Louisiana’s 2026 Equal-Custody Change (Act 605): What It Does and Doesn’t Do

Since August 1, 2026, when a Louisiana court awards joint custody, the schedule it sets must split the child’s physical custody equally unless the court determines that equal time is not feasible or not in the child’s best interest La. R.S. 9:335(A)(2)(b); Acts 2026, No. 605. That is the whole change. Act 605 rewrote one sentence. It did not create the clear-and-convincing “presumption of shared custody” that the original bill proposed, and the child’s best interest still decides every custody case La. C.C. art. 131. This article covers Louisiana law only; Mississippi’s equal-custody law works differently, as the firm’s Mississippi equal-custody article explains.

What the law said before, and what it says now

The change is easiest to see side by side. Before August 1, 2026, the sentence read: “To the extent it is feasible and in the best interest of the child, physical custody of the children should be shared equally.” Since then, it reads: “Unless the court determines it is not feasible or in the best interest of the child, physical custody of the child shall be shared equally” La. R.S. 9:335(A)(2)(b).

Two things moved. “Should” became “shall.” And the structure flipped. Under the old text, equal time was a goal the court reached only if it was feasible and in the child’s best interest. Under the new text, equal time is the starting point once joint custody is ordered, and the court must make a determination to set anything else.

One drafting quirk is worth knowing. The new sentence contains only one “not”: “not feasible or in the best interest of the child.” Read literally, that is awkward; the evident intent is “not feasible or not in the best interest.” How courts will read the phrase is not yet settled; no court has ruled on it yet.

What Act 605 does not do

Some coverage of Act 605 describes the bill as first filed, not the law that passed. The original bill would have changed several Civil Code articles. The enacted version amends only one subsection of one statute, Revised Statutes 9:335(A)(2)(b). Here is what stayed the same.

It does not add a shared-custody presumption or change who gets joint custody

The custody rules in the Civil Code are unchanged. If the parents agree on custody, the court follows their agreement unless family-violence rules apply or the child’s best interest requires something different. Without an agreement, the court awards joint custody, unless sole custody to one parent is shown by clear and convincing evidence to serve the child’s best interest La. C.C. art. 132. Act 605 only matters after the court has decided joint custody is right.

It does not change the best-interest factors

The court still weighs all relevant factors, including the fourteen listed in the Civil Code. The first factor — the potential for the child to be abused — is the primary consideration La. C.C. art. 134(A)(1). Where there is a history of family violence or domestic abuse, the court must decide custody and visitation under the special statutes that govern those cases La. C.C. art. 134(B).

It does not eliminate the domiciliary parent

In a joint-custody decree, the court still designates a domiciliary parent unless the implementation order provides otherwise or there is other good cause La. R.S. 9:335(B)(1). The domiciliary parent is the parent with whom the child primarily resides La. R.S. 9:335(B)(2). Unless the implementation order says otherwise, that parent makes the decisions affecting the child, and major decisions are presumed to be in the child’s best interest, subject to court review on the other parent’s motion La. R.S. 9:335(B)(3). Equal time and decision-making authority are separate questions.

It does not automatically rewrite existing judgments

A parent with an older custody judgment who wants equal time must still ask the court to modify it, under the standards for modifying custody. For a judgment rendered by considered decree, a change within five years requires either clear and convincing evidence that the harm likely caused by the change is substantially outweighed by its advantages to the child, or proof that the present arrangement is so harmful that a change is justified. After five years, and in all other cases, the parent must show a change in circumstances that materially affects the child’s welfare, and that the change is in the child’s best interest La. C.C. art. 138. Article 138 itself took effect in 2026, and how its five-year window applies to judgments signed before then has not yet been settled by the courts. Act 605 contains no provision addressing cases already pending on August 1, 2026, and whether the new text applies to them is an open question. No court has ruled on this yet.

What “equal physical custody” means in practice

Joint custody comes with an implementation order, which the court must issue except for good cause shown La. R.S. 9:335(A)(1). The order does three main jobs. It allocates the time each parent has physical custody so the child has frequent and continuing contact with both parents La. R.S. 9:335(A)(2)(a). It allocates the legal authority and responsibility of the parents La. R.S. 9:335(A)(3). And it must address communication and an interim plan if a parent has to evacuate the state with the child during a declared emergency or disaster La. R.S. 9:335(A)(2)(c).

Equal physical custody divides the child’s time evenly. Families reach that split in different ways — alternating weeks, or shorter blocks during the week. The firm’s free custody schedule visualizer shows how common schedules fall across a month.

Equal time also changes the child support math. When each parent has physical custody for an approximately equal amount of time, support is calculated under the shared-custody rules La. R.S. 9:315.9. And joint custody of any kind obligates the parents to exchange information about the child’s health, education, and welfare and to confer with one another on decisions La. R.S. 9:336.

When a court can order something other than equal time

The statute lets the court depart from equal time on a determination about feasibility or the child’s best interest La. R.S. 9:335(A)(2)(b). Read with the evident intent noted above, that means equal time is not workable, or is not in the child’s best interest. The listed factors guide that call. Several bear directly on whether an equal schedule can work, including the distance between the parents’ homes La. C.C. art. 134(A)(13), the child’s home, school, and community history La. C.C. art. 134(A)(10), and each parent’s past role in the child’s care La. C.C. art. 134(A)(14). Parents may also agree to a different arrangement, and the court follows the agreement unless family-violence rules apply or the child’s best interest requires a different award La. C.C. art. 132.

The practical takeaway

Act 605 changed the starting point inside a joint-custody order, not the standard for awarding custody. If you are negotiating a parenting plan, expect equal time to be the baseline and expect to explain any departure from it. If you already have a judgment, a new schedule still requires a request to modify, under the modification standard. To talk about your situation, call (985) 612-7220, start a confidential family-law intake, or read more about the firm’s family law practice.