This chart describes the federal and when offered state funded public benefits that immigrant crime victims are legally eligible to access. Which benefits a victim can access depends on:
• On the victim’s immigration status or the immigration relief the victim is in the process of applying for;
• Which benefit they are applying for; and
• When they entered the United States.
The chart provides information about benefits eligibility for VAWA self-petitioners, refugees, asylees, T and U visa applicants, children applying for SIJS and DACA, and undocumented victims. The chart covers eligibility for: TANF, Child Care, SNAP (food stamps), WIC, health care, educational grants, loans and in-state tuition, driver’s licenses, housing, tax credits, legal services, weatherization assistance, and FEMA assistance.
Topic: VAWA Confidentiality
Materials regarding VAWA confidentiality.
Narrow your search:
- Confidentiality Sample Motions & Briefs
- Confidentiality Statutes, Policy, & Regulations
- VAWA Confidentiality Materials & Best Practices
- Confidentiality Case Law
- Confidentiality Statutes
- VAWA Confidentiality Legislative History
- Confidentiality Memorandums of Law
- Index of Significant VAWA Confidentiality Training Materials
- VAWA Confidentiality Training Materials
[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] VAWA Confidentiality Training Materials (November 17, 2023) (+)
This collection of training materials address all three aspects of VAWA confidentiality protections for immigrant victims. It includes training materials on the VAWA confidentiality’s
— bars on reliance on perpetrator provided information to harm victims including protections against deportation;
— prohibitions on immigration enforcement against immigrant crime victims at courthouses and other locations; and
— bars and limitations on discovery in civil, family and criminal court cases.
This document includes links to web pages with more information and a specific materials list that includes bench cards, cases, and tools to assist judges and lawyers with issues related to the impact of federal VAWA confidentiality laws on discovery in state court cases.
[pdf] FAQs for Victims’ Lawyers: The Central Role of Federal Immigration Laws and the Confidentiality Provisions of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) in Protecting the Safety and Privacy of Immigrant Survivors (January 2023) (+)
The immigration-related remedies for survivors of crime, and the corresponding federal immigration VAWA confidentiality laws, are designed to remove immigration status as a barrier to survivors accessing the help they need. They are also intended to encourage survivors to report to and cooperate with law enforcement and criminal prosecutions. The Victim Rights Law Center (VRLC)1 and the National Immigrant Women’s Advocacy Project (NIWAP)2 developed these FAQs (and a companion tip sheet) to help attorneys understand and navigate the VAWA confidentiality protections in federal immigration law when representing survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence, sex trafficking, dating violence, and stalking who are seeking protection from deportation and other immigration relief.
[pdf] The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA): Tips to Protect the Privacy of Immigrant Survivors (January 2023) (+)
The Victim Rights Law Center (VRLC)1 and the National Immigrant Women’s Advocacy Project (NIWAP)2 developed these tips (and a companion set of FAQs) to help attorneys understand and navigate the VAWA confidentiality protections in federal immigration law. The tips are intended to help you promote the safety, privacy, and healing of survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence, sex trafficking, dating violence, and stalking.
[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] Cazorla and EEOC v. Koch Foods of Mississippi US Court of Appeals 5th Circuit (October 22 2015) (+)
Cazorla v. Koch Foods of Mississippi, (October 22 2015) United States Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit. NIWAP, represented by Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch, LLP, Arnold and Porter, Latino Justice PRLDEF, was the lead Amicus in the first case to reach the U.S. Courts of Appeals on the (VAWA) immigration confidentiality protections. In this workplace sexual assault case brought by the EEOC the employer is attempting to obtain through civil court discovery receive copies of and/or information contained in victim workers’ U visa cases filed with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that under federal law are to receive VAWA confidentiality protection.
[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 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] 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] 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] Hawke v. Department of Homeland Security, the United States District Court for the District of Northern California (May 23 2008) (+)
Hawke v. Department of Homeland Security, the United States District Court for the District of Northern California (September 29, 2008). Filed an amicus brief discussing the history and purpose of VAWA Confidentiality created in 1996 (expanded in 2000 and 2005) as Section 384 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”). In this case of first impression, the Court clarified that VAWA confidentiality provisions protect victims filing for VAWA immigration relief even if the case is ultimately denied when such denials were not based on the merits. Procedural denials or withdrawals of applications continue to receive the full scope of VAWA Confidentiality eligible protection. (Morgan, Lewis, Pro Bono)
[pdf] In the Matter of M.A. (March 23 2020) Board of Immigration Appeals (+)
In the Matter of M-A. (2020) Brief filed with the Board of Immigration Appeals. NIWAP was lead amicus in an appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeal in a case of first impression challenging an Immigration Judge’s denial of VAWA cancellation of removal to an LGBTQ+ immigrant victim of spouse abuse who suffered multiple VAWA confidentiality violations including Immigration and Custom’s Enforcement informing the court they planned to call the perpetrator as a witness, submitting an affidavit by the perpetrator that the immigration judge relied upon to deny the victim VAWA cancellation of removal, the immigration court failing to remove the victim’s case from the publicly available computer system and numerous other VAWA confidentiality violations. The brief provided detailed legislative, regulatory and policy history on VAWA confidentiality and discussed each of the numerous VAWA confidentiality violations occurring in this case by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the immigration judge and the immigration courts. (March 24, 2020)
[pdf] Francisco Ramirez, Jacqueline Reyes-Mendoza, And Their Minor Child B.R., v Hon. Daylene A. Marsh and David Paulino Padilla-Suazo (August 14 2023) Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico (+)
Francisco Ramirez, Jacqueline Reyes-Mendoza, And Their Minor Child B.R., v Hon. Daylene A. Marsh and David Paulino Padilla-Suazo Emergency petition for writ of superintending control to the New Mexico Supreme Court in a sexual assault case in which a state court judges ordered U visa applicant victims to turn over in criminal court discovery information contained in the victim’s VAWA confidentiality protected case in violation of federal law. NIWAP is being represented in this appeal by Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP; (June 27 2023)
[pdf] Workshop 3C – PowerPoint Presentation (August 2023) (+)
[pdf] Workshop 3B – PowerPoint Presentation (+)
Workshop 3B – PowerPoint Presentation
[pdf] Improving 8 U.S.C. 1367 VAWA Compliance and Avoiding Harm to Abused Spouses and Children in I-130 Family Based Visa Petition Cases and I-485 Family Based Adjustments (November 28, 2022) (+)
This memo proposes steps USCIS can take to fill gaps in VAWA confidentiality implementation in the context of Family based visa petition adjudications (I-130) and adjudication of lawful permanent resident applications (I-485) filed on behalf of noncitizen spouses. The goal is to ensure that USCIS adjudicators do not rely upon information provided by a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident spouse who is a perpetrator of domestic violence, battering or extreme cruelty to deny a noncitizen spouse’s application, particularly on the grounds of marriage fraud when the “evidence” of marriage fraud comes from the perpetrator. This type of outcome is exactly what Congress sought to avoid with VAWA confidentiality protections.
[pdf] Extending VAWA Confidentiality and 384 Protections to Special Immigrant Juvenile Status Eligible Immigrant Children (January 31, 2023) (+)
This memo submitted to the Council on Combatting Gender-Based Violence at DHS on January 31, 2023 discusses why SIJS children should receive the same VAWA confidentiality protections as all other immigrant survivors protected under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA).
[pdf] Legislative History of VAWA (94,00,05), T and U-Visas, Battered Spouse Waiver, and VAWA Confidentiality (January 5, 2023) (+)
This document recounts the legislative history of laws offering protection for victims of domestic violence sexual assault and human trafficking with a particular focus on the immigration relief developed by Congress to protect immigrant survivors.
[pdf] How to Argue or Rule on VAWA Confidentiality Protections in Discovery Involving Immigrant Survivors (November 18, 2022) (+)
Step-by-step guide for attorneys and judges on VAWA confidentiality and discovery with links to resources, tools, case law, Amicus Briefs, and sample bench briefs and motions.
[pdf] EEOC v. Dimare Ruskin Inc. (February 15, 2012) (+)
Entering a protective order on discovery into the claimants’ immigration status because “[t]he EEOC’s mission of protecting victims of employment discrimination would be hampered if potential victims are unwilling to come forward and cooperate because of fear of removal or other immigration consequences.”
[pdf] EEOC v. First Wireless Group Inc. (November 19, 2004) (+)
Upholding protective order on discovery into immigration status because such inquiries “would significantly discourage employees from bringing actions against their employers who engage in discriminatory employment practices.”
[pdf] EEOC v. Bice of Chicago (July 18, 2005) (+)
Entering a protective order prohibiting discovery into immigration status because “questions about immigration status are oppressive, they constitute a substantial burden on the parties and on the public interest and they would have a chilling effect on victims of employment discrimination from coming forward to assert discrimination claims.”
[pdf] Avila-Blum v. Casa De Cambio Delgado Inc. (May 16, 2006) (+)
Approving of the magistrate judge’s protective order prohibiting questions on immigration status during the plaintiff’s deposition and explaining that such questions could chill employment discrimination cases.
[pdf] Molnar v. Margaret W. Wong Assocs. Co. L.P.A. (April 22, 2021) (+)
The Court of Appeals found that in cases where the victim obtained the U visa and permanent resident status because of egregious legal malpractice committed by the victims’ former attorneys, defendants were entitled to obtain that information in order to prepare a defense. The Court observed that at the time the trial court ruled on […]
[pdf] Guillen v. B.J.C.R. LLC (March 31, 2022) (+)
In a motion to compel production of plaintiff’s immigration records, the Court found the U Visa information was relevant to plaintiff’s motive and potentially probative of fraud because plaintiff appeared to acknowledge the relevance of the documents as she agreed to request them from USCIS and produce them subject to a tailored protective order; Defendant's […]
[pdf] Camayo v. John Peroulis Sons Sheep Inc. (November 27, 2012) (+)
[pdf] Washington v. Horning Bros. LLC (May 14, 2018) (+)
The Court granted the Plaintiffs- Intervenors’ request for a protective order prohibiting discovery of their U visa immigration status. The Court weighed Plaintiffs-Intervenor’s fears for themselves and others of possible detention, removal, criminal prosecution, and job loss if forced to disclose U visa information. The Court held that the “[…] chilling effect, public policy concerns, […]
[pdf] Walsh v. Unforgettable Coatings, Inc. (August 23, 2022) (+)
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)action where the Court found that although Plaintiff has demonstrated good cause to limit the deposition of the Department of Labor’s Regional Coordinator for Workplace Crimes, defendants have the right to explore inconsistencies with plaintiff’s statements in regard to immigration applications on a limited basis. The Court found that the deposition […]
[pdf] What Judges, Attorneys, and Prosecutors Need to Know About How VAWA Confidentiality Impacts Discovery In Cases Involving Immigrant Survivors (October 14, 2022) (+)
Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) confidentiality offers federal immigration law protections enacted to prevent perpetrators from learning about, interfering with, and obtaining information contained in survivors’ victim-based applications for immigration relief (VAWA, Battered Spouse Waiver, U and T visa cases). The faculty (judge, former prosecutor, family lawyer) will discuss how courts, prosecutors and attorneys should […]
[pdf] Quick Reference Guide for Judges: VAWA Confidentiality and Discovery Related Case Law (October 25, 2022) (+)
Quick reference for judges on VAWA confidentiality case law that address how federal VAWA confidentiality laws impact state court discovery motions in criminal, civil and family court cases. All cases cited can also be found in NIWAP”s web library by searching the case name.
[pdf] DHS Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) Complaint Instructions for Violation Investigations (2021) (+)
Information about VAWA confidentiality provisions at the Department of Homeland Security and instructions for reporting a violation. Updated on 12/12/2021. For previous information about VAWA confidentiality complaints go to https://niwaplibrary.wcl.american.edu/pubs/conf-vawa-gov-dhscomplaintinstrts-2008
[pdf] OVW, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on the VAWA Confidentiality Provisions (34 U.S.C. Section 12291(b)(2)) (October 2017) (+)
FAQ discusses the VAWA confidentiality protections that apply to Office on Violence Against Women grantees and subgrantees including the requirement that grantees and subgrantees “covered” by the VAWA Confidentiality Provision must adhere to the requirements of that Provision; that is, they may not disclose, reveal, or release personally identifying information or individual information collected in connection with services requested, utilized, or denied through grantees’ and subgrantees’ programs, regardless of whether the information has been encoded, encrypted, hashed, or otherwise protected.
[pdf] USCIS Policy Manual Chapter 7 – Privacy and Confidentiality (March 23, 2022) (+)
USCIS Policy Manual discussing confidentiality and privacy which includes a discussion of VAWA confidentiality protections.
[pdf] Amicus Brief Matter of MA (March 23, 2020) Board of Immigration Appeals (+)
The amici submit this brief in support of Respondent (“Mr. M.A.”) seeking reversal of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (“EOIR”) immigration judge’s October 17, 2019 decision denying Mr. M.A’s petition for (a) Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”) cancellation of removal pursuant to Section 240A(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”); (b) asylum pursuant to Section 208 of the INA; (c) withholding of removal pursuant to Section 241(b)(3) of the INA; and (d) protection under the Convention Against Torture, pursuant to 8C.F.R.§1208.16. Amici specifically submit this brief requesting the Board of Immigration Appeal (“Board”) to remedy the flagrant and egregious violations of VAWA’s confidentiality provisions that occurred in Mr. M.A.’s detention and removal proceedings. The Board should remedy these violations by terminating the present removal proceedings— a measure envisioned by Congress when it renewed the VAWA legislation in 2005 (see infra Sections III, IV), or, in the alternative, by reversing and remanding this matter to a different immigration judge.
[pdf] Three Prongs of VAWA Confidentiality (December 15, 2021) (+)
A brochure summarizing the three prongs of VAWA confidentiality (Disclosure Limitations, Source Limitations, & Enforcement Limitations) for advocates and attorneys, including information on best practices and complaint instructions.
[pdf] Bench Card on Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) Confidentiality (December 3, 2021) (+)
An overview of federal immigration VAWA confidentiality laws for state family/civil court judges.
[pdf] DHS Council on Combating Violence Against Women Instruction 002-02-001 (March 15, 2013) (+)
This Instruction describes the scope, responsibilities, composition, membership, and operating instructions for the DHS Council on Violence Against Women. It’s responsibilities include implementation of VAWA and TVPA and assisting with VAWA confidentiality protections across DHS.
[pdf] DHS Directive 002-01 Council on Combatting Violence Against Women (March 14, 2013) (+)
This directive establishes the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Council on Combating Violence Against Women (“Council”) and its membership, and outlines the Council functions, coordination responsibilities, and operating procedures. Responsibilities of the Council include advancing knowledge and awareness throughout DHS about Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and Trafficking Victims Protection Act and compliance with the requirements of each of these laws.
[pdf] Pages 79-81 and 92 FOIA BSW Response 2017 384 VAWA Confidentiality Broadcast (February 9, 2016 & April 4, 2016) (+)
Notice to field offices reminding them about the VAWA confidentiality “384” computer system that notifies DHS officials about a victim’s cases receiving VAWA confidentiality protections. These memos also discuss interviewing battered spouse waiver applicants including interview approach and the importance of using only the “safe address” and taking care not to send information to the abuser.
[pdf] Pages 2-37 FOIA Battered Spouse Waiver Response 2017 District Office Training (2014) (+)
District field office training of officers that adjudicate interviews in VAWA self-petitioner adjustments of status to lawful permanent residency and battered spouse waiver cases. The training covers fraud detection at the VAWA Unit, VAWA confidentiality protections, VAWA unit training and data, requirements of I-485 interviews based on approved VAWA self-petitions, procedures that are to be followed if the District office wants to return a case to the VAWA Unit for revocation or further investigation, Common errors in return often stemming from District Officers following outdated regulations and not the statutory changes.
[pdf] FOIA USCIS Response to NIWAP’s FOIA on Battered Spouse Waiver Cases and Case Processing (August 25, 2017) (+)
This FOIA response discusses the application of VAWA confidentiality protections to battered spouse waiver and all VAWA cases; provides slides used to train on VAWA confidentiality and the rules that apply to district office staff adjudicating battered spouse waivers and VAWA adjustments of status applications for lawful permanent residency. These slides highlight the types of evidence that adjudicators cannot rely upon that come from the abuser under VAWA confidentiality law. It also discusses how many of the cases returned to the VAWA unit from district offices stems from reliance on regulations that were later overruled by subsequent VAWA statutes and have not been updated and highlight common returns that are errors. The training includes a copy of the 4.11.08 memo on adjustment of status for VAWA self-petitioners who are present without inspection. There are also documents discussing VAWA’s amendments designed to allow VAWA self-petitioners to remarry and the USCIS position on narrow implementation of the remarriage provisions. The materials provided in response to the FOIA provide detailed information in the form of emails, policies, and trainings warning adjudicators to not rely on perpetrator provided information in adjudicating VAWA self-petitions, adjustments or battered spouse waiver cases with good examples of the types of evidence that must be avoided, including not relying on perpetrator provided information in marriage based visa interviews. The policy discussing referrals from District offices for revocations for self-petitions is discussed. The response also included the memo on the 2 year custody and 2 year residency and custody exceptions for abused adopted children. Pages 1-57 of this FIOA response contain information applies primarily to VAWA self-petition or cases of abused adopted children.
Page 58 (Electronic page 72) of the response appears to be a check list of the types of evidence that may be fraud indicators or raise questions or lead to a request for further evidence (RFE) this appears to be self-petition related and it is not clear the extent to which it relates to battered spouse waiver cases.
Pages 59-61 and pp 88-91 directly related to battered spouse adjudications and provide direction on how District Office adjudicators are to respond when at an interview for a jointly filed request to remove conditions a battered spouse/child request to file a battered spouse waiver. These communications recognize the VAWA confidentiality implications in processing these requests. Pages 70-73 provide the formal interim process from changing from a joint petition to a battered spouse waiver.
Pages 62 -67, also provided on pages 82-87. Directly discuss battered spouse waiver adjudications with VAWA Unit staff providing examples the types of questions VAWA unit trained staff use in requests for further evidence (RFE) on the following topic proof of: extreme cruelty; battering (physical abuse); good faith marriage, residence with abusive spouse/parent. There is also included RFE language describing that marital tensions are not necessarily abuse. The materials also describe the three main reasons why battered spouse waiver adjudicators send cases to an interview at a field office. Any credible evidence rules are described and an explanation of Battering or Extreme Cruelty from Chapter 25 of the Adjudicators Field Manual is included. Page 92 also addresses similar issues.
Pages 76-78 set out the standard operating procedures (S)OP) used by District offices processing VAWA cases addressing both battered spouse waiver cases and VAWA self-petitions adjustments of status to lawful permanent residency. The SOP discusses interviews, the timing of interviews and the involvement of supervisors. It also discusses having a VAWA Point of Contact at the field office and their role. This SOP recognizes that some VAWA cases will be identified during an interview and any such cases are to be referred to the VAWA POC in the field office. This policy took effect August 1, 2011.
Pages 79-81 discuss the creation of the “384” code of admission notifying DHS staff that a case has VAWA confidentiality protection. It is interesting to note that no mention of battered spouse waivers are a case type is included in these communications despite VAWA 2005 defining battered spouse waivers as VAWA self-petitioners.
[pdf] IIRAIRA Legislative History Conference Report (September 24, 1996) (+)
Includes preservation of VAWA self-petitioning, creation of VAWA cancellation of removal, creating VAWA confidentiality requirements, and exempting battered immigrants from deeming (see pp 32, 49, 108-109, 129-130, 139, 150 for statutory text and pp 208, 214, 231, and 238 for legislative history). Included battered spouse waiver, VAWA self-petitioners and VAWA suspension of deportation in VAWA confidentiality protections. IIRAIRA is the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.
[pdf] Evolution of the Battered Spouse Waiver Protections and Related VAWA Confidentiality Protections (February 6, 2017) (+)
This tool tracks the legislative development of the battered spouse waiver in 1990 through the provisions that became law under the Violence Against Women Act that directly impact protections for battered spouse waiver applicants.
[pdf] Unconditional Safety for Conditional Immigrant Women (January 31, 1996) (+)
Article detailing the legislative history of family based immigration in the United States, the marriage fraud act amendments in 1986, battered spouse waivers in 1990, VAWA self petitioning in 1994, the VAWA any credible evidence rules of 1994, and the need for VAWA confidentiality that became law in 1996.
[pdf] Legal Issues Confronting Conditional Residents Aliens Who Are Victims of Domestic Violence: Past, Present and Future Perspectives (1995) (+)
Article discusses the legislative history and implementation of the Battered Spouse Waiver, the problems with the regulations developed to implement the program, and the legislative solutions that were being developed in 1994 to address these problems. This includes a discussion of the creation of VAWA’s any credible evidence rules and the need for the VAWA self-petition. The article documents the legislative history of the Battered Spouse Waiver, the VAWA self-petition, VAWA’s any credible evidence rules and describes the need for what ultimately became VAWA’s confidentiality protections.
[pdf] VAWA Confidentiality Protections, Courthouse Enforcement, and Sensitive Locations Policies at a Glance (December 27, 2021) (+)
This tool assists judges, courts and attorneys in determining the applicability of VAWA confidentiality protections, DHS policies on protected areas, and DHS courthouse enforcement policies to cases involving immigrant survivors of crime and abuse, particularly victims of domestic violence, child abuse, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking and any U visa covered criminal activity. It assists courts in designing court orders including protection orders and visitation exchange and helps attorneys and victim advocates safety plan.
[pdf] Quick Reference: VAWA Confidentiality Protections: Quoting Statutes, Regulations and DHS Policies (June 12, 2021) (+)
This documents provides a quick reference for judges on federal Violence Against Women Act VAWA immigration confidentiality laws listing quotes from the statute, legislative history, regulations and U.S. Department of Homeland Security policies. It concludes with a discussion of DHS VAWA confidentiality procedures and complaint process for violations of this federal statute.
[pdf] Discovery and Use of Immigration Information in Court Checklist (2019) (+)
This tool was developed by the Center for Judicial Education and Research, Judicial Branch of California as a bench card for judges.
[pdf] Rivera v NIBCO Inc (April 13, 2004) (+)
Protective order issued regarding immigration status.
[pdf] Guardado v. State (2015) (+)
Immigration status alone does not reflect on an individual’s character and is not admissible for impeachment purposes.
[pdf] Diaz Silvas v Horning Brothers Order Granting Protective Order (2018) (+)
Protective order barring U visa discovery granted.
[pdf] DHS Disclosure of Section 1367 Information to National Security Officials for National Security Purposes Instruction (11/7/13) (+)
This DHS Instruction implements the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Directive 215-01, Disclosure of Section 1367 Information to National Security Officials for National Security Purposes Title 8, United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 1367(b)(8), with respect to the disclosure of any information related to applicants for or beneficiaries of T Visa, U Visa or Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) protections (“Section 1367 information”) for National Intelligence (including Foreign Intelligence and Counterintelligence) purposes to elements of the Intelligence Community or for counterterrorism purposes to elements of the Intelligence Community, other Federal departments and agencies, and foreign government entities. Includes a required standard warning that is to accompany all releases of information on the last page of the instruction.
[pdf] DHS Disclosure of Section 1367 Information to National Security Officials for National Security Purposes Directive (11/6/2013) (+)
This DHS Directive serves as the principal reference for disclosing any information related to applicants for or beneficiaries of T Visa, U Visa, or Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) protections (“Section 1367 information”) for National Intelligence (including Foreign Intelligence and Counterintelligence) purposes to elements of the Intelligence Community or for counterterrorism purposes to elements of […]
[pdf] DHS Disclosure of Section 1367 Information to Law Enforcement Officials For Legitimate Law Enforcement Purposes (June 18, 2016) (+)
This DHS Instruction implements the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Directive 002-02 with respect to the disclosure to Law Enforcement Officials for legitimate Law Enforcement Purposes any information relating to applicants for or beneficiaries of T nonimmigrant status applications (“T visa”), U nonimmigrant status petitions (“U visa”), or applications for immigration relief under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) (“Section 1367 Information”). Title 8, United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 1367(a)(2),(b)(2). Includes a required standard warning that must be included with any release of information to law enforcement regarding the obligation to continue to not release the information to other persons.
[pdf] DHS The Council on Combating Violence Against Women Instruction (3/15/2013) (+)
This DHS Instruction implements the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Directive 002-01, The Council on Combating Violence Against Women (“Council”) and its
membership, and outlines the Council functions, coordination responsibilities, and operating procedures. The Council focuses on advancing overall compliance with, and knowledge about, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (VTVPA), subsequent reauthorizations of those laws, and related immigration laws and issues, and the provision of training and resources to stakeholders and the public as appropriate.
[pdf] DHS Council on Combating Violence Against Women Directive (3/14/2013) (+)
This directive establishes the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Council on Combating Violence Against Women (“Council”) and its membership, and outlines the Council functions, coordination responsibilities, and operating procedures. The Council focuses on advancing overall knowledge of and compliance with the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (VTVPA), subsequent reauthorizations of those laws, and related immigration laws and issues, as well as the provision of training and resources to
stakeholders and the public as appropriate.
[pdf] DHS – Delegation of Authority to Issues Guidance and Implement VAWA Confidentiality 8 USC 1367 (September 23, 2013) (+)
This Delegation vests the authority described herein in the DHS Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. delegate to the Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties the authority to provide DHS-wide guidance and oversight on the implementation of 8 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1367 confidentiality and prohibited source provisions (relating to applicants for and
beneficiaries of Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), T visa, or U visa protections) in accordance with policies and procedures established by implementing departmental Directives or Instructions.
[pdf] New York Courts OCA Directive (April 17, 2019) (+)
This document is for educational use only. Protocol Governing Activities in Courthouses by Law Enforcement Agencies
[pdf] Rivera v NIBCO Inc (April 13, 2004) (+)
This document is for educational use only. In this case, the Magistrate judge entered protective order precluding the employer from using the discovery process to inquire into the plaintiffs’ immigration status, and the employer sought reconsideration. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denied reconsideration, and the employer brought an interlocutory […]
[pdf] US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v SOL Mexican Grill LLC (June 11, 2019) (+)
The Court found that Defendants’ Reply and attached exhibit contain improper evidence of what was said and done during the EEOC’s conciliation with Defendants. By statute, such information cannot be used as evidence in this lawsuit. Defendants’ Reply in Support of its partial Motion to Dismiss remains sealed at this point.
[pdf] Diaz Silvas v. Horning Brothers ORDER GRANTING PO (May 14, 2018) (+)
This document is for educational use only. ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL AND GRANTING PLAINTIFFS INTERVENORS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
[pdf] Memorandum on People v. Alvarez (March 15, 2019) (+)
This document is for educational use only. The decision did not discuss or pointed out how the defendant knew the victim had applied for a U visa. The decision held that the exclusion of u visa evidence was constitutional and within the court’s discretion. However, VAWA confidentiality is not discussed or presented as an argument before the court.
[pdf] US v. Locascio (October 8, 1993) (+)
In this case, the court found that the prosecution was not in possession of information acquired by federal agencies uninvolved in the state’s investigation or trial.
[pdf] US v. Brown (October 28, 2003) (+)
The court found that the defendant’s right to confront witnesses was not violated when he was denied access to the witness’s immigration file and was not allowed to call an expert witness regarding the unusual immigration circumstances of the witness. The court found that the cross-examination of the witness sufficiently addressed bias/motive.
[pdf] State v. Buccheri-Bianca (October 30, 2013) (+)
In this case, the court found that the trial court did not err in excluding the immigration status of the victims because it found that the possible grant of a U visa was not the motivation for the disclosure of the crime and therefore, was irrelevant.
[pdf] Guardado v. State (October 14, 2015) (+)
This document is for educational use only. This case is related to the State court decisions that is addressing defense counsel’s use of lack of immigration status and/or pursuing immigration relief during cross-examination. In this case, the court found that the trial judge properly limited the scope of the cross-examination of the victim about her […]
[pdf] Cazorla v. Koch Foods of Mississippi – 5th Cir ( February 27, 2017) (+)
Federal court decision addressing discoverability of the U Visa certification, the U Visa case file, the VAWA self-petition case file, and other application materials that are protected by VAWA confidentiality.
[pdf] Briggs v. Hedgpeth- 9th Cir ( October 7, 2014) (+)
This document is for educational use only. The case found that it was erroneous to preclude the defense from asking about U visa benefits that were offered to the victim, but also found that it was a harmless error because there was substantial evidence of the crime.
[pdf] Briggs v Hedgpeth – Order Denying Writ of Habeas Corpus (March 19, 2013) (+)
This document is for educational use only. The case found that it was erroneous to preclude the defense from asking about U visa benefits that were offered to the victim, but also found that it was a harmless error because there was substantial evidence of the crime.
[pdf] DHS: Privacy Compliance Review of the Privacy Incidents Affecting Individuals Protected by Section 1367 (February 4, 2019) (+)
This is a report produced by DHS that review compliance with VAWA Confidentiality (8 U.S.C. 1367). It discusses many of the DHS and USCIS policies on VAWA confidentiality, but interestingly did not discover or recognize the two ICE VAWA confidentiality implementation policies that were issued in January of 2007. The appendix to the report includes most of the DHS policies implementing VAWA confidentiality are required by statute in VAWA 2005.
[pdf] State v. Marroquin-Aldana (2014) (+)
Access to the U visa certification sufficient giving the defendant opportunity to cross examine. The U visa immigration case file is not discoverable.
[pdf] Hawke vs. U.S. (U.S. District Ct. 2008) (+)
This case concluded that VAWA Confidentiality protects all cases unless it’s denied on the merits. The 6th Amendment right to compulsory process does not permit access to absolutely privileged information, and judicial exception applies to appeal victim’s immigration case, not state family, civil, or criminal cases.
[pdf] Demaj v. Sakaj (March 18, 2013) (+)
The case found that seeking VAWA confidentiality protected information through custody case discovery is barred by federal statute, and VAWA confidentiality applies even when the victim disclosed that their crime victim related immigration case was approved.
[pdf] October 2017 Newsletter (+)
In this issue: – VAWA Confidentiality and Protections for Immigrant Victims of Domestic Violence webinar announcement – Upcoming training announcement/access
[pdf] November 2016 Newsletter (+)
In this issue:
– VAWA Confidentiality Training
– New Orleans Conference December 2016
– NIWAP National Directory Updates
[pdf] May 3, 2018 Newsletter (+)
In this issue: – NIWAP releases national survey on increased immigration enforcement on immigrant crime victims – Offer to help with VAWA Confidentiality vouchers
[pdf] December 2016 Newsletter- HUD Provides Public and Assisted Housing Benefits for VAWA Self-Petitioners (+)
This newsletter contains a link to resources from the New Orleans Conference as well as discusses public and assisted housing for VAWA self-petitioners.
[pdf] VAWA Confidentiality Newsletter (January 2015) (+)
A newsletter with detailed information on VAWA Confidentiality and its protections for immigrant survivors as well as the type of immigrants eligible for VAWA Confidentiality disclosure limitations.
[pdf] Anticipating and Protecting Immigrant Survivors’ Privacy Interests (December 2016) (+)
Slides from workshop presentation.
[pdf] VAWA Confidentiality and Criminal Cases: How Prosecutors Should Respond to Discovery Attempts for Protected Information (July 24, 2017) (+)
This tool for prosecutors discusses best practices for prosecutors in responding to discovery requests from criminal defendants requesting information contained in the victim’s immigration case. The case could be a U visa, a VAWA self-petition or a T visa case and the discovery obligations turn on federal statutory VAWA confidentiality requirements and what is in the prosecutors possession. Generally only in U visas is the certification discoverable and not the full U visa case file. In other cases where there has been no certification, no part of the victim’s immigration case file would be discoverable.
[pdf] VAWA-Confidentiality-History-Purpose-and-Violations (+)
Chapter in Empowering Survivors: Legal Rights of Immigrant Victims of Sexual Assault. This chapter contains detailed legislative history on the development and evolution of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) confidentiality protections under U.S. immigration laws. VAWA’s immigration confidentiality protections accomplish three objectives: 1) preventing DHS, DOJ and the U.S. State Department from relying on information provided by a perpetrator or the perpetrator’s family member to harm victims; 2) barring the release by government officials of information about the existence of, actions taken in, or materials contained in a VAWA confidentiality protected case file; and 3) establishing a list of protected locations at which immigration enforcement actions in cases involving immigrant crime victims are not to take place. This chapter discusses each of these protections in detail and includes statutory and legislative history, regulations and government policies implementing VAWA confidentiality protections. This chapter also contains a discussion of sanctions applicable to DHS, DOJ, and State Department officials when VAWA confidentiality violations occur.
[pdf] VAWA Confidentiality and Breaches (2013) (+)
Battered immigrant women relay extremely sensitive and private information to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS, formerly INS)3 when seeking immigration relief. A batterer in possession of any of this information might use it to locate the battered immigrant spouse and her children and harm them. If he becomes aware that she is seeking immigration status independently of him or planning on leaving him, he might try to seek revenge and might contact the immigration authorities in an attempt to undermine her case or have her deported. For these reasons, confidentiality rules can serve as a potentially lifesaving protection for the victim and her children. A manual of confidentiality and breaches of confidentiality.
[pdf] VAWA Confidentiality and Criminal Cases: How Prosecutors Should Respond to Discovery Attempts for Protected Information (+)
This tool for prosecutors discusses best practices for prosecutors in responding to discovery requests from criminal defendants requesting information contained in the victim’s immigration case. The case could be a U visa, a VAWA self-petition or a T visa case and the discovery obligations turn on federal statutory VAWA confidentiality requirements and what is in the prosecutors possession. Generally only in U visas is the certification discoverable and not the full U visa case file. In other cases where there has been no certification, no part of the victim’s immigration case file would be discoverable.
[pdf] Sample Amicus Curiae Brief VAWA Confidentiality and Family Court Discovery (2011) (+)
Sample redacted brief on VAWA Confidentiality opposing state family court discovery motions. 2011
[pdf] Amicus Curiae Brief of Legal Momentum, Sanctuary for Families, and NIWAP (2012) (+)
Amicus Brief filed by Legal Momentum opposing criminal court discovery of VAWA confidentiality protection information contained in federal immigration case file.
[pdf] VAWA Confidentiality Courtroom Scenario (+)
Case Scenario for VAWA Confidentiality Training.
[pdf] State Confidentiality Statutes (+)
[pdf] DHS ICE Field Officer Policy VAWA Confidentiality (1.22.2007) (+)
[pdf] DHS ICE-OPLA-VAWA-2005-Confidentiality Implementation (2.1.2007) (+)
OPLA VAWA Confidentiality and VAWA 2005 implementing policy.
[pdf] DHS U Visa Regulations- VAWA Confidentiality (September 17, 2007) (+)
VAWA confidentiality regulations and preamble included in the U visa regulations 2007. See electronic pages 3, 14, 15, and 27. Search for “1367”.
[pdf] DOJ Immigration Judge VAWA Confidentiality Guidance (1997) (+)
VAWA Confidentiality protections applicable in immigration court proceedings.
[pdf] VAWA Confidentiality and the Courts Part II (Judicial Multi-State Training – Albuquerque) (+)
[pdf] The 2005 Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act: Why Congress Acted to Expand Protections to Immigrant Victims (+)
A brief history of the Violence Against Women Act and congressional intent that lead to the expanded legal protections for immigrant crime victims in the 2005 reauthorization written by Representative John Conyers, Jr.
Oct. 26, 2018: Jackson MS “Mississippi Trial and Appellate Judges Conference (Judicial Training Network)”
SJI and Judicial Training Network Training Materials[1] Mississippi Trial and Appellate Judges Conference Jackson, Mississippi October 26, 2018 Also see our full library of SJI supported materials for courts at www.niwap.org/go/sji To receive updates, sign up for NIWAP’s outreach list. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Z6373LX You can elect NIWAP’s general outreach list to receive notices of trainings, webinars, […]
[pdf] Training Michigan Judicial Institute – VAWA Confidentiality Discovery and Courthouse Enforcement (+)
[pdf] Best Practices In State Court Cases: Special Immigrant Juvenile Status and Violence Against Women Act Confidentiality (+)
[pdf] VAWA Confidentiality Complaint Process at DHS Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) (2018) (+)
This flow chart describes the process that the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties uses to process VAWA confidentiality complaints.
[pdf] Harvard 2018: Advocacy in Times of Crisis (+)
This panel at the Harvard Immigration Project Symposium covered how an immigrant crime victim’s ability to seek help or participate in the justice system can be impacted in times of increased immigration enforcement. It also discussed deportation and removal protections for crime victims and witnesses under laws such as VAWA Confidentiality and the ICE Courthouse […]