 |
| Bridgette Stumpf |
Though the law was a good start, it has fallen short in several key ways. As we approach the 20th anniversary of the CVRA this month, it's time to confront what is broken about the law.[1]
According to the Alliance for Safety and Justice's 2024 "Crime Survivors Speak" survey, published in September, 1 in every 3 Americans experienced violence in the last 10 years.[2] Crime has become a divisive issue, both in political debate and policymaking efforts. But very few approaches have demonstrated evidenced-based outcomes that provide healing and restoration for the person affected by violence and the person who caused harm.
Furthermore, many public safety investments do not center those affected by crime or underinvested communities that face higher vulnerabilities to crime and trauma exposure. Indeed, the Alliance for Safety and Justice found that almost "1 in 2 victims who did not get the support they wanted did not know where to find support."
As Lenore Anderson wrote in the 2022 book, "In Their Names: The Untold Story of Victims' Rights, Mass Incarceration, and the Future of Public Safety," historically, the "tough on crime" movement appended many victims' rights policy efforts that aimed to integrate survivors into the criminal legal system.
This perpetuated the false narrative that mass incarceration could make communities safer. It has not. Tough-on-crime responses failed to support survivors and also failed to prevent crime.[3] Yet, these carceral responses continue to be a part of the national narrative, despite findings that only 1 in 4 victims found the justice system helpful in providing information about recovering.[4]
The truth is that not all victims see the prosecution of a case as justice. Research has shown that for many, the most important measure of satisfaction with the criminal legal system is not the case outcome or punishment, but rather survivors' meaningful participation in the process.[5]
Within the criminal legal system, survivors have very little control or options for empowerment, despite efforts to create meaningful inclusion through laws like the CVRA. Given this reality, criminal legal reform must prioritize the opportunity to ensure survivors know about their options and are connected to actionable support to minimize the negative consequences of trauma.
A new bill would do just that. The Reinforcing Crime Victims' Rights Act was introduced in late September and is sponsored by Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., and Burgess Owens, R-Utah, with Reps. Jim Costa, D-Calif., and Lois Frankel, D-Fla., serving as original co-sponsors.
Proposed amendments to the CVRA would require that survivors are provided with a crime victims' rights card.
Due to the so-called CSI effect — in which many people learn about the criminal legal system through fictitious television shows that solve crimes in less than an hour — many victims of crime believe that the prosecutor is their personal lawyer, even though the goals of the prosecutor and the victim do not always align.
Under the new bill, every crime victim would receive information, in writing, indicating that they have the right to seek independent victims' rights counsel during this process to ensure rights are afforded to them and enforced if violated. This is an important step to ensure all survivors are receiving the same information.
Additionally, the bill would require more effective oversight of government actors who violate victims' rights. Those who fail to afford rights to victims will be subject to complaints that carry actual remedies for crime victims.
Beyond the accountability value, this is critical, because unmet promises as to how survivors should expect to experience the criminal legal process exacerbate the original harm and are inconsistent with trauma-informed responses.
Most importantly, the bill would explicitly require that victims' rights attach prior to the filing of a complaint, investigation or indictment, so that no federal prosecutor could serve as gatekeeper to victims having rights in the first place. This happens when a prosecutor communicates to a survivor that they are not entitled to information about the investigation or a survivor is not given the legally required opportunity to confer with a prosecutor.
Without the proposed amendment, prosecutors can continue to strip survivors of their rights simply by declining to prosecute the case.
There is real power in healing when survivors understand how they should expect to experience the legal systems. Passing this bill to amend the CVRA will go a long way toward helping victims brave the legal process, whether they choose to or not.
Bridgette Stumpf is executive director at Network for Victim Recovery of DC.
"Perspectives" is a regular feature written by guest authors on access to justice issues. To pitch article ideas, email expertanalysis@law360.com.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of their employer, its clients, or Portfolio Media Inc., or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
[1] 18 U.S.C. § 3771.
[2] Alliance for Safety and Justice, Crime Survivors Speak 2024: A National Survey of Victims' Views on Safety and Justice, available at: https://asj.allianceforsafetyandjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CrimeSurvivorsSpeak2024.pdf.
[3] Don Stemen, The Prison Paradox: More Incarceration Will Not Make Us Safer. New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2017.
[4] See Alliance for Safety and Justice, Crime Survivors Speak 2022: A National Survey of Victims' Views on Safety and Justice, https://allianceforsafetyandjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Alliance-for-Safety-and-Justice-Crime-Survivors-Speak-September-2022.pdf.
[5] Dean G. Kilpatrick et al., The Rights of Crime Victims—Does Legal Protection Make a Difference?, U.S. Dep't. of Just., Nat'l Inst. of Just. Res. in Brief (1998) (predicting that "victim perceptions of helplessness and lack of control are maximized by raising the expectation that a right of participation exists, the victim electing to exercise that right, and then being denied that right"); and Judith Lewis Herman, The Mental Health of Crime Victims: Impact of Legal Intervention, 16 J. of Traumatic Stress 159, 159 (2003) (observing that "dissatisfaction appears to be highest among victims who are denied a chance to participate in the legal system, in spite of their expressed wish to do so").