Violence Against Women

  • Determined whether a domestic violence survivor could remove her name from the electronic court record of an eviction complaint.
  • In October, 2013, Supreme Court heard arguments in U.S. vs. Castleman, for which Legal Momentum co-authored an amicus brief. The case centered on whether a gun trafficker who abused the mother of his child should be able to legally buy guns. The amicus brief urged the Supreme Court to uphold federal laws—and those state laws like Tennessee’s—that were enacted to ensure that domestic violence abusers are prohibited from possessing guns. In March, 2014, the Court decided to uphold the provisions of the Violence Against Women Act that prevent abusers from purchasing firearms. Justice Sotomayor cited information from Legal Momentum’s amicus brief in her majority opinion.
  • Determined the right to unemployment benefits when a woman is forced to quit job due to domestic violence.
  • Amicus brief in support of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s appeal of a decision of the Superior Court Panel vacating the sexual assault conviction of three defendants.
  • Determined the right to sue for civil rights remedies under VAWA and the power of Congress to enact VAWA. The decision was overruled, in part, by the Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Morrison.
  • Ms. Tucker is appealing the Circuit Court of Cook County ruling, affirming the Chicago Housing Authority's decision to terminate her Housing Choice Section 8 Voucher, without consideration of the applicability of the Violence Against Women Act and Ms. Tucker's status as a victim of domestic violence.
  • Determined the right to sue under Title VII for wrongful discharge when a woman is dismissed from employment because her batterer works in the same establishment and has threatened with violence if she is not fired.
  • Determined whether a judge in a rape case should instruct the jury that the defendant made a reasonable mistake as to whether or not the victim had, in fact, consented to sexual contact.
  • Whether policy required an exception to the "proportionate share" of damages rule in cases of domestic violence where the police fail to act resulting in harm to the victim.
  • Individuals and the EEOC are seeking justice for dozens of immigrant women and men subjected to abuse in their workplace, including sexual assault, extortion, felonious assault, and sexual harassment.  This specific appeal seeks to enforce the confidentiality protections available under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) for individuals who apply for U-visas and T-visas, which are available to crime victims who cooperate with authorities and for immigrant family violence victims who apply for immigration relief under VAWA.The issue of confidentiality of VAWA self-petitions, U-visa, and T-visa applications has been litigated in the lower courts, but this appeal is the first time that a federal appeals court has heard the issue.  By submitting this brief, we hope to strengthen the Violence Against Women Act by ensuring that immigrant victims of sexual assault, harassment, and other crimes receive the full protections available to them under the law.
  • Determined the definition of extreme cruelty under the VAWA provision that protects immigrant victims from deportation and return to their abuser.
  • Determined the statute of limitations for torts based on sexual abuse in Montana.