{ "id": "IN11085", "type": "CRS Insight", "typeId": "INSIGHTS", "number": "IN11085", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 595054, "date": "2019-03-27", "retrieved": "2020-01-02T16:02:49.141453", "title": "Defining Domestic Violence", "summary": "In 2018, the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) changed the expansive domestic violence (DV) definition that appeared on its website to the more narrow statutory definition used for grant programs. There is some confusion as to the meaning and implication of OVW\u2019s change. In the 116th Congress, legislation has been introduced that would amend the definition used in the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) grant programs\u2014the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2019 (H.R. 1585), if enacted, would amend and expand the definition of DV. \nFederal Definitions of DV\nThe federal government defines DV in different ways and for different purposes. Under criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. \u00a72261 defines a DV offender that falls under federal jurisdiction as:\n[a] person who travels in interstate or foreign commerce or enters or leaves Indian country or is present within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States with the intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate a spouse, intimate partner, or dating partner, and who, in the course of or as a result of such travel or presence, commits or attempts to commit a crime of violence against that spouse, intimate partner, or dating partner.\nFor VAWA grant purposes, VAWA states:\nThe term \u201cdomestic violence\u201d includes felony or misdemeanor crimes of violence committed by a current or former spouse or intimate partner of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the victim as a spouse or intimate partner, by a person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction receiving grant monies, or by any other person against an adult or youth victim who is protected from that person\u2019s acts under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction.\nOVW administers VAWA grants, and the DV definition on OVW\u2019s website matches the definition Congress established for grants. OVW previously (April 2018 and earlier) posted a more expansive definition that described DV as a \u201cpattern of behavior\u201d and included both economic and emotional abuse. Of note, changes to the OVW website definition have no impact on VAWA grantees. In the 116th Congress, H.R. 1585, if enacted, would amend the statutory definition used for grant programs to resemble the more expansive definition previously published by OVW. This change would impact future VAWA grantees.\nExpanded Definition for VAWA Grant Programs under H.R. 1585\nH.R. 1585 would define DV as:\na pattern of behavior involving the use or attempted use of physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, economic, or technological abuse or any other coercive behavior committed, enabled, or solicited to gain or maintain power and control over a victim, by a person who\u2014\n(A) is a current or former spouse or dating partner of the victim, or other person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the family or domestic violence laws of the jurisdiction;\n(B) is cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the victim as a spouse or dating partner, or other person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the family or domestic violence laws of the jurisdiction;\n(C) shares a child in common with the victim;\n(D) is an adult family member of, or paid or nonpaid caregiver for, a victim aged 50 or older or an adult victim with disabilities; or\n(E) commits acts against a youth or adult victim who is protected from those acts under the family or domestic violence laws of the jurisdiction.\nThe bill would describe DV as a pattern of abusive behavior, and extend the current definition beyond crimes of violence to include verbal, emotional, economic, and technological abuse (the bill also defines the latter two forms of abuse).\nPotential Implications of an Expanded Definition\nA more expansive definition of DV would generally expand the number of individuals who are eligible for support from VAWA grantees. A broader definition captures harmful behavior (such as financial abuse) that is not physical in nature but is another form of abuse common in relationships involving domestic violence. Victim advocates support this more inclusive definition.\nOn the other hand, some argue that a violent act is qualitatively different from other forms of abuse such as economic abuse, and legal definitions should reflect that distinction. In United States v. Castleman, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a misdemeanor offense of having \u201cintentionally or knowingly cause[d] bodily injury to\u201d the mother of the respondent\u2019s child qualified as \u201ca misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.\u201d The opinion of the Court (delivered by Justice Sotomayor) included extensive discussion of defining and distinguishing between acts of physical force. The Court ruled that it must attribute \u201cthe common-law meaning of force\u2019 to [18 U.S.C.] \u00a7921(a)(33)(A)\u2019s definition of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence\u2019 as an offense that has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force.\u2019\u201d In a concurring opinion, Justice Scalia argued that \u201c[w]hen everything is domestic violence, nothing is.\u201d He further argued that if a DV definition were to include all harmful domestic acts, Congress would \u201chave to come up with a new word ... to denote actual domestic violence.\u201d\nFurther, defining DV as \u201ca pattern of behavior\u201d seemingly excludes isolated DV incidents that do not involve a pattern of behavior. So while the goal may be to be more inclusive, the proposed definition could exclude isolated incidents of domestic violence that do not meet the \u201cpattern of behavior\u201d standard.\nCongress may choose to expand the definition of DV for VAWA grants or maintain the current definition. Alternatively, it could separately define terms such as \u201ceconomic abuse\u201d and \u201ctechnological abuse\u201d and add them to the eligibility criteria for grant programs. The addition of these terms to grant programs\u2019 purpose areas would achieve some advocates\u2019 desired goal of expanding VAWA support for more victims, not solely those of violent physical acts.", "type": "CRS Insight", "typeId": "INSIGHTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/IN11085", "sha1": "2ef4777a019b302a89386e49a082d2706d192234", "filename": "files/20190327_IN11085_2ef4777a019b302a89386e49a082d2706d192234.html", "images": {} }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/IN11085", "sha1": "4601df4b13507d80bab3bf3e33316cd8cba6c36b", "filename": "files/20190327_IN11085_4601df4b13507d80bab3bf3e33316cd8cba6c36b.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4850, "name": "Criminal Justice" } ] } ], "topics": [ "CRS Insights" ] }