Changes in Legal Standards Impact Immigrant Survivors of Domestic Violence
This story was first reported by Stateline.
In March, Michigan attorney Ruby Robinson received a notice denying legal status for her client, an immigrant woman who had faced physical abuse at the hands of her husband.
Robinson detailed the nature of the abuse, stating that the husband strangled her client, pushed her away, forced unwanted contact, and exercised control over financial resources.
The couple, who married in the United States after a lengthy relationship, provided a marriage certificate and testimonials from long-time acquaintances, including the man’s daughter, to support the authenticity of their union.
Robinson’s client applied for legal status as a victim of domestic violence under the federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). However, a significant policy shift announced by federal officials late last year has made qualifying for legal status increasingly challenging.
Under VAWA, the alien spouse of a U.S. citizen or green card holder can self-apply for legal immigration status if they have experienced abuse. This legislation, initially proposed by then-Senator Joe Biden in 1994, has undergone several updates, the latest occurring in 2022. However, the Trump administration’s new guidelines introduced in December have narrowed the definitions of abuse and increased scrutiny on applications, requiring more substantial proof of cohabitation and the authenticity of the marriage.
Despite submitting a four-page document containing a witness’s affidavit and photographs, Robinson’s client’s application was rejected. Immigration officials indicated there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the marriage was legitimate. According to Robinson, a senior attorney at the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, these stricter requirements represent a significant barrier for victims seeking refuge from their abusers.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has justified the new requirements as necessary to prevent fraud, suggesting that an increase in fraudulent claims could lead to processing delays for legitimate self-petitions. However, advocates express concern that the changes exacerbate challenges for vulnerable survivors, particularly those who experience coercion from their abuser regarding their immigration status.
Robinson emphasized that “VAWA was designed to protect victims of intimate partner violence and domestic violence. Now, these protections are effectively being dismantled.” The latest revisions require petitioners to provide evidence of residency with their abuser and corroborate that abuse took place during their marriage. This poses significant challenges for survivors who often lack documentation due to the controlling nature of their relationship.
Legal experts warn that the updated definitions of “battery” and “extreme cruelty” further complicate matters for survivors. For example, the legal definition of battery has been replaced with a more restrictive dictionary definition that fails to encompass the realities of domestic violence. “To qualify for this immigration benefit, the abuse has to be unusual,” stated Cristina Velez, legal and policy director for ASISTA. She insists that the new definitions contradict the intent of VAWA and the overall understanding of domestic violence.
Moreover, the burden placed on survivors to provide detailed evidence—for instance, specifying when and where photographs of abuse were taken—creates additional hurdles. “Survivors are typically at a severe disadvantage in collecting the necessary documents to prove cohabitation and abuse,” noted Laura Depas Cabrera, an immigration attorney based in Gainesville, Florida. “In many cases, essential documentation simply does not exist, either because of the abuser’s control or the chaotic circumstances of leaving an abusive relationship.”
This new policy framework could have a chilling effect on immigrant survivors seeking help. Advocate Cecilia Friedman Levin argued that instead of focusing on the integrity of the program, authorities should better target those exploiting the system, including unscrupulous lawyers and abusive partners. “Punishing the many for the misdeeds of a few is not the solution,” she cautioned.
Victims of domestic violence often face threats of deportation from their abuser, a tactic used to maintain control. As illustrated by Jane Stover, director of the Domestic Violence Clinic at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, this dynamic can prevent victims from seeking necessary assistance. “Many of my clients are told that if they call the police, they will be deported,” Stover explained.
With increasing scrutiny on the abuses of VAWA protections, it is imperative that the government reassesses its approach to ensure that support remains available for those genuinely in need. Lives could depend on sustaining these protections in the face of evolving immigration policies.
Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network.
