Violence Against Women Act

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) is a United States federal law. It was passed as Title IV, sec. 40001-40703 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 HR 3355 and signed as Public Law 103-322 by President Bill Clinton on September 13, 1994. It provided $1.6 billion to enhance investigation and prosecution of the violent crime perpetrated against women, increased pre-trial detention of the accused, imposed automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allowed civil redress in cases prosecutors chose to leave unprosecuted.

VAWA was drafted by then-U.S. Senator Joseph Biden's office with support from a number of advocacy organizations including Legal Momentum and The National Organization for Women, which described the bill as "the greatest breakthrough in civil rights for women in nearly two decades."

VAWA was reauthorized by Congress in 2000, and again in December 2005. The bill was signed into law by President George W. Bush on January 5, 2006. [1]

VAWA will be up for reauthorization in 2010.

There is a division of the U.S. Justice Department that deals exclusively with violence against women. In June of 2009, Vice President Biden announced the appointment of Lynn Rosenthal to the new position of White House Advisor On Violence Against Women.

Contents

[edit] Background

The World Conference on Human Rights, held in Vienna in 1993, and the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women [2] in the same year, concluded that civil society and governments have acknowledged that domestic violence is a public health policy and human rights concern.

The World Health Organization [3] conducted an extensive study on worldwide domestic violence. Released in 2005, the study analyzed data from 10 countries and sheds new light on the prevalence of violence against women. It seeks to look at domestic violence from a public health policy perspective. The survey is viewed as controversial by many because it did not assess the extent of partner violence against men, and its failure to use a validated survey instrument.

The findings from this and other studies can be used to inform a more effective response from government, including the health, justice and social service sectors, as a step towards fulfilling the state’s obligation to curtail domestic violence under international human rights laws.

[edit] Debate and legal standing

The American Civil Liberties Union had originally expressed concerns about the Act, saying that the increased penalties were rash, the increased pretrial detention was "repugnant" to the US Constitution, the mandatory HIV testing of those only charged but not convicted is an infringement of a citizen’s right to privacy and the edict for automatic payment of full restitution was non-judicious (see their paper: "Analysis of Major Civil Liberties Abuses in the Crime Bill Conference Report as Passed by the House and the Senate", dated September 29, 1994). However, the ACLU has supported reauthorization of VAWA on the condition that the "unconstitutional DNA provision" be removed.[4]

The ACLU, in their July 27, 2005 'Letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee Regarding the Violence Against Women Act of 2005, S. 1197' stated that "VAWA is one of the most effective pieces of legislation enacted to end domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. It has dramatically improved the law enforcement response to violence against women and has provided critical services necessary to support women and children in their struggle to overcome abusive situations." [5]

In 2000, in a controversial 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court of the United States held part of VAWA unconstitutional in United States v. Morrison on federalism grounds. Only the civil rights remedy of VAWA was struck down. The provisions providing program funding were unaffected.[6]

[edit] Organizations that support VAWA

[edit] Texas Civil Rights Project (TCRP)

Texas Civil Rights Project has a Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) department. TCRP is a nonprofit law office that offers free legal help to women and men whose civil rights have been denied. TCRP handles cases involving abused documented and undocumented immigrants to start the process of helping them gain legal status in the United States. Ninety percent of the clients they work with are female immigrants from Mexico; however, they also work with female immigrants from Central America, Russia, Korea and Viet Nam.[7]

[edit] Criticisms of VAWA legislation

Various persons and groups, including Marc H. Rudov, Glenn Sacks, Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting (RADAR), and African-Americans for VAWA Reform (AAVR), have voiced concerns that VAWA violates due process, equal protection, and other civil rights. None of these groups oppose laws protecting victims of domestic violence. As with many laws passed in the US, the VAWA has been used as a vehicle for unscrupulous immigrants to gain access by marrying US citizens and claiming abuse under the act when no abuse has occurred. While not limited only to women, some male immigrants also use the VAWA act to gain fraudulent access to immigration benefits every year. It is reported that as much as 30% of all immigrant marriages each year are a part of immigration fraud with over half of that number, 15-20% of total marriage based immigration, involves false claims of abuse. The unsuspecting American citizen is often abused and bankrupt in this fraud. The fraud also covers minor children of the immigrant and often false allegations of child abuse are involved. USCIS guarantees the privacy and security of abused immigrants under the VAWA and the citizen often is left without any rights to fight against the fraud of which he or she is victim.


[edit] References

  1. ^ www.whitehouse.gov
  2. ^ [1]
  3. ^ [2]
  4. ^ Tell Congress to Support the Violence Against Women Act
  5. ^ [3]
  6. ^ See: United States v. Morrison,529 U.S. 598, 627; "For these reasons, we conclude that Congress' power under § 5 does not extend to the enactment of § 13981.... The judgment of the Court of Appeals is Affirmed."
  7. ^ http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-139824.html

[edit] External links

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act"
Personal tools