Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Trump Funding Cuts Endanger Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Survivors

Two people holding hands, comforting each other.

The National Domestic Violence Hotline fields up to 3,000 calls and messages a day from all over the country.

Getty Images, Tempura

This essay is part of a series by Lawyers Defending American Democracy where we demonstrate the link between the administration’s sweeping executive actions and their roots in the authoritarian blueprint, Project 2025, and show how these actions harm individuals and families throughout the country.

The Trump administration’s funding cuts and new rules for grants are threatening critical programs from food and housing to medical research, parks, and much more. Among them are programs proven to prevent and reduce violence as well as initiatives that assist survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and other acts of violence.


Although the administration claims to care about violence—citing concerns about “rapists,” for example, in justifying policies that target immigrants and transgender individuals—its actions in fact increase the risk of violence and jeopardize survivors’ safety and ability to move forward. The administration’s harsh approach aligns with Project 2025’s failure to support critical social services, which can be a lifeline for victims of sexual violence or domestic abuse.

Sexual and domestic violence occur in all regions of the country and affect all age groups and household incomes. The National Domestic Violence Hotline, which took its first calls in 1996, fields up to 3,000 calls and messages a day from all over the country. Even before this administration’s draconian cuts, the hotline has been woefully underfunded, with resources to answer only about half of its calls and messages. In addition, more than half of women and almost one in three men have experienced sexual violence involving physical contact, and one in four women have experienced rape or attempted rape, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported last year.

One investigation described survivor Tina Johnson, who grew up in Alabama in a community where sexual abuse was rampant, wasn’t something that was discussed, and was something women were raised to tolerate and for which they were often blamed. She first experienced sexual abuse when she was about four years old. Soon, a second uncle began abusing her as well. As a young adult, she was sexually assaulted by a prominent lawyer, who later ran for the U.S. Senate.

Survivors like Johnson clearly need help, yet the administration appears determined to undermine programs that might provide it. Many of the current cuts have come without prior notice. Newly imposed grant restrictions aim to cut funding unless programs pledge to adhere to unprecedented requirements—vowing not to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion, for example. And this is despite the fact that Congress has supported programs reaching out to those most in need of help. While some proposed cuts have been reversed or paused, the resulting uncertainty makes it virtually impossible for victim service organizations to run effectively and plan for the future.

Why this matters

Cuts increase risks for survivors and their families:

Survivors fleeing abusive partners in the middle of the night could lose access to hotlines that help them find safety. People who have been sexually assaulted could lose access to forensic nurse examiners specializing in sexual assault, to rape kits that preserve evidence, to rape crisis counselors, and other essential help. Case management, counseling, housing assistance, legal help, and medical care, among other things, are also under threat.

Entire communities, including LGBTQ+ and immigrant survivors, could lose access to support programs. Survivors of domestic violence may find it harder to get a lawyer to help them navigate the legal system when, for example, they seek a protective order or help with a child custody battle.

Programs aimed at reducing violence are needed in every part of the United States:

Funding cuts threaten efforts to guide abuse survivors toward healthy relationships; public service announcements that raise awareness of domestic violence; and initiatives like Dating Matters, a program aimed at helping teenagers recognize and respond to abuse. Critical programs addressing the root causes of domestic violence and sexual assault face budget cuts simply because someone in Washington declares that they are not “aligned with the administration’s priorities.”

Slashing these programs increases the risk of poverty:

Domestic violence survivors often end up saddled with debt incurred by their abusive partners and face other economic challenges as a result of abuse. Support programs help them keep jobs and housing so they can be economically secure.

Safety and support are crucial:

A robust democracy should help people in times of need and should promote safety. Vital social service programs should not be terminated for partisan political reasons. Domestic violence and sexual assault are not Republican or Democratic issues, nor are they issues that affect only cities, a particular state or two, or one social or economic class.

We as a nation should have a shared commitment to ending violence and supporting victims of abuse. Project 2025 paints a picture of a country where individuals are left on their own to deal with crippling assaults, their mental, physical, and emotional damage be damned.

Julie Goldscheid is a Professor of Law Emeritus at CUNY School of Law and an Adjunct Professor of Law at NYU School of Law. She teaches courses on gender violence and has taught courses including civil procedure, legislation, gender equality and lawyering. She is a volunteer with Lawyers Defending American Democracy.

Read More

RFK Jr. Vowed To Find the Environmental Causes of Autism. Then He Shut Down Research Trying To Do Just That.

Erin McCanlies spent almost two decades at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health studying how parents’ exposure to chemicals affects the chance that they will have a child with autism. This spring, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. eliminated her entire division.

Nate Smallwood for ProPublica

RFK Jr. Vowed To Find the Environmental Causes of Autism. Then He Shut Down Research Trying To Do Just That.

Erin McCanlies was listening to the radio one morning in April when she heard Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promising to find the cause of autism by September. The secretary of Health and Human Services said he believed an environmental toxin was responsible for the dramatic increase in the condition and vowed to gather “the most credible scientists from all over the world” to solve the mystery.

Nothing like that has ever been done before, he told an interviewer.

Keep ReadingShow less
When Politicians Draw Their Own Victories: Why and How To End Gerrymandering

Alyssa West from Austin holds up a sign during the Fight the Trump Takeover rally at the Texas Capitol on Saturday, August. 16, 2025.

(Aaron E. Martinez/Austin American-Statesman via Getty Images)

When Politicians Draw Their Own Victories: Why and How To End Gerrymandering

From MAGA Republicans to progressive Democrats to those of us in the middle, Americans want real change – and they’re tired of politics as usual. They’re craving authenticity, real reform, and an end to the status quo. More and more, voters seem to be embracing disruption over the empty promises of establishment politicians, who too often live by the creed that “one bad idea deserves a bigger one.” Just look at how both parties are handling gerrymandering in Texas and California, and it’s difficult to see it as anything other than both parties trying to rig elections in their favor.

Instead of fixing the system, politicians are fueling a turbocharged redistricting arms race ahead of high-stakes midterm 2026 elections that will determine control of the U.S. Congress. In Texas, Republicans just redrew congressional lines, likely guaranteeing five new Republican seats, which has sparked Democratic strongholds like California and New York to threaten their own gerrymandered counterattacks.

Keep ReadingShow less
Declaration of Independence
When, in 2026, the United States marks the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, we should take pride in our collective journey.
Douglas Sacha/Getty Images

What Exactly Does "All Men Are Created Equal" Mean in the Declaration of Independence?

I used to think the answer was obvious; it was self-evident. But it's not, at least not in today's political context. MAGA Republicans and Democrats have a very different take on the meaning of this phrase in the Declaration.

I said in my book, We Still Hold These Truths: An America Manifesto, that it is in the interpretation of our founding documents that both the liberal and conservative ideologies that have run throughout our history can be found. This is a perfect example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Washington, DC, skyline
A country in crisis needs to call a truce with its government
Michael Lee/Getty Images

Defending Democracy in the Heart of Democracy - Washington, D.C.

The Crisis in Our Capital

Washington, D.C. is at the center of American democracy. Yet today, its residents — taxpayers, veterans, workers, families, people like you an I, American citizens — are being stripped of their right to self-government. The recent surge of out-of-state National Guard troops into the District under federal order has highlighted a deep flaw in our system: D.C. does not have the same authority to govern itself that the 50 states enjoy.Keith

We are told this militarization is about “public safety,” but violent crime in D.C. is near a 30-year low . What we are witnessing is not a crime-fighting measure, but an unprecedented encroachment on local authority. The consent of the people — the foundation of democracy — is being sidelined to pursue a political or even personal agenda.

The Ethical and Constitutional Problem

Legally, a president can request National Guard support through interstate compacts. But legality is not the same as legitimacy. True democracy requires consent, not unilateral fiat. Under the Home Rule Act, federal control over D.C. is only supposed to last 30 days in emergencies. Yet the use of state-based National Guard units circumvents this safeguard and seems to demonstrate a hidden agenda. This is a loophole — one that undermines D.C.’s right to self-governance and sets a dangerous precedent for federal overreach.

An Urgent Legislative Answer

It is not enough to critique the abuse of power — we must fix it. That is why I have drafted the D.C. Defense of Self-Government Act, which closes this loophole and restores constitutional balance. The draft bill is now available for public review on my congressional campaign website:

Read the D.C. Defense of Self-Government Act here

This legislation would require explicit, expedited approval from Congress before federal or state National Guard troops can be deployed into the District. It ensures no president — Republican. Democrat or Independent — can bypass the will of the people of Washington, D.C.

This moment also reminds us of a deeper injustice that has lingered for generations: the people of Washington, D.C., remain without full representation in Congress. Over 700,000 Americans—more than the populations of several states—are denied a voting voice in the very body that holds sway over their lives. This lack of representation makes it easier for their self-government to be undermined, as we see today. That must change. We will need to revisit serious legislation to finally fix this injustice and secure for D.C. residents the same democratic rights every other American enjoys.

The Bigger Picture

This fight is not about partisan politics. It is about whether America will live up to its founding ideals of self-rule and accountability. Every voter, regardless of party, should ask: if the capital of our democracy can be militarized without the consent of the people, what stops it from happening in other cities across America?

A Call to Action

When I ran for president, my wife told me I was going to make history. I told her making history didn’t matter to me — what mattered to me then and what matters to me now is making a difference. I'm not in office yet so I have no legal authority to act. But, I am still a citizen of the United States, a veteran of the United States Air Force, someone who has taken the oath of office, many times since 1973. That oath has no expiration date. Today, that difference is about ensuring the residents of D.C. — and every American city — are protected from unchecked federal overreach.

I urge every reader to share this bill with your representatives. Demand that Congress act now. We can’t wait until the mid-terms. Demand that they defend democracy where it matters most — in the heart of our capital — because FBI and DEA agents patrolling the streets of our nation's capital does not demonstrate democracy. Quite the contrary, it clearly demonstrates autocracy.

Davenport is a candidate for U.S. Congress, NC-06.