Everyone loves the party game/icebreaker “two truths and a lie.”
The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was last reauthorized in 2022. Congress will soon have another opportunity to revisit this landmark law and must rectify the significant changes that have moved VAWA away from its original focus on protecting women from sex-based violence.
Can you identify which of the following is NOT true about the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)?
A. VAWA was first enacted with bipartisan support in 1994 to prevent violent crime, particularly violence against women.
B. Since VAWA’s enactment, there have been numerous reports of waste, fraud, and abuse.
C. VAWA prioritizes women’s safety and recognizes differences in male and female biology.
Let’s take these statements one at a time:
A. TRUTH! VAWA was passed and signed into federal law in 1994 with bipartisan support to help victims of violence, including domestic and sexual violence, and to prevent future abuse. Since then, VAWA has been reauthorized by Congress four times (2000, 2005, 2013, and 2022).
B. TRUTH! Justice Department Inspector General audits spanning roughly two decades have repeatedly identified millions in questionable costs and funds that could have been put to better use in OVW programs. As recently as June 2026, one audit of two major VAWA programs identified more than $22 million sitting in expired grant accounts and another $1.2 million in excess drawdowns. While the Office on Violence Against Women had addressed much of that by the time the audit was released, the Inspector General still recommended action involving roughly $7.5 million in remaining funds and questioned costs.
Ultimately, this means that VAWA’s funds are not always spent on assisting victims of violence, leaving some without access to the services they need.
C. LIE! Unfortunately, the latest version of VAWA maintains nondiscrimination requirements that include “gender identity,” restricting the ability of federally funded women’s shelters and other service providers to maintain protections based on biological sex. This is extremely concerning, especially given that women are more likely to be victims of domestic abuse, sexual abuse, and stalking.
Women seeking refuge from domestic or sexual violence deserve access to spaces where their safety, privacy, and dignity are protected. Yet there are real-world examples of the consequences that can arise when women’s shelters are unable to maintain protections based on biological sex.
Congress enacted VAWA more than three decades ago with laudable intentions: to prevent and respond to the crimes of violence against women. VAWA shouldn’t be a political issue; we all want to eliminate violence against women. If policymakers are serious about helping women, they should use the next reauthorization to deliver a better Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and stop putting progressive political concerns ahead of women’s security and safety.