Checklist to assist judicial officers in identifying and making findings about stalking behaviors judges identify in the cases they hear. It is important for judges to document in the findings in their court orders stalking behaviors. Stalking is a crime that is made up of a pattern of behaviors that occur, repeat, and escalate over time. When judges make findings about stalking behaviors in protection order, custody, divorce, child welfare and other family court proceedings, those findings document behaviors occurring and help judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials in future cases be better able to identify patterns of stalking.
Dynamics, Culture, & Safety > Domestic Violence
Topic: Domestic Violence
Narrow your search:
[pdf] Danger Assessment for Immigrant Women (DA-I) (+)
The Danger Assessment Tool for Immigrant women (DA-I) is a structured risk assessment instrument developed by Dr. Jacquelyn Campbell to assess the risk of lethality in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV), particularly the likelihood of homicide. Several risk factors have been associated with increased risk of homicides (murders) of immigrant women in violent relationships. […]
[pdf] What Happens When We Get It Wrong? Predominant Aggressor Determination in Cases Involving Immigrant and non-English Speaking Victims – Manchester, NH (September 4, 2024) (+)
This session provides an opportunity to review hypothetical case scenarios where a primary/predominant aggressor determination must be made, yet where the analysis is not overwhelmingly clear. The unique challenges faced by immigrant survivors/victims and the consequences when non-citizens acting in self-defense are arrested will also be addressed.
[pdf] Wilkinson v. Garland (September 2023) US Supreme Court (+)
NIWAP participated in an amicus brief on writ of certiorari to the US Court of Appeals of the Third Circuit to ensure that courts review BIA hardship determinations for immigrant victims of domestic violence seeking cancellation of removal under VAWA. SCOTUS ruled in favor of Wilkinson, holding that the application of the exceptional and extremely […]
[pdf] 12 Question Predatory Helpfulness Screener (October 24, 2023) (+)
This screener appears as an appendix to the article Inderjit K Basra, Tatum Kenney, Shandra Forrest-Bank, Lisa K. Zottarelli & Chitra Raghavan (24 Oct 2023): Predatory Helpfulness: An Empirical Framework to Identify Fraudulent Tactics Used by Pimps to Recruit and Commercially Sexually Exploit Young Girls and
Women, Journal of Human Trafficking, DOI: 10.1080/23322705.2023.2259263
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23322705.2023.2259263
[pdf] Chapter 10: U Visas: Victims of Criminal Activity (August 8, 2023) (+)
Chapter from “Empowering Survivors: Legal Rights of Immigrant Victims of Sexual Assault” to assist advocates and attorneys in identifying sexual assault, domestic violence, and other crime victims who may be eligible for U-visa immigration status and to provide resources to help advocates and attorneys work together to prepare U-visa applications for immigrant crime victims.
[pdf] Training Materials for Victim Advocates and Attorneys (11.28.23) (+)
Training materials for family lawyers, prosecutors, and state family, civil and criminal court judges assisting immigrant crime victims Topics include: U visas, T visas, Family Law cases, VAWA Self-Petitions, VAWA Confidentiality, Public Benefits, Best Practices, Language Access, Webinars, Podcasts and more.
[pdf] MedlinePlus Child Abuse (6.19.17) (+)
[pdf] HHS Public Health and Safety from Violence and Abuse Webpage (2.27.15) (+)
[pdf] HHS Domestic Violence Fact Sheet (6.8.2020) (+)
[pdf] Vallabhaneni (September 27 2001) Board of Immigration Appeals (+)
NOW Legal Defense Fund and others filed this amicus in support of the appeal by Aruna C. Vallabhaneni
of the decision of the Immigration Judge denying her application for political asylum despite an
undisputed record of years of severe domestic violence and her inability to obtain protection
from the government of India. The record before the judge established that Ms. Vallabhaneni
was persecuted in the past and that she has a well-founded fear that she will continue to be
persecuted in the future by her husband if she is forced to return to India, that the persecution she
experienced and which she fears was inflicted because of her membership in a particular social
group defined in whole or in part by her gender, and that she is not able to obtain protection from
her government. The Immigration Judge’s decision should be reversed and Ms. Vallabhaneni’s
application for asylum should be granted.
[pdf] Idinyan (August 9 2005) Board of Immigration Appeals (+)
Nvart Idinyan (formerly Nvart Huckfeldt) (August 9 2005) Board of Immigration Appeals. The National Network to End Violence Against Immigrant Women, represented by Crowell and Moring, filed this amicus in support of the immigration judge’s finding that plaintiff qualified for cancellation of removal under VAWA and refuting DHS assertion that once a victim reached a “safe house” she should no longer have access to VAWA provisions. (Crowell and Moring, Pro Bono)
[pdf] Perales v. Ashcroft (2003) US Court of Appeals 10th Circuit (+)
Perales v. Ashcroft, U.S. Court of Appeals 10th Circuit (2003). Legal Momentum, represented by National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, BIA, Arnold and Porter, submitted this amicus brief discussing the any credible evidence standard and the definition of battery or extreme cruelty in an immigrant victim’s Violence Against Women Act suspension of deportation case.
[pdf] Rosario v. Holder (May 10 2010) US Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit (+)
Rosario v. Holder (May 10 2010) US Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit. National Network to End Violence Against Immigrant Women respectfully moves pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure for 29 for leave to file an amicus brief in support of Appellant Josefa Rosario. Client placed in removal proceedings, concedes removability and applies for VAWA Cancellation of Removal. IJ denies cancellation based on finding that there is not substantial evidence of battery to the extent envisioned by the statute and not substantial evidence of extreme hardship. BIA affirms IJ. The decision was wrong because the IJ ignored an analysis of extreme cruelty completely and even though Ms. Rosario and her witness were found to be credible – focused on the lack of police reports and medical records – thereby holding her to a standard higher than the any credible evidence standard. Battery and extreme cruelty are non-discretionary determinations that can be reviewed by that court. Ms. Rosario has now filed brief with 2nd Circuit.
[pdf] Arguijo v. USCIS (July 24 2020) US Court of Appeals 7th Circuit (+)
The National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) represents Jennifer Arguijo, who was 11 years old when her mother married her stepfather, who turned out to be abusive. Applying BIA case law from other contexts, VSC held that a stepchild-stepfather relationship ends after the biological parent divorces the stepparent, unless there is a “continuing relationship” between the stepchild and stepfather. NIJC sought reconsideration, and appealed to the AAO. The AAO affirmed the VSC’s decision to deny the VAWA self-petition unless the abused step-child had a continuing relationship with the abusive step-father. NIJC filed a challenge to the AAO denial under the Administrative Procedure Act in Federal District Court in 2013. Unfortunately, the case moved slowly but Jennifer eventually lost on Summary Judgment in 2020, and NIJC appealed to the Seventh Circuit. The National Immigrant Women’s Advocacy Project filed an Amicus brief in the 7th Circuit in support of NIJC’s appeal represented by K&L Gates LLP. The Seventh Circuit overturned the District Court and The Court handed down its decision on March 12, 2021 confirming that in the context of the Violence Against Women Act “stepchild” status survives divorce. Divorce between the natural parent and the abusive stepparent does not cut a stepchild victim off from VAWA immigration relief, including self-petitioning.
[pdf] United States v. Dixon (December 2 1992-June 28 1993) (+)
United States v. Dixon (December 2 1992-June 28 1993) U.S. Supreme Court. United States V. Michael Foster (United States v. Dixon, 598 A.2d 724, 725 (D.C. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S. Ct. 1759 (1992), aff’d in part and rev’d in part, 113 S. Ct. 2849 (1993). Amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court of the United States as the organization that serves as counsel for the domestic violence victim in the underlying protection order contempt proceeding that resulted in an over 600 day sentence for multiple counts of contempt of a civil protection order. The Brief argued that victims could constitutionally enforce their protection orders without undermining the ability of the state (in this case the United States) to bring criminal charges against the domestic violence perpetrator that included numerous assaults and assault with a deadly weapon. The Supreme Court upheld the right of a victim to enforce her protection order without barring criminal prosecution by double jeopardy as long as the contempt proceeding and the criminal prosecution each require proof of additional elements under the Blockburger “same elements” test.
[pdf] In The Matter of: Suyi Varquero-Cubias (April 5 2016) Board of Immigration Appeals) (+)
In The Matter of: Suyi Varquero-Cubias (April 5 2016) Board of Immigration Appeals. NIWAP, represented by Tahirih Justice Center and Center for Gender and Refugee Studies, participated filed this brief in a case of a battered immigrant from El Salvador who separated from her abusive boyfriend and her abuser continued to stalk, sexually assault, and threaten her for the next two years until she fled in fear of her life for the United States. The
Immigration Judge denied her asylum case based on the fact that she was not married to the abuser and that she had physically separated from her abuser. This amicus brief asked the Board of Immigration Appeals to clarify that divorce or a woman’s other attempts to separate are not dispositive of a woman’s
ability to leave the abusive relationship where she lacks the power to end the domestic relationship.
NIWAP provided social science research on separation violence and abusers power and control to
continue to perpetrate the post-separation coercive control, abuse and sexual violence supporting the victim’s
claim for gender based asylum.
[pdf] Vigil v. Lynch (February 29 2016) US Court of Appeals 5th Circuit (+)
Maria Esterlina Perez Vigil v. U.S. (February 29 2016) 5 th Circuit Court of Appeals. NIWAP, and various Immmigration Law Professors from Texas, filed an
amicus curiae brief on behalf of Maria Esterlina Perez Vigil a victim of domestic violence, who had
denied her request for asylum because she was able to move out the residence that she shared with the
abuser. The brief discussed the dynamics of abusive relationships and explained that physical separation
from an abuser rarely means that an abused woman has successfully left the relationship or marriage and
stopped the cycle of violence. Indeed, the abuser’s control of the victim can often continue well after the
victim moves out, particularly where children are involved. This amicus was filed in the 5th Circuit
Federal Court of Appeals in a case in which Perez Vigil is seeking to overturn the Immigration Judge and
the Board of Immigration`s ruling that denied her request seeking asylum, withholding of removal, and
protection under the CAT.
[pdf] Rosen v. Ming Dai and Rosen v. Alcaraz (January 11 2021) Supreme Court of the United States (+)
Rosen v. Ming Dai and Rosen v. Alcaraz (January 11 2021) Supreme Court of the United States. NIWAP assisted Jenner &
Block LLP in developing and securing social science support in a brief filed to the Supreme Court of the
United States on the question of credible testimony. The brief explained the impact of trauma on memory
and ability to testify, other mental health conditions’ impact on memory and credibility, and credibility
compared to truth.
[pdf] Guimares v. Brann (May 8 2019) Supreme Court of Texas (+)
Marcelle Guimaraes v. Christopher Scott Brann (Texas Supreme Court). NIWAP, represented by KL Gates, served
as lead amicus on a brief before the Texas Supreme Court. The amicus curiae brief is filed on behalf of a woman who is fighting for complete custody and the ability to keep her child in Brazil away from the child’s father, who had abused the mother. The mother won a contested Hague
Convention Case in which both parties participated and the mother was granted the right to keep the child
in Brazil and was awarded full custody. The Texas trial court ignored the Brazilian order and in a divorce proceeding awarded custody to the father.
[pdf] Souratgar v. Fair (February 18 2013) 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (+)
Souratgar v. Fair (February 18 2013) 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. NIWAP and others, represented by Greenberg and Trauri, participated in an amicus in a Hague Convention international custody case with Sanctuary for Families in New York. The amicus address domestic violence and immigration related abuse and provided social science research and legislative history documenting the dynamics of domestic violence experienced by immigrant victims, particularly immigration related abuse as well as research and Congressional Resolutions on the effect that witnessing a domestic violence has on children.
[pdf] Romain v. Napolitano (March 16 2012) United States District Court (+)
Romain v Napolitano (March 16 2012), U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York. NIWAP, represented by Morgan, Lewis and Bockius, served as lead amicus in the first VAWA Confidentiality appeal of denial of a criminal court discovery order. This was a case in which a domestic violence perpetrator who was being prosecuted for domestic violence sought discovery under Brady and W.M.V.Crio of the VAWA confidentiality protected VAWA self-petition immigration case filed by his battered immigrant spouse. The perpetrator of spousal rape subpoenaed the
victims VAWA self-petition case from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The Federal District Court ultimately denied the subpoena and discovery of the self-petition file by the criminal defendant
spouse.
[pdf] Jessica Ruth Gonzales v. United States of America Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (December 5 2007) (+)
Amicus brief submitted to the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights after Castle Rock police department failed to enforce an order of protection against Ms. Gonzales’s husband. This brief argues that there is an international consensus recognizing states’ obligation to protect against domestic violence and provide effective remedies for its victims. Even if laws and orders are issued, they must be enforced. The police failure to enforce the protective order in this case, together with the United States’ failure to provide a judicial remedy for this lack of enforcement, violate established international human rights treaties and standards, under which states are required to respect, protect, and fulfil women and girls’ rights to be free from gender-based violence, including domestic violence.
[pdf] Nicholson v. Williams NY State Court of Appeals (May 2004) (+)
Amicus submitted to the New York State Court of Appeals in support of battered women and their children in Nicholson v. Scoppetta. The Nicholson case is a class action suit against the Administration for Children’s Services (“ACS”) of New York City based on their policy and practice of presumptively removing children from battered mothers and charging them with neglect for “engaging in domestic violence.” Under the ACS policy, children are removed and women charged simply because the mothers are victims of domestic violence. The Nicholson case, comprised of over 20 class members, challenges the ACS policy on constitutional grounds. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has certified questions to the New York State Court of Appeals to assist in determining whether the policy is unconstitutional.
[pdf] Jane Doe v. Claire McIntire (August 10, 2001) Commonwealth of Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (+)
Jane Doe v. Claire McIntire, App. No. 01-P-1013 (Mass.) (August 10, 2001) Amicus brief appealing a denial of
TANF benefits to two immigrant women lawfully residing in Massachusetts, the denial was based on six month
residence requirement before receiving benefits. One woman was fleeing domestic violence and the other residing
with family during pregnancy. (Foley, Hoag & Eliot, Pro Bono)
[pdf] United States v. Dixon U.S. Supreme Court (December 2 1992-June 28 1993) (+)
United States V. Michael Foster (United States v. Dixon, 598 A.2d 724, 725 (D.C. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S. Ct. 1759 (1992), aff’d in part and rev’d in part, 113 S. Ct. 2849 (1993) Filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of the United States as the organization that serves as counsel for the domestic violence victim in the underlying protection order contempt proceeding that resulted in an over 600 day sentence for multiple counts of contempt of a civil protection order. The Brief argued that victims could constitutionally enforce their protection orders without undermining the ability of the state (in this case the United States) to bring criminal charges against the domestic violence perpetrator that included numerous assaults and assault with a deadly weapon. The Supreme Court upheld the right of a victim to enforce her protection order without barring criminal prosecution by double jeopardy as long as the contempt proceeding and the criminal prosecution each require proof of additional elements under the Blockburger “same elements” test.
[pdf] Blondin v. Dubois (2000) U.S. Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit (+)
Blondin v. Dubois, U.S. Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit (2000). NOW LDEF represented by Crowell & Moring filed an amicus brief in support of a mother’s child custody against a challenge under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction U.S.C. section 11601 by the father, a resident of France.
[pdf] Harrison v. Harrison, Kentucky, Fayette Circuit Court 3rd Division (February 11 2002) (+)
Harrison v. Harrison, Kentucky, Fayette Circuit Court 3rd Division (2002) Amicus Brief explaining misuse of protection orders to penalize victims and discourage them from seeking legal relief, “mutual” protection orders as contrary to public policy, and the safety of DV victims as directly related to batterer responsibility enforced in the legal system. (Wiley, Rein & Fielding, Pro Bono)
[pdf] Marriage of David M. Salcido and Irina N. Salcido Arizona State Court of Appeals (August 24 2004) (+)
In Re the Marriage of David M. Salcido and Irina N. Salcido, Case No. 20023590 before the Arizona Court of Appeals. (2004) Filed an amicus brief in support of overturning a grant of annulment in favor of an abusive spouse who sought an annulment after a five year marriage in order to deny the victim-wife VAWA immigration status. (Crowell and Moring, Pro Bono).
[pdf] Meredith v. Muriel Crowell and Moring Supreme Court of the State of Washington (July 17 2009) (+)
Meredith v. Muriel second brief (Crowell and Moring, Pro Bono) argued that Abusive speech is not protected by the First Amendment because it is essentially conduct not expression and that a restriction in the protection order ordering an abuser not to contact DHS or interfere with his wife’s immigration case is not overbroad when weighed against the significant State interest in protecting abuse victims and does not impermissibly infringe on the abuser’s right to petition the government
[pdf] Meredith v. Muriel K&L Gates Supreme Court of the State of Washington (July 17 2009) (+)
Meredith v. Muriel, Supreme Court of the State of Washington, (2009). Submitted two amicus briefs one on behalf of Legal Momentum and a second on behalf of the National Network to End Violence Against Immigrant Women in a case in which an abuser appealed the issuance of a protection order containing a prohibition against the abuser communicating with the Department of Homeland Security regarding his wife. One brief (K & L Gates, Pro Bono) provided social science documentation of the harm to victims and the lethality of immigration related abuse and discussed the history and purpose of VAWA confidentiality protections.
[pdf] Kumar v. Kumar California Court of Appeals (September 26 2016) (+)
Kumar v. Kumar (California Court of Appeals) NIWAP served as sole amicus in a case in which a California state family court judge imposed the duty to mitigate that applies in contract cases and alimony cases to an immigrant spouse, in this case a battered immigrant spouse, seeking to enforce the Affidavit of Support her husband signed with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security when he sponsored her to attain legal permanent residency status. The brief cited case law from other states and law review articles discussing current state family court practice allowing immigrant spouses to enforce affidavits of support in family court cases. The brief provided legislative history and social science data supporting the position imposing a duty to mitigate undermines the legislative purpose of the Affidavit of Support and in the case of battered immigrant spouses the Violence Against Women Act. (Crowell and Moring: September 26, 2016)
[pdf] S.E.R.L v. U.S. Federal Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit (September 25 2017) (+)
Amicus Brief in S.E.R.L v. U.S. NIWAP filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of a Honduran woman who had helped her daughter escape from a domestic violence perpetrator who had trafficked the daughter to Mexico. The brief discussed the extent to which those who intervene to protect their family from perpetrators of domestic violence are at risk of violent retaliation by the perpetrator, up to and including death. She fled Honduras seeking asylum in the U.S. out of fear of more retaliation. This amicus was filed in the 3rd Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in a case in which S.E.R.L is seeking gender based asylum as a Honduran woman who intervened in a domestic violence relationship who are left completely vulnerable to violent retaliation. Crowell and Moring (September 25, 2017)
[pdf] Rosa Marisol Avelar Oliva Board of Immigration Appeals (February 16 2018) (+)
Amicus Brief in Matter of Rosa Marisol Avelar Oliva, NIWAP filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of an El Salvadorian woman who suffered child abuse and was held in isolation for years. The Immigration Judge found that she was not credible. The brief discussed the psychological and developmental effects of trauma and how childhood rape and sexual abuse can significantly impact witness’s demeanor and ability to testify and report the abuse. The brief addressed how childhood trauma impairs brain development in key regions responsible for memory, reasoning, and planning. The amicus was filed in the Board of Immigration Appeals in a case in which Rosa Marisol is seeking gender-based asylum and withholding of removal. Crowell and Moring (February 16, 2018)
[pdf] W.M.V.C.; A.P.V. v. U.S 5th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals (February 28 2018) (+)
Amicus Brief in W.M.V.C.; A.P.V. v. U.S. NIWAP filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of W.M.V.C. and her son A.P.V DV who suffered domestic violence and life-threats in a non-consensual relationship. The amicus brief discussed that the same power dynamics that precipitate domestic violence in heterosexual marital relationships apply and are present in same-sex and non-extramarital relationships. It also discussed the that the same factors that make a woman unable to leave an abusive opposite-sex relationship also make a woman unable to leave an abusive same-sex relationship, especially when the abuser is connected with law enforcement. This amicus was filed in the 5th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in a case in which W.M.V.C. and A.P.V are seeking to overturn BIA’s decision that denied Petitioners’ applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Baker & McKenzie LLP (February 28, 2018)
[pdf] N.Y.C.C. v. Whitaker Seventh Circuit Federal Court of Appeals (November 26 2018) (+)
Amicus Brief in N.Y.C.C. v. Whitaker, NIWAP filed an Amicus Brief in N.Y.C.C. v. Whitaker in the Seventh Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. This brief explained that coercive control is one of the defining characteristics of domestic violence relationship as a result leaving a shared residence with an abuser does not bring an end to the abuse. Additionally, the brief discusses the particular dangers when the perpetrator engages in stalking his victim. Winston & Strawn LLP (November 26, 2018)
[pdf] O.M.G. et al v. Wolf et al. U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (March 30 2020) (+)
O.M.G. v. Wolf (2020) U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. David Thronson, “Declaration filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in O.M.G. vs Wolf.” NIWAP coordinated a national team of law professors and recruited the law firm of Winston Strum to help draft and develop this declaration that discusses the dangers for children in DHS family detention centers, the risks posed by the COVID-19 pandemic and provides an excellent overview with social science research data support of the impact of trauma for immigrant children in their neurobiological, cognitive, and psychological development and children’s health and well-being. Leslye E. Orloff assisted in drafting and editing the brief. (March 30, 2020)
[pdf] Gabriel Perez Cruz v. Barr, U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit (July 2 2020) (+)
Gabriel Perez Cruz v. Barr (2020) U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit. NIWAP assisted the Family Violence Appellate Project in California in developing, securing social science support for and national sign ons from 16 organizations nationally for this 9th Circuit Amicus Brief in which we were represented by Haney and Boone LLP. The brief discussed the mental health impact of domestic violence and coercive control in abusive relationships and perpetrators who coerce their victims into committing crimes, and the need for courts to consider these factors when adjudicating a domestic violence victim’s withholding of removal claims and particularly whether they crime they committed was a “particularly serious crime.” (July 2 2020).
[pdf] Friendly House Et Al., V. Michael B. Whiting Et Al., United States District Court Arizona (June 11 2010) (+)
Friendly House Et Al., V. Michael B. Whiting Et Al., United States District Court Arizona, (2010) Recruited by the ACLU, MALDEF, The National Immigration Law Center and the Asian Pacific American Legal Center to organize a women’s perspective amicus in support of plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction to stop implementation of key portions of Arizona’s anti-immigrant legislation SB 1070. Legal Momentum also assisted in identifying immigrant victim plaintiff’s for this lawsuit. 83 women’s, violence against women’s and allied organizations joined the brief which demonstrated how SB 1070 interferes with federal protections for immigrant crime victims; cuts immigrant women and their children off from federally provided services necessary to protect life, health and safety, and harms children by depriving them of the care and nurturing of their mothers through detention leading to family separations. The Mexican Consulate translated this brief and is distributing it in Spanish. (Manatt, Phelps, and Phillips, Pro Bono)
[pdf] United States v. State of Arizona and Janice K. Brewer Governor, (September 30 2010) United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (+)
United States v. State of Arizona and Janice K. Brewer Governor, United States Court of Appeals for the 9trh Circuit. (2010) Submitted an amicus brief in the 9th Circuit case in support of the United States position that Arizona law SB 1070 unconstitutionally interferes with federal immigration laws designed to help immigrant victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking and other crimes. It undermines federal laws guaranteeing that all persons in the United States have access to programs and services necessary to protect life and safety and public health and will be extremely harmful to immigrant families from family separations forced by local law enforcement mandates to enforce federal immigration laws. This amicus brief was joined by 90 organizations working to help immigrant women and immigrant victims of violence against women. (Manatt, Phelps, and Phillips, Pro Bono)
[pdf] In the Matter of RA (February 13 2004) (+)
In the Matter of RA (February 13 2004) Board of Immigration Appeals. Domestic violence as a basis for Gender Based Asylum. Filed Briefs and coordinated amici for amicus briefs filed before the Board of Immigration Appeals (1999) and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (1999). Provided editing and amici sign on assistance to Amicus brief filed with Attorney General Ashcroft (2004).
[pdf] Yessica Alvarado Euceda vs. Loretta Lynch US Court of Appeals 5th Circuit (February 25 2016) (+)
Yessica Alvarado Euceda vs. Loretta Lynch. NIWAP Inc. served as the lead amicus in an appeal of a denial of gender based asylum to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of a Honduran battered immigrant who unsuccessfully attempted to end her relationship with her abusive boyfriend who was the father of her two children. The immigration judge and a single Board of Immigration Appeals judge denied gender based asylum to a battered mother who fled Honduras when she could find no protection from being subjected to ongoing abuse from the father of her children. The law firm of Winston and Strawn represented NIWAP in the amicus brief. (February 26, 2016)
[pdf] Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Koch Foods 5th Circuit (October 22 2015) (+)
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Koch Foods. NIWAP Inc. collaborated with Latino Justice, the law firms of Arnold and Porter and Procopio, and Legal Momentum to submit an amicus brief to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in an interlocutory appeal of a Federal District Court decision to allow an employer who employed supervisors who perpetrated rape, sexual assault, felonious assault, extortion, sexual harassment and other discrimination against workers to use civil court discovery in an EEOC enforcement action to obtain copies of the victim’s VAWA confidentiality protected U visa case files. The brief provided legislative history of the VAWA confidentiality provisions and the U visa and discussed the public policy effects on victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking and other crimes if discovery of VAWA confidentiality protected information is allowed in civil cases. (October 22, 2015)
[pdf] Nelsa Rosa Hernandez Cabrera; A.J.E.H. v. U.S. US Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit (February 14 2019) (+)
Nelsa Rosa Hernandez Cabrera; A.J.E.H. v. U.S., NIWAP filed an amicus curiae on behalf of Nelsa Rosa Hernandez Cabrera; A.J.E.H., the petitioner is a domestic violence victim, from Honduras, who suffered physical abuse and enormous amount of control from her husband. The amicus will be filed in the Fourth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in a case that Hernandez Cabrera is seeking to overturn a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals that denied her request seeking asylum. Winston & Strawn LLP. (February 22, 2019)
[pdf] S.K.E.R v. Barr (April 8 2019) Court of Appeals 5th Circuit (+)
S.K.E.R. v. William P. Barr. NIWAP filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of a Honduran woman who was a victim of domestic violence. The brief discusses the complexity of domestic violence and how the victim was unable to physically remove herself from her abuser due to fear of his retaliation. This amicus was filed in the 5th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. Winston and Strawn LLP (April 8, 2019).
[pdf] Reina Victoria Rodriguez-Ramirez v. William P. Barr Motion and Amicus US Court of Appeals 5th Circuit (August 16 2019) (+)
Reina Victoria Rodriguez-Ramirez v. William P. Barr. NIWAP filed an amicus curiae brief in the 5th Circuit Court in Texas. The brief discusses how incest relationships qualify as a domestic relationship and how laws of domestic violence should apply. Baker and McKenzie LLP. (August 16, 2019)
[pdf] Aguilar-Jimenez Board of Immigration Appeals (2002) (+)
Aguilar-Jimenez, Board of Immigration Appeals (2002). Amicus brief discussing the “extreme cruelty” and “extreme hardship” standards in the context of requests for suspension of deportation under VAWA, specifically that extreme cruelty includes the psychological and emotional abuse imposed on a child who is forced to watch as a parent is battered by another parent. (Crowell and Moring Pro Bono)
[pdf] Kewan, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (2005) (+)
Kewan, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (2005). Amicus brief discussing research data and the dynamics of domestic violence against male victims and VAWA’s gender neutrality offering protection to both male and female victims. (Northwest Immigrant Rights Project)
[pdf] Cabezas (2010) US Citizenship and Immigration Service Administrative Appeals Office (+)
Esteban Cabezas is an appeal to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Administrative Appeals Office (2010) of a denial of a VAWA self-petition by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Vermont Service Center. This case raises important issues about the any credible evidence standard to be applied in VAWA self-petitioning cases and on immigration related abuse and the role this abuse plays as part of a pattern of extreme cruelty. (Andrew Taylor, Pro Bono)
[pdf] Birru v. Wilkinson 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (January 22, 2021) (+)
Aylaliya Assefa Birru v. Barr (January 11 2021) 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. NIWAP, represented by
Baker McKenzie, is lead amicus in a brief on behalf of an immigrant domestic
violence victim who is seeking relief under the Violence Against Women Act’s domestic violence victim
waiver in her VAWA cancellation of removal case. The Board of Immigration Appeals and the
immigration judge denied her the ability to present evidence of waiver eligibility.