Microsoft Word - Maryam Note Publication FINAL.docx COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF RACE AND LAW VOL. 13 June 2023 NO. 1 NOTE AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE? RESTRUCTURING VAWA’S FUNDING STRUCTURE TO CREATE RACIAL AND GENDER EQUITY Maryam Asenuga* “Because young Black women . . . are depicted not as frightened, pregnant adolescents who are . . . abused by men . . . but as criminal defendants . . . it is virtually impossible for the mainstream public, their communities, or their potential advocates to understand their vulnerability or to respond accordingly.”1 This Note analyzes the funding priorities of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), and how the law’s egregious funding of prosecutors, enforcement agencies, officers, and courts directly impacts Black female survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV). Although VAWA was passed in 1994 to serve as a federal remedy for women subjected to IPV, over 85% of current VAWA’s funding supports law enforcement, prosecutors, and the overall criminal legal system. This directly harms Black women due to this community’s historically negative relationship with the legal system. Additionally, Black women subjected to abuse are also uniquely impacted by VAWA’s emphasis on punitive measures and enforcement due to their overrepresentation amongst IPV survivors. This Note will advance the argument by investigating three grant programs under VAWA. * J.D. Candidate 2023, Columbia Law School. The author would like to thank Professor Daniel Richman for his guidance and the staff of Columbia Journal of Race and Law for their meaningful editorial assistance. 1 BETH E. RICHIE, ARRESTED JUSTICE: BLACK WOMEN, VIOLENCE, AND AMERICA’S PRISON NATION 7 (1st ed. 2012) (emphasis added) (finding that Black women subjected to gendered violence face particular peril because race, gender, and culture are missing from the discussions surrounding punitive policies as a solution to gendered violence). 854 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 Introduction ................................................................................................ 856 I. History and Subsequent Treatment of Violence Against Women .... 860 A. The Conditions That Led to VAWA’s Enactment ...................... 860 1. Historical Climate and the Battered Women’s Movement ............................................................................. 860 a. The Effects of IPV on Women Were Often Ignored ....................................................................... 861 b. The Battered Women’s Movement Encouraged Recognition of IPV and Brought Remedies for Victims ....................................................................... 861 c. Anti-IPV Reformers Shifted their Focus to the Criminal Legal System to Reduce IPV .................... 863 B. Black Women and the Criminal Legal System .......................... 864 1. Slavery as the Historical Origins of the Relationship between Black Women and the Legal System and its Effects ................................................................................... 864 2. Punitive Policies as Causes of Black Women’s Vilification by the Legal System ......................................... 865 3. The Discriminatory Mythologies Held by Legal Actors and Officers about Black Women ........................................ 867 4. Black Women’s Distrust of the Criminal Legal System .... 868 5. VAWA Endorsed a Clear Federal Preference for a Carceral Response to IPV .................................................... 869 C. VAWA’s Funding Structure, Relevant Agencies, and Grant Programs ...................................................................................... 870 1. VAWA’s Legislative History and Purpose .......................... 870 2. VAWA’s Current Funding Structure and Procedures ....... 871 3. The Procedural Mechanics of VAWA’s Grant Programs ... 873 II. Examining the Relationship between VAWA’s Grant Programs and Black Female Survivors .............................................................. 874 A. VAWA’s STOP Grant Program ................................................... 875 1. Statutory Purpose and Procedural Explanation of the STOP Grant Program .......................................................... 875 2. STOP Contributes to Harmful Outcomes for Black Female Victims and Survivors ............................................ 876 a. The Punitive Consequences for Black Women Who Use Self-Defense in IPV Disputes ................... 876 b. STOP’s Effects on the Black Community ................ 878 c. The Outcomes of STOP’s Victim-Centered Services ...................................................................... 880 d. Additional Inefficiencies of the STOP Program ...... 881 e. The Effect of Criminalization on Deterring Abuse ......................................................................... 882 B. The Funding Differences between VAWA’s Improving Criminal Justice Responses Program and Culturally Specific Services Program ........................................................... 882 1. The Disparate Number of Victims Served between ICJR and CSSP .................................................................... 884 III. The Fiscal Road to Racial and Gender Equity .................................. 886 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 855 A. Restructuring the Current Funding Distributions of STOP, ICJR, and CSSP is Necessary to Mitigate the Inequities Exacerbated by VAWA ................................................................ 887 1. Restructuring VAWA’s Funding Priorities Best Serves the Intent and Purpose of VAWA ........................... 887 2. Congress Is Best Suited to Restructure VAWA’s Current Funding Structure ................................................. 888 3. Potential Difficulties that Congress May Face in Announcing a Restructured VAWA .................................... 889 B. A Legislative Change Should Be Reasonable Within the Context of VAWA ......................................................................... 889 1. Funding Changes Proposed for the STOP Program .......... 889 2. Funding Changes Proposed for the ICJR and CSSP Programs .............................................................................. 890 C. Victim-Centered Services that Could Improve the Status of Black Women Subjected to Abuse ........................................... 890 1. Economic Security Programs to Aid Black Women Subjected to Abuse ............................................................... 891 2. Housing as a Major Provision to Aid Black Female Survivors .............................................................................. 892 IV. Conclusion ........................................................................................... 892 856 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 INTRODUCTION In 2009, Tiffany Wright, a Black girl was shot in the head and killed while she waited at a high school bus stop.2 At the time, Wright was eight months pregnant.3 The police told reporters that they believed the shooting arose from a domestic dispute between Wright and her adoptive brother, Royce Mitchell.4 Previously, Wright had accused Mitchell of raping her, which her foster mother reported to the Department of Social Services and the police before Wright’s death.5 Despite the severity of these allegations and the Wright’s age, investigators did not interview Wright until a month after the initial report.6 The police did not meet with Mitchell until the day of Wright’s death, when Mitchell was arrested and charged with statutory rape and taking indecent liberties with a minor.7 At Mitchell’s bond hearing, the defense attorney vilified Wright and diminished her credibility by focusing on the victim’s sexual history.8 Ultimately, in 2021, the District Attorney dropped Mitchell’s rape charge.9 This is a result known all too well by Black women.10 Indeed, for Black female victims and survivors11 who have experienced intimate partner violence (IPV),12 the criminal legal system either ignores the violence against this community13 or criminalizes Black women for defending themselves against the violence that they have experienced.14 2 JournalNow Staff, Dropped Sex Charges In Dead Teen's Case Upset Police, WINSTON-SALEM J., https://journalnow.com/dropped-sex-charges-in-dead-teens-case-upset- police/article_41db29b3-fb02-51d5-90fd-da1cf0dddd3a.html [https://perma.cc/C2RT-WN84] (last updated Apr. 16, 2021). 3 Id. 4 Id. 5 Id. 6 Id. 7 Id. 8 Id. 9 Id. 10 See generally Michael Pinard, Race Decriminalization and Criminal Legal System Reform, 95 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 119, 131 (2020) (recognizing how the criminal legal system at “each stage of the system, from policing practices to the impact of criminal records, will continue to harm Black……women…”). 11 This Note will use the language of “victims and survivors” in reference to women, alive or deceased, subjected to abuse. Also, while it is evident that intimate partner violence crosses all racial, social, economic, and political lines, this Note focuses specifically on Black women due to the unique relationship Black women have historically shared with IPV and the criminal legal system, which receives the majority of VAWA’s funding. This Note uses Black women loosely to refer to all women-identifying people of African descent. However, it is important reiterate that intimate partner violence affects all communities. The rate of violence against Native women is 37.5%. Similarly, 23.4% of Latinx women and 41–60% of Asian Pacific Island women have been subjected to intimate partner violence. 12 This Note generally uses “intimate partner violence” or IPV to describe the phenomenon of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking perpetrated by a current or former intimate partner or spouse. 13 See generally Mario L. Barnes, Black Women's Stories and the Criminal Law: Restating the Power of Narrative, 39 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 941, 968-980 (2006) (noting the criminal legal stories of Black women who were ignored by prosecutors and other legal actors and were rendered “invisible”). 14 See Kali Nicole Gross, African American Women, Mass Incarceration, and the Politics of Protection, 102 J. AM. HIST. 25, 25 (2015) (discussing how racial and gender discrimination contributes to the disproportionate incarceration of Black women who defend themselves against their abusers). 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 857 Wright’s case illustrates a significant consequence Black female survivors face in their interactions with the legal system—the lack of effective protection. Individuals and activists are now proposing that resources aimed at reducing violence against women15 be shifted away from prosecutors and police officers because of the racial and gender inequities that the legal system exacerbates.16 One central area of focus for these activists is the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which is the first federal law to classify IPV as a crime and establishes structural remedies for survivors.17 As VAWA is currently up for its fourth reauthorization in Congress and was approved by the House in March 2021,18 civil rights activists have criticized the law’s disproportionate funding of the criminal legal system.19 As the first federal law to sanction penalties for IPV,20 VAWA reveals a close relationship with the criminal legal system.21 In reference to VAWA’s substantial funding of law enforcement, prosecution, and incarceration to address IPV, Leigh Goodmark, an expert in domestic violence policies, stated, “For the last thirty years, the United States has relied primarily on one tool to combat intimate partner violence—the criminal legal system.”22 This Note argues that a revised appropriations bill under VAWA which shifts funding away from the legal system and to culturally-specific 15 This Note focuses on IPV specifically against women because women have been found to be most at risk of victimization. Women make up 85% of IPV victims. However, it is evident that intimate partner violence affects people of all genders, gender identities, and gender expressions. 16 See Francesca Willow, What is Abolition Feminism, What Is Carceral Feminism & What Could a World Without Prisons Look Like?, ETHICAL UNICORN (Mar. 26, 2021), https://ethicalunicorn.com/2021/03/26/what-is-abolition-feminism-what-is-carceral- feminism-what-could-a-world-without-prisons-look-like/ [https://perma.cc/Y34C-BRE4] (discussing Abolition Feminism as an alternative to policing and prison systems to combat gender-based violence); see also Leigh Goodmark, The Violence Against Women Act Is Unlikely To Reduce Intimate Partner Violence – Here’s Why, THE CONVERSATION (Oct. 17, 2018) [hereinafter Goodmark, Violence Against Women Act], https://theconversation.com/ the-violence-against-women-act-is-unlikely-to-reduce-intimate-partner-violence-heres-why- 103734 [https://perma.cc/L4LS-CCUK] (the author expresses that they “believe that [the Violence Against Women Act] still relies too heavily on the criminal system” and “doesn’t do enough to address the causes of intimate partner violence”). 17 Id. 18 Susan Davis, House Renews Violence Against Women Act, But Senate Hurdles Remain, NPR (Mar. 17, 2021), https://www.npr.org/2021/03/17/977842441/house-renews- violence-against-women-act-but-senate-hurdles-remain [https://perma.cc/E68R-5FVG]. 19 See Leigh Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA: Why Criminalization Is a Failed Policy and What a Non-Carceral VAWA Could Look Like, 27 VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 84, 92 (2021) [hereinafter Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA] (“For over 25 years, VAWA has dedicated significant resources to criminalizing intimate partner violence—in essence, to encourage police and prosecutors to do things that were already required by law. That funding has not resulted in lower rates of intimate partner violence, has not deterred intimate partner violence, and has had serious consequences, both intended and unintended, for the people whose lives it has affected.”). 20 34 U.S.C. § 12291(a)(12). 21 See generally LISA N. SACCO, THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT (VAWA): HISTORICAL OVERVIEW, FUNDING, AND REAUTHORIZATION, CONG. RSCH. SERV. 12 (2019) (“The fundamental goals of VAWA are to prevent violent crime; respond to the needs of crime victims; learn more about crime; and change public attitudes through a collaborative effort by the criminal justice system.”). 22 LEIGH GOODMARK, DECRIMINALIZING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 1 (Claire M. Renzetti ed., 2018) [hereinafter GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE]. 858 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 victim programs, economic and housing programs, is necessary to target the pressing needs of Black female survivors. The ongoing Congressional debates regarding VAWA make now an opportune time to investigate VAWA’s funding priorities and the effects its interventions have on Black female survivors. VAWA’s emphasis on enforcement is demonstrated by VAWA’s two largest grant programs, the Services, Training, Officers, and Prosecutors Grant Program (STOP) and the Improving Criminal Justice Responses Program (ICJR).23 This Note will examine these two programs, in addition to providing an analysis of the Culturally Specific Services Program (CSSP).24 This analysis will demonstrate that VAWA harms Black women because the law’s two largest grant programs strengthen the legal system that has criminalized Black female survivors, and this enforcement focus is compounded by the inattention to the needs of Black female survivors. Who is VAWA’s funding structure working for, and whom is it working against? Black women are impacted by VAWA’s focus on criminal enforcement because they make up a disproportionately high number of IPV victims.25 IPV disputes increased across the country during the COVID-19 pandemic, “18% in San Antonio, 22% in Portland, Ore.; and 10% in New York City”, but the IPV rates dramatically increased to 50% or higher for women of color.26 However, Black women face 2.5 times the rate of violence of other women of color.27 IPV is one of the leading causes of death for Black women ages fifteen to thirty-five.28 Although Black women make up only 7% of the general population, they account for 22% of IPV- related homicides.29 Additionally, 45% of Black women have experienced IPV.30 These shocking statistics are partly due to the fact that Black women’s intersectionality leaves them vulnerable to IPV.31 Recognizing the 23 SACCO, supra note 21, at 12 (an overview of the appropriations and set-asides for the STOP and ICJR programs that this Note relies heavily on). 24 Id. 25 See Maya Finoh & Jasmine Sankofa, The Legal System Has Failed Black Girls, Women, and Non-Binary Survivors of Violence, ACLU (Jan. 28, 2019), https://www.aclu.org/news/racial-justice/legal-system-has-failed-black-girls-women-and-non [https://perma.cc/SH7S-DDRE] (explaining that “Black girls, women, and non-binary people are hyper-vulnerable to abuse” including rape, homicide, and sexual and domestic violence). 26 Jeffrey Kluger, Domestic Violence Is a Pandemic Within the COVID-19 Pandemic, TIME (Feb 3. 2021), https://time.com/5928539/domestic-violence-covid-19/ [https://perma.cc/S6EZ-5289]. 27 N. Jamiyla Chisholm, COVID-19 Creates Added Danger for Women in Homes With Domestic Violence, COLORLINES (Mar. 27, 2020), https://colorlines.com/article/covid-19- creates-added-danger-women-homes-domestic-violence/ [https://perma.cc/SXX6-CMME]. 28 Feminista Jones, Why Black Women Struggle More with Domestic Violence, TIME (Sept. 10, 2014), https://time.com/3313343/ray-rice-black-women-domestic-violence/ [https://perma.cc/PT82-2A9U]. 29 Id. 30 Stephanie Hargrove, Intimate Partner Violence in the Black Community, THE NAT’L WOMEN CTR. ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IN THE BLACK CMTY. (Oct. 2018), https://ujimacommunity.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Intimate-Partner-Violence-IPV- v9.4.pdf [https://perma.cc/S4SU-EGSC]. 31 See Katherine Hilson, The Intersectionality of Domestic Abuse: Law Enforcement Barriers Black Women Face, CRIMRXIV (Nov. 16, 2020), https://www.crimrxiv.com/ pub/05op0xl6/release/1?readingCollection=e3ec78b4 [https://perma.cc/8VBU-G3VZ] 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 859 impact of intersectionality is helpful in understanding how the relationship between IPV and criminal legal enforcement creates harm to Black women. Coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw, intersectionality is an analytical framework for understanding how the interconnected nature of one’s identities creates overlapping and interdependent forms of discrimination.32 Black women’s race, class, and gender combine to create compounding oppressions, which increase Black women’s disproportionate exposure to IPV.33 Black female survivors are then detrimentally affected by VAWA’s governmental responses to IPV because they continue to perpetuate criminalization and disenfranchisement.34 For example, evidence has demonstrated that Black female victims are prosecuted and incarcerated at higher rates when they decide to defend themselves during IPV disputes.35 This occurs because Black women’s racial and gender identities have led to stereotypes that deem Black women as violent aggressors who must be punished. It is imperative to analyze VAWA’s current funding structure in a broader intersectional framework to create an approach that effectively prevents and reduces IPV. By investigating the interaction between VAWA’s grant programs and Black women, this Note serves to create a path forward for an amended funding structure that effectively serves all women subjected to intimate partner violence. This intersectional approach will improve the law’s ability to prevent and reduce violence. This approach is crucial because if women subjected to abuse are injured rather than aided by a law specifically intended to address IPV, the law is not working in accord with its purpose. VAWA, the vehicle of alleged assistance, has been tainted and may have been tainted from its very origin. This Note will proceed in three parts. Part I will review the historical prevalence of violence against women, the evolution of the public and legal responses to IPV, and the relationship between Black women and (“[O]ppressive structures of race, class, and gender limit the alternatives [Black] women have to resolve domestic encounters and negotiate the institutional challenges they face . . .”). 32 Kimberlé Crenshaw, Mapping The Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, And Violence Against Women Of Color, 43 STAN. L. REV. 1241, 1244 (1991). 33 Id. at 1242 (“[T]he violence that many women experience is often shaped by other dimensions of their identities, such as race and class.”). 34 See generally Abigail Higgins & Olúfémi O. Táíwò, How the Violence Against Women Act Failed Women, THE NATION (Mar. 3, 2021), https://www.thenation.com/article/society/violence-against-women-act/ [https://perma.cc/ 68FG-562G] (“[Black women] who do not fit the imagined profile of the right victim (because they are the wrong race, gender, sexual orientation, or even age) report facing exclusion, hostility, and mockery when they attempt to get help from . . . the very same formal institutions supported legally and financially to address the problem by laws like VAWA.”). 35 See generally Jane Coaston, A Black Woman Shot And Killed Her Abusive Husband In A “Stand Your Ground” State. Now She Faces Murder Charges, VOX (Aug. 25, 2018), https://www.vox.com/2018/8/25/17778712/stand-your-ground-alabama-black-woman- guns [https://perma.cc/K333-9KEA] (describing how “Stand Your Ground” laws do not serve Black women who use self-defense against their abusers, citing the story of Jacqueline Dixon); see also Why do Black women go to Jail for Self-defense?, NEW YORK MINUTE (Oct. 9, 2020), https://www.newyorkminutemag.com/why-do-black-women-go-to-jail-for-self- defense/ [https://perma.cc/7SHZ-5DSU] (noting how “almost 60% of women state prisoners have a history of sexual abuse. Part of that population…are incarcerated for criminal charges after pleading self-defense to free themselves from their abusers”). 860 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 the legal system. This Part will also describe VAWA’s legislative history and provide a procedural explanation of the Act’s funding structure. Part II will analyze three of VAWA’s grant programs to examine the programs’ effects on Black women. Finally, Part III will analyze how Congress can introduce a revised appropriations bill that will fund economic and housing programs, which will meet the two most pressing needs for Black female survivors.36 I. HISTORY AND SUBSEQUENT TREATMENT OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN This Part provides an overview of the history leading up to the passage of VAWA, and connects that history to the policy and legal interpretations of the law. Section I.A outlines the historical prevalence of violence against women and the women’s rights movements that arouse of it. Section I.B. discusses the relationship between Black women and the criminal legal system. Then, Section I.C. will examine VAWA’s funding structure and its grant programs. A. The Conditions That Led to VAWA’s Enactment 1. Historical Climate and the Battered Women’s Movement IPV dates back to ancient times.37 Ancient Roman communities of 600 BC treated women as the property of their husbands, who could lawfully beat, or even murder, their wives for misbehavior.38 In the United States, violence against women has persisted, especially in light of the increase in overall crime.39 The disproportionate infliction of violence against women continued through the late 1990s to today, with variations over time.40 From 2010 through 2017, the homicide of women by their intimate partners increased.41 According to the Department of Justice 36 See generally Gender and Racial Justice in Housing, NAT’L WOMEN'S L. CTR. (Feb. 2021), https://nwlc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Gender-and-Racial-Justice-in- Housing.pdf [https://perma.cc/XVN8-4XWN] (noting how Black female survivors are disproportionately represented in the homeless population); see also J. Sebastian Leguizamon et al., Revisiting the Link Between Economic Distress, Race, and Domestic Violence, 35 J. INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE 4141, 4141 (2020) (This article uses “a multivariate regression model to estimate how differences in the change in reported incidences of domestic violence by race correlate with changes in mass layoffs by race”). 37 See Anna Clark, Domestic Violence, Past and Present, 23 J. WOMEN’S HIST. 193, 193-195 (2011) (describing the history and normalization of IPV dating back to the ancient Roman period). 38 Worldwide History of Domestic Violence, IRESEARCHNET, http://criminal- justice.iresearchnet.com/types-of-crime/domestic-violence/worldwide-history-of-domestic- violence/ [https://perma.cc/X9JA-VXHC] (last visited Oct. 20, 2021). 39 See RACHEL E. MORGAN & JENNIFER L. TRUMAN, CRIMINAL VICTIMIZATION 2019, DEP’T OF JUST., BUREAU JUST. STAT. 11 (2020), https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv19.pdf [https://perma.cc/87EQ-EFAX] (reporting that “the percentage of violent victimizations reported to police was higher for females (46%) than for males (36%)”). 40 Id. at 6. 41 See generally Emma E. Fridel and James Alan Fox, Gender Differences in Patterns and Trends in U.S. Homicide, 1976–2017, 6 VIOLENCE AND GENDER 1 (2019) (finding that homicides by intimate partners are increasing, driven primarily by gun violence). 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 861 (DOJ), women made up 85% of IPV victims in 2001.42 IPV accounted for 20% of violent crimes against women in that same year. In 2020, one in four women experienced severe physical IPV during their lifetime, compared to one in nine men.43 a. The Effects of IPV on Women Were Often Ignored Despite this grim reality, IPV was trivialized in American society until the 1970s.44 In 1964, some doctors viewed IPV as “therapeutic.”45 This characterization as therapeutic stems from a 1964 study that concluded that couples use fighting to "balance out each other's mental quirks."46 Judges and psychiatrists sometimes deemed it a pathology of the underclass or individual women.47 Consequently, societal influences normalized IPV. b. The Battered Women’s Movement Encouraged Recognition of IPV and Brought Remedies for Victims However, the efforts of the Battered Women’s Movement in the 1970s led to societal recognition of the severity of violence against women. The Battered Women’s Movement, or the Movement, was a social movement that developed in the 1970s to support women subjected to IPV. Mirroring the spirit of England’s women’s liberation movements, this grassroots movement called attention to the male hegemony that allowed IPV to persist.48 G. Kristian Miccio, an expert on domestic violence, rape, and other gender-related crimes, articulated, “By situating male intimate violence within a cultural paradigm, the Battered Women’s Movement focused on altering the social conditions that produced, created, and supported such abuse.”49 The initial focus of the Movement’s advocates was to secure domestic violence shelters.50 The dangerous intersection between IPV and housing insecurity tends to force abused people to remain with their abusers due to financial dependence or the lack of affordable housing for people who choose to leave abusive partners.51 As a result of the advocates’ 42 CALLIE RENNISON, INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE, 1993-2001, DEP’T OF JUST., BUREAU JUST. STAT. (2003), https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf [https://perma.cc/ M8AC-AP9H]. 43 National Statistics, NAT’L COAL. AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, https://ncadv.org/STATISTICS [https://perma.cc/7A2U-N7KB] (last visited Dec. 21, 2021). 44 Eliana Dockterman, 50 Years Ago, Doctors Called Domestic Violence ‘Therapy’, TIME (Set. 25, 2014), https://time.com/3426225/domestic-violence-therapy/ [https:// perma.cc/T8YU-NCBQ]. 45 Id. 46 Id. 47 See Barnes, supra note 13, at 974 n. 135 (quoting Randal Albelda, Fallacies of Welfare-to-Work Policies, 577 ANNALS 66, 74 (2001) (welfare receipt ‘constitute[s] dysfunctional behavior’ or ‘a pathology — one of the many ‘bad’ behaviors that helps reproduce poverty’”)). 48 Miccio, G. Kristian, A House Divided: Mandatory Arrest, Domestic Violence, and the Conservation of the Battered Women's Movement, 42 HOUST. L. REV. 237, 249 (2007). 49 Id. 50 Sydney Hyer, History of the Battered Women's Movement, DELAWARE COAL. AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, https://dcadv.org/blog/history-of-the-battered-womens- movement.html [https://perma.cc/5ZHW-DR8L] (last visited Sept. 15, 2021). 51 See Giulia Paglione, Domestic Violence and Housing Rights: A Reinterpretation of the Right to Housing, 28 HUM. RTS. Q. 120, 123 (2006). 862 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 organizing, approximately 250 shelters were operating by the end of the 1970s.52 Eventually, the advocates’ efforts led to over 50% of states passing laws that made it easier for survivors to receive civil protections.53 However, the Movement shifted away from its initial focus and became increasingly professionalized and allied with other entities like law enforcement.54 Over time, the organizers of the Battered Women’s Movement collaborated with enforcement agencies, prosecutors, the courts, the private bar, and social services organizations.55 For example, the Movement’s organizers began advocating for more funding of police, prosecutors, and courts.56 Antiviolence reformers also prioritized laws that centered on carceral legal responses to IPV and state-sanctioned punishment.57 Partnering with law enforcement occurred because feminist movements often focused on the experiences and circumstances of specific women—white middle-class women.58 Some criminologists point to male entitlement and fragile masculinity as the root of IPV repeat offenders.59 These feminists posited that the cure was to strengthen criminal laws and remove police discretion because “lax policing of abusers and rapists as the gender justice issue . . . .”60 The shift in focus away from housing security to more punitive solutions led to policies like mandatory arrest laws, which evidence shows often led to the arrest of abused women and escalated violence.61 These laws allow an officer to make an arrest when there is probable cause that abuse has been perpetrated or when a person holding a protective order fears imminent harm.62 Consequently, this collaboration influenced subsequent efforts and legislation that relied on enforcement to solve IPV.63 52 Kathleen J. Tierney, The Battered Women Movement and the Creation of the Wife Beating Problem, 29 SOC. PROBS. 207, 208 (1982). 53 Id. 54 Id. at 286—292. 55 Id. 56 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 15. 57 Id. at 14. 58 Id. at 7 (recognizing that white middle-class women had “faith in the deterrent power of criminal law”). 59 Id. at 146 (Criminologist Michael Salter states that for repeat offenders “‘violence appears to be, at least in part, an effort to shore up a fragile and unstable sense of masculine honour and entitlement, the threat of punishment appears as an additional affront to their authority and may trigger a compensatory escalation in violence.’”) 60 AYA GRUBER, THE FEMINIST WAR ON CRIME: THE UNEXPECTED ROLE OF WOMEN'S LIBERATION IN MASS INCARCERATION 7 (2020). 61 ERICA R. MEINERS & JUDITH LEVINE, THE FEMINIST AND THE SEX OFFENDER: CONFRONTING SEXUAL HARM, ENDING STATE VIOLENCE 15 (2020). 62 David Hirschel, et al., Domestic Violence and Mandatory Arrest Laws: To What Extent Do They Influence Police Arrest Decisions?, 98 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 255, 256 (2008). 63 See Mimi E. Kim, From Carceral Feminism to Transformative Justice: Women- of-Color Feminism and Alternatives to Incarceration, 27 J. ETHNIC & CULTURAL DIVERSITY IN SOC. WORK 219, 220 (2018) (noting that decades of anti-violence movements, like the Battered Women's Movement, entailed the “collaboration with the institutions of police, prosecution, courts, and the systems of jails, prisons, probation, and parole.”). 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 863 c. Anti-IPV Reformers Shifted their Focus to the Criminal Legal System to Reduce IPV By the 1970s, IPV disputes resulted in increased arrest and prosecution rates, for abusers but also for victims.64 This occurred because antiviolence advocates pressured prosecutors to increase their low prosecution rates of IPV cases. Some prosecutors initially argued that they would not bring IPV cases to court because there could be no proof without the cooperation of IPV victims.65 Victims often feared retaliation by their partners or the financial loss created by their partner’s incarceration.66 Thus, advocates demanded “no-drop prosecution” policies, which allowed prosecutors to circumnavigate victims’ refusal to cooperate through various, and sometimes disturbing, tactics.67 To encourage cooperation, prosecutors provided inducements, subpoenaed reluctant witnesses, and in extreme cases, arrested and imprisoned victims as material witnesses before trial.68 By 1996, two-thirds of prosecutors’ offices adopted some form of no-drop policies.69 As this story suggests, the responses to IPV became more focused on enforcement, and women of color warned of the problems that this would create for their communities.70 Judith Levine and Erica R. Meiners, authors of pieces centered on gender-related crimes, noted that women of color feminists “adamantly opposed outsourcing vengeance to the state,” because their experiences indicated that prisons do not eliminate violence, “but instead perpetrate and perpetuate it, while destroying individual lives, families, and communities.”71 This focus has now been labeled “carceral feminism.”72 Coined by sociologist Elizabeth Bernstein, carceral feminism refers to “a reliance on policing, prosecution, and imprisonment to resolve gendered or sexual violence.”73 Black female activists forewarned that this criminal law focus intentionally constructed new laws in a way that negatively impacted Black women subjected to IPV due to increased 64 See generally Lisa Holland-Davis & Jason Davis, Victim Arrest in Intimate Partner Violence Incidents: A Multilevel Test of Black’s Theory of Law, 6 J. PUB. AND PRO. SOCIO. 1 (2014) (finding that the Battered Women's Movement inadvertently led to the increase in arrests and prosecution of victims and perpetrators following the Movement's push for pro-arrest policies). 65 Id. 66 Id. 67 Id. 68 Id. at 15. 69 Id. 70 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 7 (“From the beginning of the antiviolence movement women of color foresaw the problems that criminalization would create for their communities, but those concerns went largely unheeded in the rush to institutionalize criminalization in law and policy.”). 71 MEINERS & LEVINE, supra note 61, at 13. 72 Elizabeth Bernstein, Militarized Humanitarianism Meets Carceral Feminism: The Politics of Sex, Rights, and Freedom in Contemporary Antitrafficking Campaigns, 36 J. WOMEN IN CULTURE AND SOC’Y 45, 47–58 (2010) (explaining how feminists’ embrace of criminalization laid the groundwork of what became known as carceral politics and carceral feminism). 73 Alex Press, #Metoo Must Avoid “Carceral Feminism”, VOX (Feb. 1, 2018) https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/2/1/16952744/me-too-larry-nassar-judge-aquilina- feminism/ [https://perma.cc/LNQ7-XJUD]. 864 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 policing.74 During a 2000 conference centered on women of color and IPV, Angela Davis articulated that criminal law is a “poorly suited” solution because IPV is rooted in both individual social circumstances and larger systemic contexts.75 Additionally, former Senior Counsel for Economic Security at the National Women’s Law Center, Brenda Smith, argued that VAWA’s criminal focus would disproportionately affect Black women because the intersection of racial and gender discriminations coupled with the legal system’s historically oppressive relationship with the Black community leaves Black women the most vulnerable to any expansions of policing.76 The intersectionality of Black women’s identities has created a “paradoxical political dynamic” that isolates Black female victims and treats them as criminals.77 As concerns increased regarding the reliance on the legal system, there is this simultaneous issue facing Black women’s treatment by the legal system. The burgeoning law-and-order focus that “made feminism more prosecutorial and punitive” harmed Black female victims due to their historically oppressive relationship with the criminal legal system.78 Specific manifestations of the legal system’s oppression of Black female survivors of IPV will be expounded upon below. B. Black Women and the Criminal Legal System In order to understand how VAWA’s enforcement focus is detrimental to Black female survivors, this section will explore how the legal system has historically treated Black women. Section I.B.1 provides an overview of how slavery influenced the relationship between Black women and the criminal legal system. Next, Section I.B.2 explores how racial and gender discrimination combined with punitive policies contributes to the criminalization of Black women. Further, Section I.B.3 addresses legal actors’ damaging perceptions of Black women. Finally, Section I.B.4 explains why Black women—including Black survivors of IPV—distrust the legal system. 1. Slavery as the Historical Origins of the Relationship between Black Women and the Legal System and its Effects The legal system’s criminalization of Black women and their “overrepresentation in prison has a long history rooted in the tangled dynamics of race, gender, enslavement, and the law.”79 Slavery’s development in the American colonies involved the creation of laws that endangered Black women.80 Specifically, laws prevented the prosecution of white slave-holding offenders who raped enslaved women; however, Black male offenders who raped white women were violently punished.81 This 74 Id. 75 GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 18. 76 See Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA, supra note 19, at 85. 77 RICHIE, supra note 1, at 112. 78 GRUBER, supra note 60, at 1 . 79 Kali N. Gross and Cheryl D. Hicks, Introduction—Gendering the Carceral State: African American Women, History, and the Criminal Justice System, 100 J. OF AFR. AM. HIST. 357, 359 (2015). 80 Id. 81 Id. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 865 contradictory treatment between white male offenders and Black male offenders within the criminal legal system reflected the prejudicial attitudes against Black women who were seemingly not deserving of legal protections compared to other survivors. Additionally, the legal system often punished Black women who defended themselves against their abusers.82 For example, Celia (nineteen years old)83 and Virginia Christian (sixteen years old)84 were two Black slaves executed in 1855 and 1912, respectively, after defending themselves against their abusive masters. Moreover, Black women who were not sentenced to death were met with longer prison sentences than their white counterparts who committed similar crimes.85 In prison, Black women were often confined under harsh conditions, which exposed them to rape and other forms of brutality.86 The unfair social hierarchy that slavery buttressed contributed to these occurrences in prison systems and within the broader criminal legal system. Over time, this hierarchy not only created the foundation that modern-day punitive policies were established on, but it also contributed to the adverse treatment of Black women. 2. Punitive Policies as Causes of Black Women’s Vilification by the Legal System Federal and state governments implemented pro-arrest legislation in response to IPV that have created punitive consequences, which further the criminalization of Black women, expose them to disparate outcomes, and illustrate the legal system’s destructive relationship with the community.87 In the late 1990s, white feminist lawyers pushed for harsher arrest laws.88 For example, feminist lawyers sued New York City’s police departments for their “arrest-avoidance” policies.89 A similar development 82 See Gross, supra note 14, at 25—26 (“Structured by colonial and antebellum judiciaries, laws representing the priorities of enslavers effectively negated and criminalized black womanhood by subjecting black women to brutality and exploitation and by barring them from lawful avenues for redress.”). 83 Mariame Kaba, Black Women Punished For Self-Defense Must Be Freed From Their Cages, THE GUARDIAN (Jan. 3, 2019) https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/ 2019/jan/03/cyntoia-brown-marissa-alexander-black-women-self-defense-prison [https:// perma.cc/LP5N-FJA9]. 84 Lashawn Harris, The “Commonwealth of Virginia vs. Virginia Christian”: Southern Black Women, Crime & Punishment in Progressive Era Virginia, 47 J. SOC. HIST. 922, 923 (2014). 85 See generally Gross, supra note 14, at 29—30 (“Between 1794 and 1835 in Philadelphia, roughly 72 percent of black women who went before juries were convicted. They also had fewer of their cases dismissed than any other group and were more starkly overrepresented in prison than black men.”). 86 See generally Jaclynn Ashly, ‘Treated Worse Than Animals’: Black Women In Pretrial Detention, ALJAZEERA (Jul. 7, 2021) https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2021/7/7/ treated-worse-than-animals-black-women-in-us-pretrial-detention [https://perma.cc/87RC- ASV2]. 87 See generally Willow, supra note 16 (“[Mandatory arrest] has led to victims being arrested instead of/as well as perpetrators, while perpetrators are still less likely to go to jail or prison than other criminals, sexual assault remains underreported, and violence hasn’t stopped.”). 88 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 13. 89 Id. 866 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 took place in Oakland, California in 1976, as seen in Scott v. Hart.90 Scott challenged the Oakland Police Department’s response to calls for assistance from abused women.91 The goal of this class action was two- pronged: 1) obtain adequate police protection for abused women by reversing the department’s arrest-avoidance policy and 2) educate the public and legal system about IPV.92 In response to Scott, the Oakland Police Department rescinded its arrest-avoidance policy and agreed to criminalize domestic violence.93 Further, two prominent cases solidified the legal system’s arrest policies. Two months following Scott, activists filed suit against the New York City (NYC) Police Department for failing to intervene on behalf of twelve women in Bruno v. Codd.94 The lawyer who filed this case argued that prosecution and arrest were necessary to disband IPV.95 Following this suit, NYC police promised to respond swiftly to IPV calls and to make an arrest whenever they have reasonable cause following an IPV dispute.96 Thurman v. City of Torrington had a similar result. On June 10, 1983, Tracey Thurman, a white woman, was brutally attacked by her husband as nearby police officers watched.97 Following this case, Thurman received a $2.3 million dollar judgement against the city of Torrington and United States’ jurisdictions gradually enacted mandatory arrest policies in response to this case.98 VAWA further incentivized jurisdictions to implement these policies by making participating jurisdictions eligible for millions in federal grant funding.99 At present, twenty-two states and the District of Columbia have enacted mandatory arrest laws, and the vast majority of police departments have implemented pro-arrest policies.100 Ultimately, mandatory arrest laws created unintended consequences. These consequences included the rise in mandatory and “dual” arrests of female victims.101 In jurisdictions that do not require police officers to determine 90 See Pauline W. Gee, Ensuring Police Protection for Battered Women: The Scott v. Hart Suit, 8 J. WOMEN IN CULTURE AND SOC’Y 554, 556—560 (1983) (provides a full discussion with background of the case). 91 Id. 92 Id. 93 Id. 94 Bruno v. Codd, 90 Misc. 2d 1047, 1048 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty. 1977) (“The complaint, supported by sworn statements in dozens of actual cases, alleges that police officers called to the scene of a husband's assault on his wife, uniformly refuse to take action, even if the physical evidence of the assault is unmistakable and undenied”). 95 Id. 96 See generally Police, UNIV. OF MINNESOTA HUM. RTS. LIBR. (2003), http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/svaw/domestic/link/policereform.htm [https://perma.cc/M8VH- CSCU (explaining how the NYC police department changed its practices in domestic violence cases). 97 Thurman v. City of Torrington, 595 F. Supp. 1521, 1522 (D. Conn. 1984). 98 Id. 99 Violence Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C. §§1033— 1034 (1994); see also H.R. 3355, 103rd Cong. (1994). 100 See generally GRUBER, supra note 60, at 148 (“Although often held up as a stunning liberal victory, VAWA was no less carceral than the rest of the Crime Control Bill . . . VAWA’s largest appropriation was grant money to states to encourage ‘more widespread apprehension, prosecution, and adjudication of persons committing violent crimes against women . . . ’”). 101 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 19. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 867 the primary aggressor, dual arrests laws allow officers to arrest the victims along with their abusers.102 The detrimental effects of dual arrests on the victim is wide-reaching, including loss of employment, loss of child custody, labeled as an offender, financial hardship, and future unwillingness to report subsequent victimization.103 Additionally, certain jurisdictions have nuisance property laws, which could result in victims losing their homes as a result of seeking police protection in an IPV dispute.104 Consequently, pro-arrest laws have led to the increase in arrest rates of Black female survivors.105 Criminologist Alesha Durfee attributed this increase to the “implementation of mandatory arrest policies and not simply an increased use of violence by women in intimate relationships.”106 Following the expansion of pro-arrest legislation in New Hampshire, Connecticut, Colorado, Minnesota, and Maryland, “[w]omen have been disproportionately affected by the increase in the number of arrests for IPV”.107 This disparity most likely occurs due to the prevalence of gender discrimination in the penal context and its effects on Black female survivors.108 Thus, the increased reliance on enforcement to solve IPV made Black women vulnerable to increased arrests, punitive social services, and rigid institutional regulation.109 Sociologist Beth Richie states, “The buildup of a prison nation that surrounded the antiviolence movement enacted a set of public policies that favor the creation of a more conservative, punishment-oriented state . . . .”110 Richie explained that this buildup of the prison nation exposed Black women to negative consequences as they simultaneously experienced male violence in communities of concentrated disadvantage.111 As a result, Black women's outcomes spurred negative stereotypes about them. 3. The Discriminatory Mythologies Held by Legal Actors and Officers about Black Women The combination of racial and gender discrimination fuels the detrimental perception of Black women by the legal system’s officials. 102 Id. 103 Id. at 20 (“Criminalization has also increased state control over women through the intervention of the child abuse and neglect system. . . . [M]andatory arrest and no-drop prosecution has been disempowering for some people subjected to abuse.”). 104 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 121. 105 See generally Carolyn M. West, “Sorry, We Have to Take You In:” Black Battered Women Arrested for Intimate Partner Violence, 15 J. AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 95, 102 (2007) (analyzing how mandatory arrest laws contributes to the increased rates of arrest among Black women subjected to IPV). 106 Alesha Durfee, Situational Ambiguity and Gendered Patterns of Arrest for Intimate Partner Violence, 18 VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 64, 75. 107 See Id. at 67. 108 See SACCO, supra note 21, at 18 (“VAWA 2013 . . . established a nondiscrimination provision to ensure that victims are not denied services and are not subjected to discrimination based on actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.”). 109 See RICHIE, supra note 1, at 25. 110 Id. at 103—104. 111 Id. See id. 868 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 Judges,112 juries, and officers perceive Black women as lascivious, dishonest, and predisposed towards criminally violent behavior.113 This is apparent in the case of former police officer Daniel Holtzclaw.114 Holtzclaw was convicted of serial sexual violence against thirteen low-income, Black women.115 According to prosecutors, Holtzclaw deliberately targeted and raped these women because they were unlikely to be believed.116 Additionally, a juror from a 2008 pornography trial said that he did not believe the testimony from Black women because of how they dressed and “the way they act.”117 Seemingly, some legal actors do not believe that Black women require or deserve adequate protection.118 This treatment contributed to Black women’s lack of trust in the legal system. 4. Black Women’s Distrust of the Criminal Legal System Black women’s apprehension stems from the legal system’s reliance on responses that criminalize Black women or exclude them from the decision-making process following IPV disputes.119 Mandatory arrest laws, for instance, often deprive Black women of the ability to determine whether and how the state will intervene. The case of Renata Singleton, a Black female IPV survivor, is demonstrative of the specific ways that certain IPV laws fail Black women subjected to IPV.120 Singleton resided in a mandatory arrest jurisdiction in Louisiana.121 In this jurisdiction, some prosecutors often issued illegal subpoenas to compel IPV victims to meet with prosecutors and secure convictions.122 After Singleton refused to meet with prosecutors following her boyfriend’s arrest for assaulting her, prosecutors issued an allegedly fraudulent subpoena to coerce her to appear in court.123 Singleton spent five days in jail because she could not afford the high bond set at $100,000.124 In contrast, her abuser paid his $3,500 bond and served no time in jail.125 Singleton’s interactions with the legal system demonstrate the pattern of institutional harm that Black 112 See generally Christina Carrega, Judge Reassigned For Allegedly Calling Black Woman Juror ‘Aunt Jemima’, ABC NEWS (Feb. 7, 2020), https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge- reassigned-allegedly-calling-black-woman-juror-aunt/story?id=68824246 [https://perma.cc/ 9NTV-8Q65] (describing the temporary suspension of a state judge who allegedly referred to a Black woman as "Aunt Jemima", which is a derogatory term for Black women). 113 Maya Finoh & Jasmine Sankofa, supra note 25. 114 Id. 115 Id. 116 Id. 117 Id. 118 Id. 119 See generally Chandra Whitfield, It’s Complicated: Why Some Black Women Refuse To Call The Police When Their Black Male Partners Threaten Their Lives, THE GRIO (Apr. 10, 2019), https://thegrio.com/2019/04/10/why-some-black-women-refuse-to-call-police- black-male-partners/ [https://perma.cc/E43M-9HT9] (“Some domestic violence advocates say that Black women also have a legitimate fear that they themselves may end up arrested or subjected to violence or mistreatment from responding officers if they call police for help, adding to already heightened anxiety levels.”); see also GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 20 (“[M]andatory arrest may reduce reporting of intimate partner violence among women subjected to abuse who oppose the policy.”). 120 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 21. 121 Id. at 20—21. 122 Id. at 21. 123 Id. 124 Id. 125 Id. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 869 female survivors face as a result of the criminal enforcement responses to IPV. Mandatory policies, such as mandatory arrest, create situations that discourage Black female IPV survivors from reporting abuse. Goodmark claims, “[s]tate intervention cannot guarantee safety for women of color so long as these women both fear and are actively harmed by engaging with the state.”126 Due to this, Black women may be afraid to call police officers.127 In 2015, Janisha Fonville was shot and killed by responding officers whom Fonville called to render aid during an IPV dispute.128 In a survey that analyzed survivors’ experiences with law enforcement, the National Domestic Violence Hotline found that over half of the participants stated that calling the police would worsen their situation.129 Taken together, the Holtzclaw, Singleton, and Fonville examples point to the system-wide harm that Black female survivors consistently face in this context. These present-day events illustrate that the warnings of women of color advocates went unheeded in the race to institutionalize criminalization as a response to IPV. This race culminated in the enactment of VAWA. 5. VAWA Endorsed a Clear Federal Preference for a Carceral Response to IPV The impact of mainstream antiviolence efforts laid the groundwork for VAWA. During the late 1990s, when antiviolence reformers received growing interest and funding for carceral responses, attorneys, judges, and Congress began paying attention to these issues.130 To aid this work, feminist legal scholars and attorneys collaborated to educate judges about gender bias in the courts, in addition to other legal issues.131 Influenced by these movements to address IPV with punitive measures, Congress created a committee to evaluate gender issues in the federal judicial system.132 Soon after, then-Senator Joe Biden sponsored the Violence Against Women bill that was signed into law by then-President Bill Clinton.133 Following 126 Leigh Goodmark, Should Domestic Violence Be Decriminalized?, 40 HARV. J. OF L. & GENDER 53, 73 (2017) [hereinafter Goodmark, Domestic Violence Be Decriminalized]. 127 See Whitfield, supra note 119. 128 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 21. 129 Goodwin K. Amber & TJ Grayson, Investing in the Frontlines: Why Trusting and Supporting Communities of Color Will Help Address Gun Violence, 48 J. L. MED. & ETHICS 164, 165 (2020), https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/area/center/justice/investing_in_the_ front_lines.pdf [https://perma.cc/FYJ8-WHAC] (“In a 2015 survey by the National Domestic Violence Hotline analyzing survivor experiences with law enforcement, over half of the participants said calling the police would make their situation worse”). 130 Jill Tiefenthaler et al., Services and Intimate Partner Violence in the United States: A County-Level Analysis, 67 J. OF MARRIAGE AND FAM. 565, 567 (2005) (In 1988, Congress created a committee to examine gender issues in the federal judicial system that was followed by the introduction of VAWA legislation in 1990. After much debate, VAWA became law in the summer of 1994 under the larger Omnibus Crime Control Act.”). 131 Id. at 567 (“[A] group of feminist legal scholars and attorneys founded Gender Bias Task Forces designed to educate judges about gender bias in the courts”). 132 Id. at 567 (“In 1988, Congress created a committee to examine gender issues in the federal judicial system . . .”). 133 Savannah Behrmann, Democrats Want To Renew The Expired Violence Against Women Act, Again. Here's What You Need To Know, USA TODAY (Mar. 16, 2021) https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/16/violence-against-women-act-joe- biden-backing-goes-back-house/4704243001/ [https://perma.cc/7N8H-74T9]. 870 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 much debate, VAWA became federal law under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L. 103–322).134 Although the bill initially stood alone, VAWA acknowledged congressional concerns regarding violent crime that disproportionately targeted women.135 Although VAWA had various victim-centered responses to violence against women, it centralized the criminal legal system in its solutions.136 C. VAWA’s Funding Structure, Relevant Agencies, and Grant Programs VAWA’s funding structure reveals that despite the consideration given to victims and survivors in VAWA’s grant program, there is a stark disparity in the Act’s funding between programs intended to support the work of law enforcement and programs specifically dedicated to victims and survivors. 1. VAWA’s Legislative History and Purpose VAWA’s legislative history relates to the investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women.137 Then-senator Biden’s advocacy was motivated by the desire to create the first U.S. federal legislation that recognized IPV as a crime.138 VAWA represented an approach to strengthening responses at the local, state, tribal, and federal levels to IPV.139 The Act provided training for police, prosecutors, and judicial officials on dealing with IPV abuse.140 It also funded services to victims, such as shelters for abused women and children.141 To efficiently distribute funds authorized by VAWA, the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) was administratively created in 1995 within the DOJ.142 The DOJ and Health and Human Services (HHS) also administer VAWA’s programs.143 In its original form, VAWA had three primary purposes: 1) it amplified investigations and prosecution of sex offenses; 2) it created grant programs that involved different entities aimed at targeting IPV, such as law enforcement, public and private entities, service providers, and victims 134 Violence Against Women, 42 U.S.C. § 13925 (2012). 135 Id. 136 Id. 137 Id. 138 German Lopez, The Controversial 1994 Crime Law That Joe Biden Helped Write, Explained, VOX (Sep. 29, 2020), https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/20/ 18677998/joe-biden-1994-crime-bill-law-mass-incarceration [https://perma.cc/7A7P-H34G]. 139 Laura L. Rogers, The Violence Against Women Act – An Ongoing Fixture In The Nation’s Response To Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, And Stalking, DEP’T OF JUST. ARCHIVES (Feb. 19, 2020), https://www.justice.gov/archives /ovw/blog/violence-against-women-act-ongoing-fixture-nation-s-response-domestic-violence- dating [https://perma.cc/3WHS-VGGK]. 140 See 34 U.S.C. §12291(b)(11)(A) (“Of the total amounts appropriated under this subchapter, not less than 3 percent and up to 8 percent, unless otherwise noted, shall be available for providing training and technical assistance. . .”). 141 See 34 U.S.C. §12291(a)(51) (“The terms ‘victim services’ and ‘services’ mean services provided to victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, including . . . emergency and transitional shelter. . .”). 142 See Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA, supra note 19, at 87 (“Since 1995, the Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women . . . administers most VAWA grant programs . . .”). 143 See SACCO, supra note 21, at 30. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 871 of crime; and 3) it established provisions for immigrants subjected to abuse.144 To strengthen its efficacy and expand its provisions, VAWA has undergone regular reauthorizations of appropriations for the VAWA grant programs every five years. The Act was reauthorized in 2000, 2005, 2013 and is currently up for reauthorization in the Senate. If authorizations for grants expire, Congress may continue to appropriate funding for VAWA.145 Each reauthorization expanded VAWA’s provisions. VAWA’s 2000 reauthorization created a pertinent legal assistance program that provided representation to IPV survivors, enhanced training for lawyers representing victims, and created other direct legal services.146 This reauthorization also enabled IPV survivors who escaped their abusers and fled across state lines to obtain custody orders without returning to jurisdictions where they may be in danger.147 Furthermore, the 2005 reauthorization offered more inclusive approaches.148 For example, it included funding for rape crisis centers, linguistically-specific services, and housing protections.149 This reauthorization set forth the Child Witness, Court Training and Improvements, and Culturally Specific programs.150 Additionally, the 2013 renewal of VAWA strengthened protections for Native Americans and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) survivors.151 This reauthorization granted tribal courts prosecutorial power over non-Native Americans who abused Native American women on tribal lands.152 Additionally, VAWA 2013 guaranteed that LGBT survivors could not be denied access to critical services on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation.153 VAWA’s fundamental goals—preventing violence against women and responding to victims’ needs—are advanced by the law’s federal funding and grant programs. The Note will turn next to a discussion of VAWA’s funding structure and its emphasis on enforcement. 2. VAWA’s Current Funding Structure and Procedures The purpose of VAWA’s funding is to support programs under the Act that address domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, and additional crimes.154 The funding distribution is organized through grant programs focused on law enforcement, social and educational programs.155 Congress appropriates the majority of funds to 144 Id. at 2. 145 Id. at ii (“Congress may consider . . . to reauthorize VAWA”). 146 Legal Assistance for Victims Grant Program, LAV PROGRAM, https://www.vawamei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/LAV.pdf [https://perma.cc/3VQX- 8ZT5] (last visited Nov. 1, 2021). 147 History of the Violence Against Women Act, LEGAL MOMENTUM, https:// www.legalmomentum.org/history-vawa [https://perma.cc/KN4L-8J5R] (last visited Aug. 23, 2021). 148 Id. 149 Id. 150 Id. 151 See SACCO, supra note 21, at 18—20. 152 Id. at 20. 153 Id. at 18. 154 Id. at ii. 155 Id. at 12. 872 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 DOJ through the Office on Violence Against Women.156 OVW administers technical and financial assistance to communities around the country to facilitate the creation of practices, policies, and programs aimed at eliminating IPV.157 Also, funds are appropriated to federal agencies responsible for managing VAWA programs, such as the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and HHS.158 Other federal agencies, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), manage VAWA’s programs. Funding for each fiscal year has increased since VAWA’s passage. Under VAWA’s 2000 reauthorization, Congress appropriated $3,300,000,000 over five years to combat IPV.159 In 2003, the total authorized funding was $627,300,000, with $362,300,000 allocated to the DOJ and $263,000,000 allocated to HHS.160 Within this allocation, $290,000,000 of the DOJ dollars fell under three specific grant programs: $185,000,000 to the Services, Training, Officers, and Prosecutors Violence Against Women Grant Program (STOP) that supports law enforcement and prosecution, $65,000,000 to Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies (also known as the Improving Criminal Justice Responses Program), and $40,000,000 to the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Abuse Enforcement.161 From 1995 to the fiscal year 2018, $5,700,000,000 in grants and cooperative agreements have been awarded, and much of this money was allocated to prosecutors, police, courts, and community-based agencies supporting the work of law enforcement.162 Approximately 62% of VAWA funding was awarded to the criminal legal system in 1994.163 By 2013, this percentage increased to around 85% of VAWA’s funding.164 VAWA’s two largest grant programs were awarded a combined $266,000,000 to the 156 OVW FISCAL YEAR 2022 VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT (VAWA) MEASURING EFFECTIVENESS INITIATIVE (MEI), DEP’T OF JUST. (DEC. 15, 2021) [hereinafter DEP’T OF JUST., OVW 2022 MEI], https://www.justice.gov/ovw/page/file/1461336/download [https:// perma.cc/JFU4-UTVV]. 157 See SACCO, supra note 21, at 284 (“Many VAWA grant programs fund the same services and the same organizations. For example, nine separate VAWA programs may be used to fund emergency shelter or transitional housing . . . OVW administers 4 formula grant programs and 15 discretionary grant programs.”). 158 Id.at 4. 159 Emily S. Rueb and Niraj Chokshi, The Violence Against Women Act Is Turning 25. Here’s How It Has Ignited Debate, N.Y. TIMES (Apr. 4, 2019), https://www.nytimes.com/ 2019/04/04/us/violence-against-women-act-reauthorization.html [https://perma.cc/A5XH- XA8J]. 160 David M. Heger, The Violence Against Women Act of 2000, NATIONAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTER (Jan. 16, 2001), https://mainweb- v.musc.edu/vawprevention/policy/vawa00.shtml [https://perma.cc/BSY6-8GNX]. 161 Id. 162 See Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA, supra note 19, at 2. 163 Id. 164 Leigh Goodmark, The Violence Against Women Act is unlikely to reduce intimate partner violence – here’s why, THE CONVERSATION (Oct. 17, 2018) [hereinafter Goodmark, VAWA IPV], https://theconversation.com/the-violence-against-women-act-is-unlikely-to- reduce-intimate-partner-violence-heres-why-103734 [https://perma.cc/L4LS-CCUK]. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 873 criminal legal system alone by 2017.165 Simultaneously, the grants to social services have declined sharply. In 1994, 38% of funding went to organizations dedicated to servicing the needs of women subjected to IPV.166 By 2013, only 15% of VAWA grants went to social services organizations due to the financial focus on enforcement policies and programs.167 Surprisingly, even within VAWA’s victim services grant programs that are seemingly less focused on enforcement, funding is still allocated to law enforcement. For example, the Rural Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, and Stalking Program, which aims to enhance the safety of rural IPV victims, funds police and prosecutors.168 3. The Procedural Mechanics of VAWA’s Grant Programs The purposes of VAWA’s grant programs, funded by the law, re- emphasize VAWA’s commitment to criminalizing IPV.169 The 1994 iteration of VAWA created several grant programs, including programs that targeted 1) investigating and prosecuting domestic violence and related crimes; 2) improving investigations and prosecutions of domestic violence and child abuse in rural states; 3) encouraging states, tribes, and local governments to treat IPV as a crime and implement arrest policies; 4) building cooperation between law enforcement, public and private sector providers, and judicial officials; 5) preventing IPV and sexual assault; 6) preventing crime in public transportation and public and national parks.170 Currently, the Office on Violence Against Women administers nineteen grant programs authorized by VAWA and subsequent legislation.171 Four of these grant programs are “formula” programs.172 Formula programs provide funding to the states through the Office on Violence Against Women.173 The enacting legislation specifies how the funds are to be distributed. For example, under the STOP Program, each territory and state must allocate 25% of the grant funds for law enforcement, 25% for prosecution, 30% for victim services, and 5% to state and local courts.174 The remaining 15% may be allocated at the discretion of the state administering agency and within one of the program’s purpose areas.175 Moreover, the additional programs are “discretionary” programs.176 The Office on Violence Against Women created program qualifications, parameters, eligibility, and deliverables per authorizing legislation for these programs.177 To be considered for funding under discretionary programs, organizations must apply directly to the Office on 165 Alisha Haridasani Gupta, Is the Legal System an Effective Solution to Domestic Violence?, N.Y. TIMES (Jun. 17, 2021), https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/us/domestic- violence-fka-twigs-shia-labeouf.html [https://perma.cc/8ZDK-746A]. 166 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 2. 167 Id. 168 34 U.S.C. § 12341 (2020). 169 See Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA, supra note 19, at 12. 170 Id. at 3. 171 Id. at 36. 172 Id. at 28. 173 Id. 174 34 U.S.C. § 10132 (2021). 175 Id. 176 See Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA, supra note 19, at 28. 177 Id. 874 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 Violence Against Women.178 For instance, OVW set the Legal Assistance for Victims Program guidelines and limited applicants to private nonprofit entities, publicly funded organizations not acting in a government capacity, and tribal organizations.179 The discrepancy in enforcement-focused funding and victim- centered funding directly affects Black women due to their relationship to the legal system.180 To be sure, some of VAWA’s grant programs are victim- focused, such as programs that provide direct intervention and related assistance to victims of sexual assault, the development of tribal coalitions focused on IPV, and transitional housing.181 For example, the Transitional Housing Program supports programs that provide six to twenty-four months of housing for victims in need of shelter due to IPV-related abuse.182 Nevertheless, like the Transitional Housing Program, many of VAWA’s victim-centered programs have limited funding compared to VAWA’s more enforcement-focused programs. In 2020, STOP received $152,900,000 in funding whereas $40,400,000 was granted to the Transitional Housing Program.183 Part II will delineate three specific grant programs that demonstrate VAWA’s funding priorities. Section II.A will describe the mechanics of VAWA’s STOP Program and how this program adversely affects Black female survivors. In tandem, Section II.B will then conduct a comparative analysis regarding the ICJR Program and the Culturally Specific Services Program (CSSP) to illustrate further how the inequality between VAWA’s enforcement and victim-centered funding impacts Black women. CSSP, a program that could substantially aid Black women due to its focus on minority survivors, is underfunded because of the financial emphasis placed on enforcement. Although VAWA funds beneficial programs, the enforcement focus ultimately harms Black women subjected to abuse. Lastly, Part III will then address a two-prong solution that better protects Black women and tailored victim-centered services. II. EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VAWA’S GRANT PROGRAMS AND BLACK FEMALE SURVIVORS The sizable gap in funding between grant programs that emphasize enforcement and grant programs that fund social services organizations is injurious to Black women because their identities have historically heightened their vulnerability to IPV and the criminal legal system.184 Namely, the reliance on the criminal legal system of VAWA’s funding structures exacerbates the negative relationship between Black women 178 See Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA, supra note 19, at 36. 179 34. U.S.C. § 20121 (2021). 180 See Section I.B of this paper, Black Women and the Criminal Legal System, for more information on black women in the carceral system. 181 See generally Davis, supra note 18 (noting the different victim services programs that VAWA offers). 182 34 U.S.C. § 12351 183 FY 2020 OVW Grant Awards by Program, DEP’T OF JUST. (Nov. 23, 2022) [hereinafter DEP’T OF JUST., OVW Grant Awards], https://www.justice.gov/ovw/awards/fy- 2020-ovw-grant-awards-program [https://perma.cc/9JBK-56F3]. 184 For more background on black women and the criminal legal system, see Section I.B of this paper, Black Women and the Criminal Legal System. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 875 and the legal system, which harms Black women subjected to IPV. While previous literature has argued that VAWA is problematic, none have thoroughly focused on how the interactions between the Act’s grant programs and minority victims, specifically Black women, contribute to the law’s inefficiency. A. VAWA’s STOP Grant Program 1. Statutory Purpose and Procedural Explanation of the STOP Grant Program While social movement actors and institutions in civil society once led in the dance to mitigate IPV, they quickly became “the subordinate partner in a dance now directed and dominated by the goals . . . of law enforcement.”185 VAWA’s allocation of hundreds of millions of dollars to police, courts, and prosecutors has “creat[ed] a powerful motivation for law enforcement to take the helm of antiviolence efforts.”186 But how truly nonviolent can law enforcement’s efforts be when used on a community whose relationship with the legal system has historically been violent? An analysis of the STOP Program, VAWA’s largest grant program, may shed light on this question. The STOP Program’s structure and its increase in funding illustrate the grant program’s emphasis on law enforcement and prosecution. The STOP Program was reauthorized and amended by VAWA 2000, VAWA 2005, and VAWA 2013.187 In 2019, STOP received $215,000,000 in funding,188 compared to the $45,000,000 in funding granted to the Civil Legal Assistance for Victims Grant Program.189 The STOP Program promotes the “strengthening of effective law enforcement, prosecution, and judicial strategies and victim services” to improve the legal system’s responses to IPV.190 Eligible applicants for STOP Program grants include all states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories.191 Once the states and territories receive the funds, the grants are then 185 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 18 (quoting Mimi E. Kim, Dancing the Carceral Creep: The Anti-Domestic Violence Movement and the Paradoxical Pursuit of Criminalization, 1973-1986, UC BERKELEY: INST. FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIETAL ISSUES (2015)). 186 Id. at 15. 187 STOP Violence Against Women Grant Federal Program Guidelines, WEST VIRGINIA DIV. OF JUST. AND CMTY. SERVICES, https://www.justice.gov/ovw/stop-violence- against-women-formula-grant-program [https://perma.cc/HR53-KXET] (last visited Dec. 24, 2022). 188 FY19 Appropriations Bill Becomes Law, ASSOCIATION OF VAWA ADMINISTRATORS (Feb. 21, 2019), https://www.avadministrators.org/fy19-appropriations- bill-becomes-law/ [https://perma.cc/BFZ3-RLCB]. 189 See Appendix: Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 2018, U.S. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, 720 (2017), https://www.google.com/books/edition/ Appendix_Budget_of_the_U_S_Government_Fi/6aTFO9nwmRcC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=vawa +owv+civil+legal+assistance+45,000,000&pg=PA720&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=v awa%20owv%20civil%20legal%20assistance%2045%2C000%2C000&f=false [https://perma.cc/GX5M-XMDL]. 190 STOP Program 2016 Report, DEP’T OF JUST., OFFICE ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 15 (2016) [hereinafter DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, Stop 2016 Report] https://www.vawamei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/final_2016_stop_report_to_ congress_august_2018.pdf [https://perma.cc/6HKX-MP4U]. 191 Id. at 2. 876 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 subgranted to programs and agencies.192 These include state and local courts (including juvenile courts), state offices and agencies, units of local government, victim service providers, and tribal governments.193 Each state then designates an official to serve as the STOP administrator to manage and oversee the process by which their state awards subgrants.194 As previously mentioned, STOP distributes funding based on a statutorily determined, population-based formula195 and pursuant to the designated purpose areas. According to 34 U.S.C. § 10441(b), funds under this grant program must be used for one or more of the designated purpose areas, which include: 1) training law enforcement officers, judges, other court personnel, and prosecutor to more effectively respond to violent crimes against women, 2) developing, training, or expanding units of law enforcement officers, judges, other court personnel, and prosecutors specifically targeting violent crimes against women, and 3) installing or expanding data collection and communication systems to link police, prosecutors, and courts to identify, classify, and track arrests.196 Some STOP funding goes to victim-centered initiatives. For example, STOP distributes funding to strengthen victim services and legal assistance programs, authorize specialized domestic violence court advocates in courts, and assist victims of domestic violence in immigration matters.197 However, STOP’s funding is still more skewed toward enforcement. In 2014, compliance with STOP required prosecutors and law enforcement to receive not less than 25% each of STOP funding, whereas community-based organizations must receive at least 10%.198 The outcomes of STOP’s enforcement focus detrimentally affect Black female survivors. 2. STOP Contributes to Harmful Outcomes for Black Female Victims and Survivors STOP’s enforcement focus harms Black women because STOP’s funding contributes to the increased arrests and convictions of Black female survivors, furthers the community devastation of the Black community, and limits Black women’s accessibility to STOP’s support services. a. The Punitive Consequences for Black Women Who Use Self- Defense in IPV Disputes Firstly, Black women are disproportionately likely to be prosecuted and incarcerated when they defend themselves against their abusers.199 192 Id. at 18. 193 Id. 194 Id. 195 Id. at 7—8 (Under STOP, each territory and state must allocate 25% of the grant funds for law enforcement, 25% for prosecution, 30% for victim services, and 5% to state and local courts). 196 34 U.S.C. § 10441 (2020). 197 Id. at 15—16 . 198 OVW Fiscal Year 2014 STOP Formula Grant Program- Solicitation, DEP’T OF JUST. 27 (Feb. 6, 2014) [hereinafter DEP’T OF JUST., OVW 2014 STOP Solicitation] https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/ovw/legacy/2014/02/24/stop-2014-solicitation.pdf [https://perma.cc/N4YF-5D7R]. 199 See NEW YORK MINUTE, supra note 35 (“The ACLU reported almost 60% of women state prisoners have a history of sexual abuse . . . Black women have struggled to be 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 877 Thus, STOP’s strengthening of the criminal system causes more Black female survivors to suffer. In 2013 and 2014, STOP’s funding resulted in 209,535 IPV dispute cases being accepted for prosecution and STOP-funded prosecution offices showing an overall conviction rate of 70%.200 Additionally, in these same years, STOP funding led to 59,211 arrests.201 Evidence suggests that Black female victims involved in IPV disputes are overrepresented in these prosecution, conviction, and arrest rates.202 This reality results because a substantial number of Black female arrestees face punitive consequences after using self-defense against their abusers.203 The 2013 case of Marissa Alexander is illustrative. Alexander was convicted and received a twenty-year sentence after firing a warning shot in self-defense during a violent confrontation with her abusive husband. To place this in perspective, while Alexander’s Stand Your Ground defense was unsuccessful, George Zimmerman’s exact defense was successful.204 Whereas Alexander’s act of self-defense injured no one, Zimmerman was not convicted for murdering an unarmed teenaged Black boy.205 While the excuse of self-defense is usually believed when applied to white victims who claim they felt threatened by minority aggressors, this defense is less likely to win when applied to Black women who acted in self- defense during an IPV dispute.206 Although Alexander’s conviction was ultimately overturned, her case illustrates how Black female “survivors are systematically punished for taking action to protect themselves and their children while living in unstable and dangerous conditions.”207 This inequality may result, in part, due to prosecutorial discretion.208 As one seen as the victims instead of the aggressors due to the preexisting notions and stereotypes surrounding them”). 200 See DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, Stop 2016 Report, supra note 190, at 41. 201 Id. at 73. 202 See RICHIE, supra note 1, at 29 (“[R]esearch has . . . established a higher incidence rate of intimate partner violence for Black women”). 203 See Gross, supra note 14, at 32 (“Given black women’s representation in the criminal justice system and their historic and ongoing vulnerability, there can be little doubt that gender violence is a key factor in their disproportionate representation. Indeed, 68 percent of incarcerated black women had been victimized by intimate-partner violence, and, compared to white women, black women are twice as likely to be killed by a spouse”); see also Kaba, supra note 83 (“Multiple studies indicate that between 71% and 95% of incarcerated women, with Black women overrepresented in these statistics, have experienced physical violence from an intimate partner.”). 204 See generally Josephine Ross, Cops on Trial: Did Fourth Amendment Case Law Help George Zimmerman's Claim of Self-Defense?, 40 SEATTLE UNIV. L. REV. 1 (2016) (discussing that George Zimmerman, a then-neighborhood watch coordinator, shot Trayvon Martin, an unarmed seventeen-year-old student. Following the trial, Zimmerman was charged with murder for Martin's death, but was eventually acquitted at trial due to his self- defense claim under Florida’s Stand Your Ground statute). 205 Id. 206 See generally Gross, supra note 14, at 32 (“Given black women’s representation in the criminal justice system and their historic and ongoing vulnerability, there can be little doubt that gender violence is a key factor in their disproportionate representation. Indeed, 68 percent of incarcerated black women had been victimized by intimate-partner violence, and, compared to white women, black women are twice as likely to be killed by a spouse”). 207 See Kaba, supra note 83. 208 JAMES E. JOHNSON ET. AL., RACIAL DISPARITIES IN FEDERAL PROSECUTIONS 11 (2010) (“Unwarranted racial disparities in decision-making may result from outright conscious animus, including the use of race-neutral criteria (such as class or geography) as a pretext for impermissible consideration of race, or from unconscious racial stereotyping.”). 878 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 scholar has articulated, “Black women were not entitled to the law’s protection, though they could not escape its punishment.”209 Through an intersectional lens, it becomes clear that Black women become trapped in cycles of victimization and criminalization due to racialized narratives that place them outside the hegemonic boundaries of womanhood, and thus, outside the bounds of the law’s protection.210 Through criminalization, Black women are held accountable for their own suffering, which is intensified by their vulnerability to poverty.211 Black women are vulnerable to economic disadvantage, which increases their likelihood of being exposed to IPV. The overrepresentation of people of color in “economically stressed neighborhoods likely accounts for the high rates of intimate partner violence among low-income women of color.”212 The disproportionate exposure of Black women to both economic vulnerability and IPV increases the likelihood that they will have to resort to self- defense. Thus, it is not just their individual “choices” but also their social positioning that makes them more susceptible to being criminalized for protecting themselves. While Black women come into contact with the criminal legal system for statutory offenses in the same way others are charged with crimes, the analysis above demonstrates how the STOP Program contributes to the overcriminalization of Black female survivors through increased arrests, prosecution, and convictions. b. STOP’s Effects on the Black Community Ultimately, the STOP Program contributes to the community devastation of the Black community. This community devastation relates to the breaking up of Black families, social networks, and community structures, which contributes to Black female survivors’ overall vulnerability to subjugation in various spheres, such as economic security. The increase in funding to the legal system, facilitated in part by STOP’s funding, strengthens officers’ and prosecutors’ ability to arrest, convict, and incarcerate Black male abusers, which creates community devastation for the Black community at large. Criminologist Elliott Currie expressed, “[T]he experiences of incarceration, especially in a society that already suffers from a hollowed opportunity structure and thin social supports, is often a disability, one that … cements great numbers of former offenders into a condition of permanent marginality.”213 This hollowing of a community is especially apparent within the Black community. Using criminalization to respond to IPV creates serious harms to Black communities at large, including the mass incarceration of Black men.214 For example, in Milwaukee, a mandatory arrest jurisdiction, men of color represented 24% of the population of the county’s population but 209 See Gross, supra note 14, at 25. 210 Id. 211 Robin Bleiweis et. al., The Basic Facts About Women in Poverty, CAP (Aug. 3, 2020), https://www.americanprogress.org/article/basic-facts-women-poverty/ [https:// perma.cc/HC29-NFCR]. 212 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 37. 213 ELLIOT CURRIE, VIOLENCE AND SOCIAL POLICY, IN ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF CRITICAL CRIMINOLOGY 472 (2012). 214 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 19. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 879 represented 66% of the defendants in IPV cases.215 The evidence suggests that a sizeable portion of these men of color defendants are Black men because Black men dominate Milwaukee’s minority population and have been incarcerated at rates highly disproportionate to their share of the state population at all age levels.216 In relation, most IPV offenses are prosecuted as misdemeanors, and rates of misdemeanor prosecutions are significantly higher among men of color. 217 Despite this reality, separating victims from their abusers does pose benefits and could prevent future abuse. However, restorative programs could serve as an alternative. The disparate prosecution and incarceration of Black men inflicts egregious costs for Black women and their communities. Black women’s vulnerability to community devastation intersects with another form of vulnerability that similarly, and overwhelmingly, exposes Black women to poverty: economic abuse. Incarcerating Black men also erodes Black women’s access to financial relief and hollows out the Black community. A report found that 86% of women who experience IPV also report economic abuse.218 Economic abuse is the range of behaviors that allows a perpetrator to control another’s access to economic relief.219 In tandem, the vast majority of IPV survivors are Black women, so it is reasonable to deduce that Black women are disproportionately impacted due to their financial dependence on their abusers. The statistics confirm this reality. Black women are more likely to be low-income and thus more likely to be subjected to IPV.220 Black women made up 22.3% of women living in poverty despite only representing 12.8% of the U.S. female population.221 Women at or below the poverty level experience abuse almost twice as often as women at 101– 200% of the poverty level.222 Scholars Sonia M. Frias and Ronald J. Angel also note, “Those who are unemployed and who lack financial resources are more likely to suffer repeated violence, and they are less likely to leave their abusers permanently than employed women or those with more financial resources.”223 For these aforementioned reasons, it is safe to deduce that economic abuse increases Black women’s disproportionate exposure to IPV. Additionally, when fathers are incarcerated, the family’s income declines by 22%, and research suggests that 65% of families cannot meet 215 Id. 216 Lois M. Quinn & John Pawasarat, Statewide Imprisonment of Black Men in Wisconsin 1, ETI PUBLICATIONS (2014) (providing data on the Black male incarceration for the state of Wisconsin). 217 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 19. 218 THE COST OF COVID-19: ECONOMIC ABUSE THROUGHOUT THE PANDEMIC, SURVIVING ECONOMIC ABUSE 3 (2021). 219 Id. 220 See Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA, supra note 19, at 92 (“While criminalization of intimate partner violence can confer benefits upon victims of violence, its costs are quite high. Those costs are borne disproportionately by people of color and individuals with lower incomes . . .”). 221 See Bleiweis et. al., supra note 211, at 2. 222 DONNA COKER ET. AL., RESPONSES FROM THE FIELD: SEXUAL ASSAULT, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND POLICING 7, ACLU (2015). 223 Sonia M. Frias & Ronald J. Angel, Stability And Change In The Experience Of Partner Violence Among Low-Income Women, 88 SOC. SCI. Q. 1281 (2007). 880 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 all of their financial needs.224 Children of incarcerated men also suffer as they are more likely to experience homelessness.225 For the Black community, incarceration serves as a “nearly insurmountable barrier”; only 5% of Black applicants with a criminal record receive callbacks for job interviews.226 The depression of former inmates’ employment opportunities is particularly troublesome in the context of IPV. Research suggests that rates of IPV are directly correlated with male unemployment.227 Thus, the longer he is unemployed, as a result of incarceration, the higher the rate of IPV. Black women are then disproportionally exposed to revictimization. This community devastation is also debilitating to Black women because the investment in prisons reduces social services and resources granted to low-income communities.228 In turn, this deprives Black communities of funding for health care, education, and housing. These are services that could dramatically stabilize these communities.229 The majority of former prisoners are released into diminished neighborhoods whose stability is weakened by the loss of their members to prison.230 The mass incarceration of Black men devastates Black communities at large because pumping more funding into carceral institutions through the STOP Program exacerbates this problem. This concentration of punitive measures in Black communities is detrimental to Black female survivors. c. The Outcomes of STOP’s Victim-Centered Services Due to the outcomes created by STOP’s victim-centered services, Black women are underrepresented in the universe of victims who receive services despite being overrepresented in the universe of people who experience IPV. Currently, 30% of STOP’s funding is attributed to victim services, with the legislation requiring at least 10% for culturally specific victim services.231 In 2013 and 2014, however, STOP’s distribution of victim services went primarily to aiding white female survivors.232 For example, in 2013 and 2014, STOP’s victim services served approximately 55% of white male and female survivors.233 This evidence also shows that 90% of the white survivors who received this funding in both years were female.234 Thus, white female victims received the most funding of any other individual racial/ethnic group.235 Although approximately 37.3% of non- Hispanic white women experience IPV in their lifetime,236 they received 224 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 27. 225 Id. 226 Id. 227 MICHAEL L. BENSON & GREER L. FOX, CONCENTRATED DISADVANTAGE, ECONOMIC DISTRESS, AND VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IN INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS 3-3 – 3- 6 (2004), https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/199709.pdf [https://perma.cc/GC8Y-CZGJ]. 228 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 22. 229 Id. 230 Id. at 27. 231 For information on VAWA’s funding structure and its grant programs, see Section I.C.1 of this paper, Aren’t I a Woman Deserving of Justice? Restructuring VAWA’s Funding Structure to Create Racial and Gender Equity. 232 See DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, Stop 2016 Report, supra note 190, at 85. 233 Id. 234 Id. 235 Id. 236 S.G. SMITH ET. AL., THE NATIONAL INTIMATE PARTNER AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE SURVEY 2010–2012 STATE REPORT, CONTROL OF THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 881 more services on average. These victims are overserved relative to the percentage they occupy as victims, which may mean that others are being underserved. In the same years mentioned above, only 23% of Black victims benefitted from these services, and the majority of the Black victims were women.237 As noted, Black women make up the vast majority of IPV victims yet received less aid on average than white women. The provision of aid to any victim of IPV is crucial and beneficial. However, when there exists a disparity in who receives remedies, the program and VAWA are not advocating on behalf of all survivors. Ultimately, this inequitable service provision disadvantages Black women subjected to IPV. Even if race and gender disparities are removed from consideration, STOP’s funding still is not adequately providing services to victims. A 2018 National Crime Victims’ Rights Resource reported, “In more than 80% of intimate partner violent victimizations in 2015, the victim did not receive assistance from victim service agencies.”238 Additionally, even though victim-centered services organizations receive 30% of STOP funding, these organizations are still influenced by law enforcement. In 2013 and 2014, 46% of community agencies and organizations reported meeting weekly or monthly with law enforcement, 40% with the prosecutor’s office, and only 30% reported weekly and monthly interactions with social services organizations.239 d. Additional Inefficiencies of the STOP Program STOP also contains victim-centered provisions that would benefit Black women subjected to abuse, but they are not well-funded. The program contains the provision of shelters and beds to IPV survivors, which is a significant need for Black women as they disproportionately experience some of the highest rates of economic insecurity.240 This economic insecurity undermines their ability to afford housing and thus makes some Black female IPV survivors dependent on their abusers.241 STOP’s funding seemingly mitigates this issue and gives Black women and other survivors a pathway to housing security. In 2013 and 2014, STOP funding allowed an annual average of 1,135 victims to receive 346,919 transitional housing bed nights and an annual average of 21,067 victims to receive 1,938,613 emergency shelter bed nights.242 Nevertheless, housing is by far the one of the most common unmet need by IPV victims annually.243 Donna Coker, PREVENTION 120 (2017), https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS- StateReportBook.pdf [https://perma.cc/U7PZ-LS74]. 237 See DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, Stop 2016 Report, supra note 190, at 85. 238 INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE, OFFICE OF VICTIMS OF CRIME (2018), https://ovc.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh226/files/ncvrw2018/info_flyers/fact_sheets/2018NCV RW_IPV_508_QC.pdf [https://perma.cc/64E8-DELW]. 239 DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, Stop 2016 Report, supra note 190, at 33. 240 See RICHIE, supra note 1, at 1. 241 See generally DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND HOMELESSNESS, ACLU (2006), https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/dvhomelessness032106.pdf [https://perma.cc/ K6W9-JK9T] (“Poor women, who are more vulnerable to homelessness, are also at greater risk of domestic violence. Poverty limits women’s choices and makes it harder for them to escape violent relationships.”). 242 DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, Stop 2016 Report, supra note 190, at 87. 243 See generally NNEDV’s 14th Annual Domestic Violence Counts Report Illuminates Ongoing Gaps in Services and Need for Policy Changes, NATIONAL NETWORK TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE (March 10, 2020), https://nnedv.org/latest_update/nnedvs-14th- 882 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 former battered women’s shelter worker and law professor, declared, “You look at the relatively minuscule amount of money going to transitional housing compared to criminal justice and it’s outrageous.”244 In 2012, VAWA’s funding for transitional housing was about one-fifth the total allocated for law enforcement.245 Thus, the STOP Program is not providing a sufficient amount of housing, and this further marginalizes Black female survivors. e. The Effect of Criminalization on Deterring Abuse Additionally, STOP may also be ineffective as studies have failed to find that laws that criminalize IPV actually deter abuse, and in some instances, these laws increase abuse.246 Goodmark states, “But after twenty-six years of public funding [through VAWA], it appears that criminalizing intimate partner violence may not lower incidence rates.”247 For example, in Quincy, Massachusetts, a jurisdiction that “aggressively” enforced IPV laws, recidivism rates were high primarily because criminalization failed to prevent repeat abusers from engaging in abusive behavior.248 Additionally, in a review of nineteen studies that measured the recidivism of batterers, social scientists found that the recidivism rate was 40%.249 Another report found that arrests increase the frequency of IPV in the long run among offenders.250 B. The Funding Differences between VAWA’s Improving Criminal Justice Responses Program and Culturally Specific Services Program A comparative analysis of two additional grant programs illustrates that VAWA does contain funding of victim services, but the allocations to criminal enforcement dwarf this funding. Unlike VAWA’s STOP Program, the Improving Criminal Justice Responses Program (ICJR), formerly known as the Grants to Encourage Arrest and Enforcement of Protection Orders Program, is a discretionary program. 251 ICJR is VAWA’s second annual-domestic-violence-counts-report/ [https://perma.cc/USV9-P878] (“Victims made 11,336 requests for services—including emergency shelter, housing, transportation, childcare, legal representation, and more—that could not be provided because programs lacked the resources to meet victims’ needs.”). 244 Kate Pickert, What’s Wrong with the Violence Against Women Act, TIME (Feb. 27, 2013), https://nation.time.com/2013/02/27/whats-wrong-with-the-violence-against- women-act/ [https://perma.cc/RG5U-XCN5]. 245 2012 Biennial Effect Report to Congress on the Effectiveness of Grant Programs Under the Violence Against Women Act, DEP’T OF JUST., OFFICE ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 250 (2012) [hereinafter DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, 2012 Biennial], https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/ovw/legacy/2014/03/13/2012-biennial-report-to- congress.pdf [https://perma.cc/4Y9T-BWHC]. 246 See GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 24. 247 Leigh Goodmark, Beyond Criminalizing Domestic Violence, TRANSFORM HARM (March 27, 2021) [hereinafter Goodmark, Beyond Criminalizing], https://transformharm.org/ ab_resource/beyond-criminalizing-domestic-violence/ [https://perma.cc/FA7P-K9DV]. 248 GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 25. 249 JEFFREY FAGAN, THE CRIMINALIZATION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: PROMISES AND LIMITS 19 (1995), https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles/crimdom.pdf [https://perma.cc/M25T-RTR9]. 250 LAWRENCE W. SHERMAN ET. AL., THE VARIABLE EFFECTS OF ARREST ON CRIMINAL CAREERS: THE MILWAUKEE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE EXPERIMENT 139 (1992), https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6733&context= jclc [https://perma.cc/W358-6PRN]. 251 34 U.S.C. §§ 10461-10465 (2020). 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 883 largest grant program, receiving $53,000,000 in the fiscal year 2019.252 In comparison, the Culturally Specific Services Program (CSSP), another discretionary program, received $7,550,000 in the same fiscal year.253 CSSP is fairly representative of VAWA’s other underfunded grant programs that do not heavily fund the legal system.254 CSSP is also distinctive because it is a VAWA program that is specifically related to minority IPV victims.255 Since ICJR and CSSP are discretionary programs and thus do not uniformly operate in all jurisdictions, they cannot be analyzed in the same manner as the STOP Program. This comparative analysis is meant to illustrate how VAWA prioritizes enforcement-focused grant programs to the detriment of programs focused on responding to the economic and social needs of underserved communities. The statutory purposes of ICJR and CSSP are pertinent. ICJR encourages partnerships between the criminal system and local, state, and tribal governments and courts.256 The first purpose area for which ICJR funds can be used is “to implement proarrest programs and policies in police departments, including policies for protection order violations and enforcement of protection orders across state and tribal lines.”257 ICJR funds can also be used for twenty-two other purposes.258 The purpose of ICJR is to focus on enforcement by ensuring that IPV is treated as a serious violation of criminal law.259 On the other hand, CSSP is intended to create opportunities for culturally specific community-based organizations to develop culturally-sensitive strategies that enhance access to services and 252 See SACCO, supra note 21, at 12. 253 Id. at 13. 254 Id. at 13 (noting that the Training and Services to End Violence Against Women with Disabilities Grant program received $6,000,000, Rape Survivor Child Custody Act received $1,500,000, Research and Evaluation on Violence Against Women received $3,500,000 in 2018). 255 DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, Stop 2016 Report, supra note 190, at 18 (“Provide culturally specific services and training to underserved communities based on factors such as race, ethnicity, language, sexual orientation, or gender identity”). 256 Id. at 33—51 (explaining the different purpose areas under ICJR). 257 OVW FISCAL YEAR 2021 IMPROVING CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSES TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DATING VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND STALKING GRANT PROGRAM- SOLICITATION 5—6, DEP’T OF JUST., OFFICE ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN (2021) [hereinafter DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, 2021 DV RESPONSES]. 258 Id. at 6—8; The following are some of the purpose areas included under ICJR: centralize and coordinate police enforcement, prosecution, or judicial responsibility for domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking cases in teams or units of police officers, prosecutors, parole and probation officers, or judges; coordinate computer tracking systems and provide the appropriate training and education about domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking to ensure communication between police, prosecutors, parole and probation officers, and both criminal and family courts; strengthen legal advocacy service programs and other victim services for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, including strengthening assistance to such victims in immigration matters; educate federal, state, tribal, territorial, and local judges, courts, and court-based and court-related personnel in criminal and civil courts (including juvenile courts) about domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and to improve judicial handling of such cases. 259 Id. at 5. 884 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 resources for victims of racial and ethnic minority groups.260 CSSP includes eight purpose areas.261 1. The Disparate Number of Victims Served between ICJR and CSSP The funding disparities between the two grant programs translate to a disparity in the number of victims served. In 2018, the ICJR grantees reported serving 39,632 victims during each sixth-month reporting period.262 In contrast, only 2,886 victims were served by the CSSP program in 2018.263 This stark difference is troublesome, especially for Black female survivors who are disproportionately impacted by criminalization. The limited number of victims served by CSSP, as opposed to ICJR, further marginalizes Black women by reducing their access to services due to poor funding. The increase in victims served by CSSP could diminish this reality for Black women. Minority female survivors of IPV experience significant barriers to seeking support, which is why the provision of services to the most victims by CSSP is necessary. For example, Black and Latina female survivors bear an additional obstacle in seeking support as these two communities have the highest rates of financial insecurity and asset poverty.264 Additionally, Black women have fewer economic resources and less social capital, while they experience more social stigma and male violence.265 In turn, this limits Black women’s access to social, legal, and medical services.266 On the other hand, as ICJR poses risk to Black women, CSSP could fill in that gap by pairing Black women with culturally- sensitive organizations. One of the areas in which CSSP funds can be used is to increase communities’ access to culturally specific resources and 260 OVW FISCAL YEAR 2020 GRANTS TO ENHANCE CULTURALLY SPECIFIC SERVICES FOR VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DATING VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND STALKING PROGRAM 1, DEP’T OF JUST., OFFICE ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN (2019) [hereinafter DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, 2020 CSSP GRANTS], https://www.justice.gov/ovw/ page/file/1256526/download [https://perma.cc/BE3R-4LU8]. 261 Id. at 2; The following are some of the purpose areas included under CSSP: working with State and local governments and social service agencies to develop and enhance effective strategies to provide culturally specific services to victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; Increasing communities’ capacity to provide culturally specific resources and support for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking crimes and their families; strengthening criminal justice interventions, by providing training for law enforcement, prosecution, courts, probation, and correctional facilities on culturally specific responses to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; enhancing traditional services to victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking through the leadership of culturally specific programs offering services to victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. 262 THE 2018 BIENNIAL REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF GRANT PROGRAMS UNDER THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT, DEP’T OF JUST., OFFICE ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 121 (2018) [hereinafter DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, 2018 BIENNIAL], https://www.justice.gov/ovw/page/file/1292636/download [https://perma.cc/8ESZ-LTYQ]. 263 Id. at 99. 264 See RICHIE, supra note 1, at 11 (“[T]he generally accepted measures of economic and social well-being—income, homeownership, high school graduation rates—predict ongoing disadvantages and persistent poverty, which profoundly shaped women’s experiences of abuse.”). 265 See Harrell R. Rodgers, Jr., Black Americans and the Feminization of Poverty: The Intervening Effects of Unemployment, 17 J. OF BLACK STUDIES 402, 404 (1987). 266 Id. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 885 support.267 However, this improvement is currently rendered unattainable by the severe underfunding of CSSP, which results in the program’s inability to reach a sizable, or even decent, portion of minority survivors. This stark difference in funding between the two grant programs is also troubling due to ICJR’s focus on pro-arrest policies. While the lack of funding to CSSP inhibits its ability to reach a good portion of IPV survivors, ICJR increases arrests by promoting mandatory arrest policies,268 which have historically affected Black women and men. As a result of these laws, arrest rates in IPV cases have increased from 7% to 15% in the 1970s and 1980s to 30% or more in 2008.269 In Vermont, 20% of the 2014 prison population was incarcerated due to IPV.270 This preference for increased funding of social services is also supported by the fact that “[c]riminalization most benefits those who feel safer as a result of interventions but are immune from most of its costs . . . . ”271 These costs fall heavily on low-income people and people of color, who are most likely to be involved in the criminal legal system due to inadequate legal representation and life-affirming social services.272 In conjunction, children are economically and emotionally harmed by their parents’ involvement in the legal system, and communities suffer from the removal of their members in noticeable numbers.273 To illustrate further the ways in which VAWA’s limited resources and services negatively impact survivors, a 2019 National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV) report that surveyed IPV survivors found unfavorable outcomes for minority communities.274 For example, the report found that minority survivors in New Jersey remain with abusers because the available shelters do not accommodate their cultures sensitively.275 On a national level, the report stated that victims made 11,336 requests in one day for services, including emergency shelter and housing, that could not be provided due to a lack of resources.276 This finding is relevant and damaging to Black women subjected to IPV. Black women are most disproportionately affected by discriminatory housing practices and are 267 See DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, 2018 BIENNIAL, supra note 262, at 11 (one of the purposes of CSSP is to describe “the barriers experienced by individuals from the identified culturally specific population who are victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking while attempting to seek and access services.”). 268 See generally DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, 2021 DV RESPONSES, supra note 257, at 18 (“State, Unit of Local Government, and Tribal Government Applicants must certify that their laws or official policies: encourage or mandate arrests of domestic violence offenders based on probable cause that an offense has been committed.”). 269 Elise Inouye, Mandatory Arrests – A Double-Edged Sword, 15 UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII L. REV. 33, 33 (2017) https://hilo.hawaii.edu/campuscenter/hohonu/volumes/ documents/MandatoryArrestsADouble-EdgedSword.pdf [https://perma.cc/54D9-H5XZ]. 270 GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 4. 271 Id. at 32. 272 Id. at 31. 273 Id. at 32. 274 NATIONAL NETWORK TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 243, at 8 (“On September 12, 2019: There were 11,336 requests for services that participating programs were unable to provide due to a lack of resources. . . . Survivors often struggle to find affordable housing in urban areas”). 275 Id. at 5. 276 Id. at 8. 886 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 twice as likely to face eviction compared to white people in at least seventeen states.277 Black women are also most likely to be displaced from their housing following domestic violence calls to the police.278 Not only are survivors affected by this, but their children are as well. The children of women who face evictions are far more likely to live in substandard housing, which leads to poor health outcomes.279 Thus, this finding advances the argument that VAWA’s policies contribute to dangerous realities for Black female survivors and their families. In tandem, other minority survivors experience disadvantages encouraged by VAWA’s current funding structure. In regards to immigrant survivors, advocates have “noticed a definite chilling effect in immigrant survivors’ willingness to report, take legal action, and obtain life-saving resources for their families. There is much fear.”280 Another advocate shared, “a trans survivor opted to seek counseling services through our program since we are able to work with local therapists who have trauma- specific training. Unfortunately, we had already run out of funding for these counselors, and the survivor was unable to receive the help they needed.”281 These adverse outcomes for various minority communities demonstrate a lack of funding for the very victims whom VAWA, particularly through its progressive reauthorizations, is meant to serve. Social service-oriented programs may be better in addressing IPV generally as it pertains to minority survivors and Black female survivors specifically because these programs would create solutions that address the different, nuanced, and complex causes of IPV. Through various anecdotes and statistics, as well as an analysis of STOP, ICJR, and CSSP, this Part has shown that VAWA’s funding priorities are ineffective and injurious to Black women. “The overreliance on criminalization tips the programmatic and policy scales in ways that are harmful to people subjected to abuse, their partners, their families and their communities and prevents the development of a menu of options,” said Goodmark.282 It is time for a new, multifaceted solution that recognizes that there is “no one-size-fits-all solution to the problem of intimate partner violence.”283 III. THE FISCAL ROAD TO RACIAL AND GENDER EQUITY Virtually none of the provisions under any VAWA reauthorization focus on the reality that VAWA’s funding priorities disproportionately impact Black female survivors. This Note argues that the best solution is a two-pronged approach. First, a legislative restructuring that reduces the funding allocated to law enforcement and prosecutors under STOP and ICJR while increasing the allocation to CSSP will solve the problems that 277 Chabeli Carrazana & Ko Bragg, Americans Were Told To Stay Home. Black Women Are Most At Risk Of Losing Theirs., THE 19TH (Dec. 21, 2020), https://19thnews.org/2020/12/eviction-moratorium-black-women-housing/ [https://perma.cc/ P56K-5PBX]. 278 Id. 279 Id. 280 NATIONAL NETWORK TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 243, at 11. 281 Id. at 13. 282 GOODMARK, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, supra note 22, at 10. 283 Id. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 887 stem from VAWA’s funding priorities. Secondly, the introduction of economic and housing programs will be salient to this approach as these initiatives target the crucial needs of Black female survivors. Section III.A discusses why the best solution to this problem is for Congress to introduce a revised appropriations bill, which will create funding for the proposed economic and housing programs. Section III.B explains how this funding reconfiguration will improve the stability of Black female survivors. Finally, Section III.C proposes specific initiatives that the new funding structure will prioritize. A. Restructuring the Current Funding Distributions of STOP, ICJR, and CSSP is Necessary to Mitigate the Inequities Exacerbated by VAWA 1. Restructuring VAWA’s Funding Priorities Best Serves the Intent and Purpose of VAWA VAWA provides for some culturally specific services to members of underserved communities, but none of these provisions are specifically tailored to Black female survivors. The law’s most recent reauthorizations (in 2005 and 2013) expanded the purpose areas of several VAWA grants by addressing the specific needs of battered immigrants, Native Americans, and other minority communities.284 For example, VAWA 2005’s Sexual Assault Services Program introduced culturally specific resources to assist minorities victimized by sexual assault.285 Additionally, the law’s 2013 reauthorization granted authority to Native tribes to enforce protection orders over any person.286 The 2021 reauthorization of VAWA, which is awaiting Senate approval, introduces the most impactful changes for minority survivors.287 This proposal calls for an increase of $40,000,000 in authorized funding for culturally specific organizations and measures to ensure that underserved populations are not prevented from accessing grants.288 It also requires culturally competent training of healthcare providers that includes lessons 284 See John Conyers Jr., The 2005 Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act Why Congress Acted to Expand Protections to Immigrant Victims, 13 VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 457, 457 (2007), https://niwaplibrary.wcl.american.edu/wp-content/uploads/ 2015/pdf/CONF-VAWA-Art-VAWA2005Reauthorization.pdf [https://perma.cc/YA3X-M8Q7] (provides an “overview of the history of congressional involvement with the Violence Against Women Act’s (VAWA) provisions to protect immigrant victims of domestic violence”); see also Office On Violence Against Women (OVW) VAWA 2013 Summary: Changes To OVW- administered Grant Programs, DEP’T OF JUST., OFFICE ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 4 (2013) [hereinafter DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, VAWA 2013 Summary], https:// www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/ovw/legacy/2014/06/16/VAWA-2013-grant-programs- summary.pdf [https://perma.cc/7YGL-7XVZ] (“Refines focus of program by redefining ‘culturally specific’ to mean primarily directed toward racial and ethnic minority groups as defined in section 1707(g) of the Public Health Service Act (‘American Indians (including Alaska Natives, Eskimos, and Aleuts); Asian Americans; Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders; Blacks; and Hispanics’”). 285 Conyers, supra note 284, at 458. 286 See DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, VAWA 2013 Summary, supra note 284, at 6 (“Reauthorizes funding for tribal sex offender and protection order registries”). 287 H.R. 1620, 117th Cong. (2021). 288 Id. 888 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 on systemic racism and equity.289 Despite the relevancy of these provisions, VAWA’s provisions do not thoroughly address the needs of Black women. Although both programs fall short of provisions aimed explicitly at Black female survivors, the STOP and ICJR programs have also been expanded to include culturally specific provisions. Under STOP, each state’s tribes are included for funding purposes, and the program sets aside 10% of victim services funding for culturally specific community-based organizations.290 The ICJR program sets aside 5% of program appropriations for Tribal Coalitions grants.291 These expansions are compelling at first glance—and certainly a step in the right direction for minority communities—but STOP and ICJR’s current funding structures do not offer enough guidance for Black female survivors or fully satisfy VAWA’s intent. Shifting the funding granted from STOP and ICJR’s enforcement-focused initiatives to culturally specific victim services under STOP, ICJR, and CSSP will better serve survivors. 2. Congress Is Best Suited to Restructure VAWA’s Current Funding Structure Congress could introduce an approved appropriations bill. For this procedural reason alone, Congress is best positioned to announce a restructured plan for these three grant programs. Importantly, there is a strong likelihood that Congress will take up this issue. Congress passed the most recent VAWA reauthorization in 2013.292 The last significant congressional action occurred in 2021 when the House approved VAWA’s 2021 reauthorization.293 In March 2021, VAWA was referred to the “Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, Ways and Means, Education and Labor, Energy and Commerce, Veterans' Affairs, and Natural Resources” .294 Congress reauthorized VAWA in March 2022.295 However, each reauthorization to VAWA has experienced lengthy congressional debates. So while an amendment by Congress may be the surest way to introduce a reconfiguration of STOP, ICJR, and CSSP funding, bipartisan debates may challenge this proposal. 289 Id. 290 For more background on the mechanics of VAWA’s STOP Program and how this program adversely affects Black female survivors, see Section II.A.2 of this paper, STOP Contributes to Harmful Outcomes for Black Female Victims and Survivors. 291 34 U.S.C. §§ 10461(f) (2020). 292 See DEP’T OF JUST. OVW, 2018 BIENNIAL, supra note 262, at 7 (“Reauthorized in 2000, 2005, and 2013, VAWA articulates Congress’s commitment to effective strategies for preventing and responding to domestic and sexual violence . . .”). 293 H.R. 1585, 116th Cong. (2019–2020) (proposing amendments to VAWA). 294 All Actions: H.R.1620 — 117th Congress (2021-2022), LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1620/all-actions?s=1&r=92 [https://perma.cc/CRD7-N3UQ]. 295 Fact Sheet: Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), THE WHITE HOUSE (March 16, 2022), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements- releases/2022/03/16/fact-sheet-reauthorization-of-the-violence-against-women-act-vawa/ [https://perma.cc/63MZ-AHZX] (last visited December 30, 2022). 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 889 3. Potential Difficulties that Congress May Face in Announcing a Restructured VAWA The Democrats and Republicans who passed VAWA did so partially because of VAWA’s tradition of investigating and prosecuting violent crimes against women. VAWA was also passed during a “tough on crime” period.296 Due to this, there may be pushback to any calls to reduce VAWA’s enforcement focus. On the contrary, VAWA’s reauthorizations indicate that the law is evolving to be more victim-centered. For example, VAWA 2005 created the first federal funding stream committed to direct services for sexual assault victims. The shift away from enforcement is also reflected in the 2021 version of the law.297 H.R.1620 focuses on restorative justice, instead of law enforcement, as a way to address victims’ needs. It adds purpose areas to LGBTQ+ specific services that implement restorative practices “that are focused on victim autonomy, agency, and safety to provide resolution and restitution for the victim.”298 This version of the law also proposes ways to increase underserved populations’ access to grants. Ultimately, although VAWA’s origins are rooted in the criminal legal system, VAWA’s expanded provisions indicate a move towards a less punitive and more restorative approach. VAWA’s evolution indicates that policymakers and advocates are becoming aware of the fact that more victim services are needed. Secondly, opposing political parties may pose challenges to this proposed funding reconfiguration. Yet, this proposal has a strong likelihood of passing due to the country’s recent push to interrogate the historically negative relationship between the Black community and the legal system.299 B. A Legislative Change Should Be Reasonable Within the Context of VAWA 1. Funding Changes Proposed for the STOP Program Congress should reduce the 50% of VAWA funding allotted to law enforcement and prosecutors to 30%. Then, Congress should increase the funding allotted to victim services to 65%. Within this percentage, 35% of the funding should be specifically allocated to culturally specific victim services. To increase the protection of Black female survivors, this proposal recommends that 15% of the 35% should be allocated specifically to services and organizations aimed at empowering Black female survivors. STOP’s specific funding centered on Black female survivors can provide proposals directly influenced by Black female advocates, attorneys, survivors, and policymakers who speak to the needs facing this community. The remaining 30% should be set aside for general victim services that will 296 For more background on “tough on crime”, reference Section I.B.4 of this paper, Black Women’s Distrust of the Criminal Legal System. 297 See generally Goodmark, Violence Against Women Act, supra note 16 (“For the first time, the act would pay for alternative justice measures designed to help victims of violence find justice without requiring them to turn to the legal system.”). 298 H.R. 1620, 117th Cong. (2021). 299 See Justin Worland, America's Long Overdue Awakening to Systemic Racism, TIME (Jun. 11, 2020), https://time.com/5851855/systemic-racism-america/ [https://perma.cc/285M-X2UK]. 890 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 benefit all survivors. The 5% of funding currently granted to the courts can remain intact. 2. Funding Changes Proposed for the ICJR and CSSP Programs ICJR’s current $53,000,000 in funding should be reduced by $20,000,000, and the remaining $33,000,000 in ICJR funds should be attributed to CSSP’s funding. Additionally, the House-approved 2021 reauthorization of VAWA proposed a $40,000,000 increase of CSSP.300 This Note argues that this $40,000,000 increase plus the remaining $33,000,000 from ICJR’s funding should be added to CSSP funding, bringing CSSP’s newly proposed funding to $80,550,000.301 This Note also argues that Congress should allocate $35,000,000 of this funding specifically to victim services centered on Black female survivors. This $35,000,000 may seem high; however, Black female survivors are widely underserved by VAWA so this figure is necessary to improve this community’s outcomes. This proposal may also benefit other survivors and the U.S. economy overall. A former labor secretary under former President Bill Clinton and the former commission of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission posited that investing in Black women serves as “catalysts for economic growth and community development . . . and a win for the U.S. economy . . . .”302 By reducing the overall funding of ICJR and shifting it to increase the funding of CSSP, Congress can diminish VAWA’s contribution to the negative outcomes of Black female survivors and increase the provision of services, economic stability, and protection of Black women. Although it is not certain that ICJR’s current total allocation takes away from CSSP’s, it is clear that the amount of people who are served by each program is considerably dissimilar.303 C. Victim-Centered Services that Could Improve the Status of Black Women Subjected to Abuse Programs and services that directly address the specific needs of Black female IPV survivors must also be implemented under these three programs in order for this proposed legislative change to adequately reduce the unfavorable outcomes of Black women. Studies have found that short- term advocacy services were beneficial to Black women following their exit from domestic violence shelters.304 Thus, investing in long-term victim- centered services that are tailored to the needs of Black female survivors could prevent IPV and provide access to Black women who have already been subjected to abuse. 300 H.R. 1620, 117th Cong. (2021). 301 This figure is reached by taking the sum of $7,550,000 (CSSP’s 2019 enacted appropriations), $40,000,000, and $33,000,000. 302 Alexis Herman & Heather Murren, Invest In Black Women To Drive The Economy Forward, FORTUNE (Feb. 3, 2021), https://fortune.com/2021/02/03/black-women- economy-diversity-equity-inclusion/ [https://perma.cc/Y8YN-85PX]. 303 For more background on the difference in populations served, see Section II.B.1 of this paper, The Disparate Number of Victims Served between ICJR and CSSP. 304 Cris M . Sullivan & Maureen H. Rumptz, Adjustment and Needs of African- American Women Who Utilized a Domestic Violence Shelter, 9 VIOLENCE AND VICTIMS 275, 275 (1994), https://vaw.msu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/African-American-women- needs-after-shelter.pdf [https://perma.cc/QK2Q-WA9H]. 2023] AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE 891 1. Economic Security Programs to Aid Black Women Subjected to Abuse Funding economic programs for Black women is pertinent due to the damaging relationship between Black women, poverty, and IPV.305 As a result, VAWA should fund back-to-school, back-to-work, and other initiatives that directly provide forms of financial security to battered Black women. Currently, many states provide educational grants to adult students who can return to vocational schools or college.306 These programs, such as New York’s College Access Challenge Grant, dedicate grants to low-income adults and displaced workers.307 The proposed increased funding to culturally specific victim services could create similar programs that will allow battered Black women to return to school to improve their employment prospects. Relatedly, VAWA’s funding should develop back-to-work programs. Such initiatives will create funding for Black female survivors who wish to establish and own small businesses. Black women experience the highest rates of unemployment in the United States.308 In May 2020, the unemployment rate for Black women reached almost 20%.309 Back-to-work programs will be valuable as Black women and women of color broadly have already shown to be among the group of fastest-growing female entrepreneurs in 2020 and 2021.310 Caitlin Mullen argued that this occurs because “need, not opportunity, drives many Black women to become entrepreneurs if they feel they’ve been underpaid or left behind at conventional institutions.”311 This program would serve as an alternative to the back-to-school program as not all Black women may have the time or resources to participate in formal education. The final economic security program this Note recommends is a program that directly provides money to Black female survivors. For Black women who cannot return to formal education or create their own business, this program will increase their stability and reduce the likelihood of their victimization. The effects of the 2020 COVID-19 stimulus relief checks illustrate the value of this recommendation. A study found that following the distribution of COVID-19 stimulus relief checks, rates of IPV decreased 305 See RICHIE, supra note 1, at 29 (“[R]esearch has . . . established a higher incidence rate of intimate partner violence for Black women”). 306 Grants For Adult Students, COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS, http:// www.collegescholarships.org/grants/adult.htm [https://perma.cc/7YY7-N3ZX] (last visited on Dec. 1, 2021). 307 Id. 308 See JASMINE TUCKER, IT’S TIME TO PAY BLACK WOMEN WHAT THEY’RE OWED, NATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER 1 (2020), https://nwlc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/ 07/BWEPD-2021-7.26.21.pdf [https://perma.cc/7GYV-5EH5] (“[T]he unemployment rate for Black women reached 16.6% in May 2020 . . .”). 309 Id. 310 Ruth Umoh, Black Women Were Among The Fastest-Growing Entrepreneurs— Then Covid Arrived, FORBES (Oct. 26, 2020), https://www.forbes.com/sites/ruthumoh/ 2020/10/26/black-women-were-among-the-fastest-growing-entrepreneurs-then-covid- arrived/?sh=5c2010c36e01 [https://perma.cc/5SDZ-DNFE]. 311 Caitlin Mullen, Women Of Color Drive New Business Growth During Pandemic, BIZWOMEN (Apr. 14, 2021), https://www.bizjournals.com/bizwomen/news/latest-news/2021/ 04/minority-women-drive-business-growth-in-pandemic.html?page=all [https://perma.cc/ 4RMP-C5TY]. 892 COLUM. J. RACE & L. [Vol. 13:853 in April 2020 because abused women directly received money.312 Thus, this proposal may effectively attack institutionalized obstacles that Black women face. This proposal poses challenges. First, it excludes the participation of non-Black female survivors and non-female survivors who are just as likely to experience IPV or have already experienced IPV. Secondly, it excludes Black women who are above the poverty line. Lastly, it could create disparate results between Black women who are eligible for these three programs. For example, Black women who live in rural or underserved areas may not have access to local schools or customers. Although these challenges are relevant, these programs should still be adopted to address the economic factors that drive IPV against Black women. 2. Housing as a Major Provision to Aid Black Female Survivors Due to Black women’s high rates of evictions and homelessness and the relationship between housing and IPV, this Note recommends providing long-term transitional housing to Black female survivors. Currently, VAWA does contain provisions that provide housing support, but they are not sufficient.313 Thus, this Note argues that there should be increased funding for the creation of housing that is specifically available to Black female survivors who are at risk of victimization due to housing insecurity. The Brooks Short-Term Housing Facility in Washington, D.C. could serve as a model.314 This funding reconfiguration coupled with culturally specific services ought to be adopted because it more thoroughly protects Black female survivors while also balancing other survivors’ interests and society’s interest. IV. CONCLUSION The intersection of race and gender discrimination has aggressively motivated the violence Black women have faced in America. Further exposing this community to state-sanctioned criminalization pushes Black women into marginalization and keeps them there. In a country reflecting on its traditions and history, in order to make way for justice, attention must be paid to laws that inadvertently work to impede progress and equity. This two-pronged solution would benefit Black female survivors by reducing the inequitable treatment and violence that they face. In turn, these benefits would reflect a society that works to protect, not discard, all individuals, including women like Tiffany Wright. 312 Emily Leslie & Riley Wilson, Sheltering In Place And Domestic Violence: Evidence From Calls For Service During COVID-19, 189 J. PUB. ECON. 3 (2020) (“The increase in domestic violence persisted for several weeks before attenuating around the middle of April”). 313 See Goodmark, Reimagining VAWA, supra note 19, at 93 (“VAWA could supplement existing sources of emergency funding for victims of violence to meet the immediate needs that come with leaving a violent relationship—e.g., deposits for rental housing, money for food or transportation.”). 314 The Brooks Short-Term Housing Facility, FRIENDSHIP PLACE, https:// friendshipplace.org/programs-outreach/ward-3-family-housing-facility/ [https://perma.cc/ JF4A-5FZJ] (last visited Jan. 10, 2022).