Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The Burden of Survival and Pursuing Justice

Opinion

The Burden of Survival and Pursuing Justice

A statue of Lady Justice.

Pixabay, WilliamCho

My neighbor was brutally attacked outside of his home one Friday night, when another resident, blasting loud music, yelled out his accusations, “You have been going through my things, you have been breaking into my home.” My neighbor gently told this man, “No, I have not gone through your things. Please lower your music.” His reply was a beating, fists that did great damage.

His wife was in the driveway, frozen. Horrified. Scared. She called the police and ran to her husband as the man fled.


My neighbor’s next memory begins at the County Hospital. His nose and several ribs were broken. He’s home now, bruised, bandaged—and still terrified. He asked why the police hadn’t acted. He had to call the police after the assault. He had to send them photos of his broken bones. The crime is a felony, but the police have no leads. I told my neighbor that this is too familiar in my field of work. When you are a victim, you become everything: The survivor, the patient, the detective, the crime scene investigator, the narrator.

The police asked him, why didn’t you have a camera? Why didn’t you let your dog out? Classic victim blaming.

Eventually, when he had to identify possible suspects, he was stressed: Could he recognize his attacker? Filing a civil restraining order was impossible because the police had not yet investigated the incident—or identified a suspect.

Welcome to my work, I said. Welcome to my world.

It is exhausting to be a victim.

Having to fight for your own survival is a tale as old as time. I hear it every day, and not just at work.

My neighbor’s story is far from unique. A teenager I know was the victim of a fight at school; her parents pushed the school for accommodations after the school did nothing. When I was in college, a friend was assaulted by her doctor. Years later, the burden to testify, to come forward, to try to stop him, was hers. Another friend suffered a beating outside of his place of employment. He had to track down security camera footage just to get the police to pay attention.

I know because I have practiced domestic violence law since 2004. Over the decades, the story is the same, always what the victim could or should have done differently.

Victim-blaming in the public sphere is brutal. Imagine when it happens at home. By your loved ones. Or by those who claim to love you. The blaming magnifies.

“Why didn’t you speak up?” They ask. “Why didn’t you tell anyone? Why did you marry that person?” Why why why.

A big part of our work is teaching survivors that the system is not fair. In the pursuit of justice, the system can hurt you more. Even in a crisis, you have to be your own advocate.

Plenty of information intended for people who experience domestic violence was applicable to my neighbor’s situation. I shared all the information I had on victim restitution, relocation assistance, security cameras, how to advocate with law enforcement, how to file a restraining order, and more. As helpful as the information might be, it forced him to take the time that he should have used for healing from the physical and emotional damage to become his own advocate. Even my offer rang hollow because all my well-intentioned advice shifted the burden from the authorities to my neighbor, the victim. I am proud to lead an organization that puts survivors first—but even I unintentionally burdened a victim, who should have been supported during a difficult time.

We can and must remove barriers to accessing justice.

During President Trump’s first administration, the failure to pursue white-collar crimes and cuts in the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) and related government funding had a massive impact on victims of crime, who now find it much more difficult to get access to legal aid. The Crime Victims Fund (CVF) did not pass the committee last session. We have another opportunity now to secure much-needed funding for victims of crime. Call or email your representatives now and urge them to pass this vital legislation. A similar law was enacted in California in 2024 to address the reduction in federal funding. It came into effect after a group of advocates urged their legislators to find funding to continue critical services—like keeping shelters and other related services for survivors running. Other states can use a similar model in the meantime. Congress must enact this law to continue to protect survivors.

On February 7, 2025, the Office on Violence Against Women, withdrew funding opportunities that had previously been available -- sustaining the toxic trend of blaming the victim.

Carmen McDonald is an attorney and the Executive Director of the Survivor Justice Center; she is a Public Voices Fellow of t he OpEdProject.

Read More

What Comes Next for the 1 Million People Who Have Lost – or Will Soon Lose – Temporary Protected Status

People hold Haitian flags and signs during a July 2026 rally in San Diego in support of immigrants living in the U.S. with Temporary Protected Status.

What Comes Next for the 1 Million People Who Have Lost – or Will Soon Lose – Temporary Protected Status

At the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term, 1.3 million individuals from 17 countries were living and working in the U.S. under Temporary Protected Status, or TPS.

TPS is a humanitarian form of protection from deportation for people who cannot return to their home countries because of an armed conflict, environmental disaster or other extraordinary circumstances.

Keep ReadingShow less
United States Customs and Border Protection sign

Signage over the headquarter entrance of the United States Customs and Border Protection building in Washington, D.C.

Getty Images

New bill seeks to limit TSA data sharing with ICE

A newly proposed bill in Congress would restrict the Department of Homeland Security from using airline passenger information for immigration enforcement, following growing scrutiny over a previously undisclosed data-sharing agreement between the Transportation Security Administration and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The “No TSA Data for ICE Act,” introduced earlier this month by U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Detroit), comes amid concerns over how information collected from passengers for air travel is being used by federal immigration authorities.

Keep ReadingShow less
Judge's hand holding wooden hammer

A lawyer breaks down 'rule of law' using everyday analogies—sports, board games—to explain why recent government actions threaten this founding principle.

naruecha jenthaisong/Getty Images

The Rule of Law Is Simple—and Essential to American Democracy

This series from Lawyers Defending American Democracy connects the words of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to current events that threaten democracy and the justice system. Each piece highlights the unique responsibility lawyers carry—through their oath, professional obligations, and roles in their communities—to help the public understand what’s at risk and to speak out when democratic principles are under threat. LDAD’s call to action is straightforward: as the Founders once did, we must recognize threats to constitutional values, demand accountability, and act to defend them.

Before the first No Kings rally last year, I carefully hand-lettered a sign that I thought perfectly encapsulated the day's theme. On one side, it read “IN THIS COUNTRY, THE RULE OF LAW IS KING." On the other, it read, "A GOVERNMENT OF LAWS, NOT OF MEN (John Adams)." I carried my sign proudly, certain that it would be a big hit. But the only reaction I got was someone asking me, “Are you a lawyer?” I wonder what gave me away.

Keep ReadingShow less
Where Do Territorial Courts Fall in Our Constitutional Framework?

Black and white sketch of a courtroom in session.

illustration provided

Where Do Territorial Courts Fall in Our Constitutional Framework?

The Supreme Court’s recent decisions in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook have understandably been read as cases about presidential control over executive officers. But they may have implications for a different and largely overlooked question lurking in a pending Supreme Court case: Who may exercise the judicial power of the United States in the territories?

This question made a cameo appearance in the Slaughter case. The majority noted in a footnote that “a justice of the peace in the District of Columbia” exercises “the judicial power of the District, just as territorial judges exercise the judicial power of their respective territories” — not the executive power. Therefore, the court went on, “the fact that Congress may prohibit the President from firing the District’s judges (who do not exercise his power) says nothing about whether Congress may prohibit the President from firing his subordinates (who do).”

Keep ReadingShow less