Amazon.com Widgets

Is the Violence Against Women Act unconstitutional?

  • The 14th Amendment

    Section 1.

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    DOES NOT STATE MAN, WOMAN, OR CHILD!

    ANY PERSON!!!

  • No Presumption of Innocence

    The language of the law removes the constitutionally protected right of "innocent until proven guilty." The accused must prove his/her innocence. Within the law, provisions exist to make this very difficult. The law removes judicial discretion. District Attorneys and judges are limited when considering the merits of individual cases. If special interest advocacy leads to Congress passing laws eliminating constitutionally protected rights, it leaves the judiciary as an enforcement tool of the legislative branch. The loss of an impartial judiciary diminishes the rights and liberty of both accused and accuser.

  • No Presumption of Innocence

    The language of the law removes the constitutionally protected right of "innocent until proven guilty." The accused must prove his/her innocence. Within the law, provisions exist to make this very difficult. The law removes judicial discretion. District Attorneys and judges are limited when considering the merits of individual cases. If special interest advocacy leads to Congress passing laws eliminating constitutionally protected rights, it leaves the judiciary as an enforcement tool of the legislative branch. The loss of an impartial judiciary diminishes the rights and liberty of both accused and accuser.

  • No Presumption of Innocence

    The law removes the presumption of innocence which is protected in the U.S. Constitution. The law asserts that the accused must prove their innocence while at the same time placing obstacles in the way preventing it. In this this law individuals lose their right of "Innocent Until Proven Guilty." District Attorneys and judges are required to adhere to the law leaving them no authority to seek justice based on the merits of individual cases. If all laws were adjudicated in this manner congress would assume the proper constitutionally mandated role of the judiciary. If advocacy of a particular position becomes law without constitutionality of the law the judiciary is weakened and individual liberty is diminished.

  • No Presumption of Innocence

    The law advocates for outcomes instead of seeking justice within the confines of the U.S. Constitution. The accused is presumed guilty with the burden of proving their innocence. This is contrary to established constitutional law. The law creates obstacles preventing one the opportunity to defend themselves. District Attorneys and Judges are limited when making decisions about the validly or merit's of a case. Rather, they must follow a law of which they have no control. If this were the case for all offenses submitted for adjudication the congress would replace the proper role of the judiciary.

  • Accused perpetrator presumed guilty and loses parenting rights via TRO before hearing

    I was blindsided by DVPA in California which is based on VAWA and lost all contact with my sons via ex arte TRO for 2 months based on false claim of "harassment" during divorce. When I finally got my hearing, the court through the case out and gave me joint legal and physical custody of my sons. Could have lost them for 5 years under DVPA had I not been trained as lawyer and had 30 years law experience.

  • We already have 'Assault Laws" why create further gender based laws?

    Why isn’t VAWA written as VAPA (P= "persons"?).

    Despite costing the state tens of thousands from a proven false 911 call, responding officer's, processing, overnight mandated "zero tolerance" one night incarceration, 6 week's medical urine analysis, countless hours and private attorney time, and the courts media recording/audio time, records keeping.... Two months later to find an absolute lie, absolute proof of the lie, and proof the lie was a malicious, vindictive retaliatory lie... The false accuser simply gets a verbal reprimand, walks away, not even a fine?

  • Why isn’t VAWA written as VAPA (P= "persons"?).

    Despite costing the state tens of thousands from a proven false 911 call, responding officer's, processing, overnight mandated "zero tolerance" one night incarceration, 6 week's medical urine analysis, countless hours and private attorney time, and the courts media recording/audio time, records keeping.... Two months later to find an absolute lie, absolute proof of the lie, and proof the lie was a malicious, vindictive retaliatory lie... The false accuser simply gets a verbal reprimand, walks away, not even a fine?

    As the falsely accused, enduring the stress, the arrest, the system not caring whatsoever about the truth until two months later, the humiliation, the career damage, reputation damage, a permanent online mugshot from multiple extortionist websites EACH demanding $400 to take the image down (mugshots.Com, florida.Arrests.Org, bustedmugshots.Com, hiddenpasts.Org, etc., EACH claiming all the while that they put mugshots up there to "warn neighbors and family" - despite that for large sums of money they take them down - how does that make anyone safe - so the wealthy can afford to "save their reputation online" but the poor cannot?), and in the end, much like this University of Virginia false rape “Jackie” allegation, the courts issue vanilla statements rather than an "INNOCENT" document... They provide a piece of paper with "NO INFO" written on it, which they claim is not an exoneration, but enough to drop one's case... That's it... That's all you get for having been dragged through the ringer... Like the police department's in Florida... Virginia's "suspended case" leaves the accused still in public opinion limbo ... Where is the "absolute exoneration"? Why isn't the false accuser held to a standard of integrity?

    The only remedy for the falsely accused, is civil court. And to the average citizen, would cost $5,000 to $30,000 to contract a lawyer, to sue an accuser, who might like Jackie herself, be unable ever to pay out any punitive, financial reward... Rendering the civil process untenable. After the fact the accused MUST describe what actually happened in order to explain to future employers, relatives, etc., but by laws that FORBID the falsely accused from mentioning the name of the false accuser? Get this: the name of the falsely accused is boldly printed on ALL THE PAPERWORK, shows up in ALL the legal computer files, on ALL mugshot websites appearing page one SEO Google, Bing, Yahoo when you type in the name of the falsely accused. .. Yet the false accuser's name? NOT MENTIONED ANYWHERE, crossed out of ALL paperwork, blanked out/silenced on ALL copies of recording's of the 911 call, hidden from ALL views in the press, not permitted to be listed at ALL, and if the falsely accused does list the false accuser's name, especially online as I just did here in this comment, the falsely accused (despite proven lies against him) remains COMPLETELY at risk of being charged with a civil "cyberstalking" restraint order. False accusers get a COMPLETE FREE RIDE over and over again at the taxpayer's FULL expense.

  • Presumption of Guilt By Anatomy

    VAWA is in its own title a presumptive and unConstitutional law. The premise is, from the title to the content of the law itself, that women are victims at all times, and men are aggressors at all times. Multiple studies, including one by Harvard University, indicate that 70% of domestic violence is initiated by women.

    VAWA contains language creating an irrational presumption that any female immigrant is instantly and unquestioningly conferred rights ex post facto regardless of her country of origin, regardless of the fact that an investigator in the U.S. has no authority or mechanism to validate any of the alleged victim's claims in their country of origin. Ergo, female immigrants can literally make any claims they like, and there is some evidence they are coached to do exactly that by certain groups pushing individual agendas.

    VAWA contains language ostensibly to "protect female victims", but in fact this language serves as carte blanche to deprive rights of the accused. In one particular case, the spouse of a U.S. Army sergeant deployed overseas used VAWA provisions to make unsubstantiated claims she "feared he would become abusive" despite no such history in the couple's relationship. She then invoked the protection clauses in VAWA to kidnap their daughter and flee. The sergeant was refused information on their whereabouts despite being on a separate continent. The spouse successfully concealed herself and their daughter for two years until the sergeant was able to force her into family court in Pierce County, Washington after exhaustive legal action which satisfactorily proved to a judge that the spouse's claims were not only unfounded but impossible - the spouse had claimed he hit her, giving exact dates; the sergeant was able to produce military orders proving he was not only not there, but deployed in action in Southeast Asia during the times she claimed.

  • Men are also subject to domestic and sexual violence

    There are crimes of violence that women are more likely to be subject to and crimes of violence that men are more likely to be subject to. VAWA operates under the premise that only women need services, a premise the statistics have never supported. The original domestic researchers Murray Strauss and Richard Gelles found violence going both ways, and more recent studies have supported this, some finding that women are actually even more likely to initiate violence than men. Yet, there is little help or acknowledgment for male victims and worse, men are often blamed for violence initiated by female partners. Men have just as much right to live in peace as women, but aren't even allowed to defend themselves in many cases. Men are stronger on average, but strength does not equal guilt.

  • No, it is not!

    If the current laws were working, there would be no need for the Violence Against Women Act. Women are standing up to men who abuse them, and men are not liking it. The sad situation is that on a statistical basis 1 in 3 women are abused either physically, sexually, emotionally, or mentally by their loved ones or spouses. This needs to stop immediately!

  • Absolutley not

    What is wrong with whomever asked that question? How on earth would this be unconstitutional? Only to men who abuse women, I suppose! Men think they have a right to beat us and rape us and we are supposed to like it or something. Morons. I am lucky in the fact that my husband is a great man. No real man would ever hurt a woman.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Quan says2014-01-08T20:10:33.533
Of course it's unconstitutional. The female gender is so protected under the law in general, not just VAWA, that men are often presumed guilty until proven innocent whenever a woman makes an accusation.
FloridaArrestscom says2015-09-10T06:38:42.900
The falsely accused pay thousands and thousands in defense, loses their reputation, loses hundreds of thousands of potential current and future career income, the damage is extraordinary, and yet here we have the falsely accused, because the false accuser faces no penalty, has their name stricken from all legal documents and media, and has access to a "civil cyberstalking" law the false accuser can invoke against their target, for even mentioning their name as the false accuser, the falsely accused CANNOT EVER VINDICATE THEMSELVES (even when there exists multiple documents, audio and video PROVING INNOCENCE from the location and time of the actual falsely claimed event).

The U.S. is failing it's citizens. The falsely accused, the innocent, now by law are not permitted to mention the name of a false accuser without violating "new cyberstalking laws"... All of which harbor themselves under a GENDER SPECIFIC FEDERAL LEGISLATION... With a blatant "V" written in it .... It should be Violence Against "Persons" Act.... But it's not. How many "men's shelters" are in the U.S. today? What HR department wants now to deal with someone who has a mugshot online? Will they really care if the person was falsely arrested? Really? Just the arrest and the dozens of scam online mugshot websites posting a Googled by persons name to page one result, just the arrest then alone is enough to offer the public a chance to "publicly condemn" and destroy the career of the falsely accused for LIFE - it's not about facts - but perceptions. Our legal system is falling apart, good people's lives, their careers, their children's support... Are being absolutely devastated by this skewed LEGALLY ACCEPTED and often encouraged (by lawyers) falsified gender-based, slanderous false witness.(as a tool in custody disputes, divorce, etc.) Why not?

There exists no reason for a false accuser to fear ANY consequence for wicked lies... Consider this.... The concept of "He's a Witch!" is rampant now in America's public media, continued commentary and sadly, systemic now in our own courts - in fact - processing false allegations is a huge financial gain for most jurisdictions (receiving increased federal funds for increases in arrests) and state's attorney's look great when they spend that money on larger shelters and advertise their higher arrest numbers to a voting public... "tough on crime" and "zero tolerance" ... And everyone thumps their chest, "be happy you got 'NO INFO' and were cleared, hey, it just proves the system worked"... But look at UVA, the Greek system, the President, Rolling Stone... The system is NOT working. Not at all.