceedings; therefore absence of parenting-time details in criminal-justice coverage does not prove there is no family-court order, only that such an order is not present in the supplied reportage [1] [2].
5. Bottom line — what can be stated with certainty from the provided sources
From the documents given, the only court action explicitly described is a pretrial protective order tied to the criminal case [1] [2]; none of the supplied sources contain or quote a final family-court ruling specifying Erika Kirk’s parenting time schedule, and the only authoritative parenting-time language available in these materials is general guidance from Rule 23A and family-law primers [3] [4] [5]. To report the exact terms of a final parenting-time schedule would require access to a family-court order or direct reporting that is not present among the sources provided.