[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 164 (Sunday, December 18, 2005)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2605-E2609]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEARS 
                           2006 THROUGH 2009

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                      Saturday, December 17, 2005

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, as ranking member of the Committee on the 
Judiciary of the House of Representatives and a co-author of the 
Violence Against Women Act of 2005, I take this opportunity to 
reemphasize the importance of certain parts of the legislative history 
of the provisions involving protections for battered immigrants. 
Additionally, I want to highlight and provide guidance on the reasoning 
behind and expectations about some of the provisions that are part of 
the final bill, the engrossed amendment agreed to by the Senate, which 
passed the Senate on December 16, 2005 and passed the House on December 
17, 2005.
  Since the section numbers changed between the version of VAWA 2005's 
Protection of Battered and Trafficked Immigrants provisions that passed 
the House September 28, 2005, and the version that we are considering 
today, I will provide a list at the end of my statement that cross 
references the section numbers in the final bill.
  Section 801 enhances protection for immigrant victims of trafficking 
and certain immigrant crime victims by reuniting them with their 
children and family members living abroad. In the context of 
trafficking cases and other immigration functions I wanted to clarify 
for the record that VAWA 2005 contains language in Sections 801, 803, 
804, 813 and 832 that are designed to amend sections of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act (INA) to reflect the current delegation of 
authority and reassignment of immigration functions from the Department 
of Justice (DOJ) to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). When DOJ 
and DHS are cited as having shared authority under this Act, that 
shared authority should be limited to instances in which DHS is making 
an immigration determination in a case in which DOJ has an active 
federal investigation or prosecution. In cases where the investigation 
or prosecution is being conducted by a state or local prosecutor, or by 
another federal government agency, DOJ involvement may not be 
appropriate or required.
  Section 802 creates an exception to unlawful presence for victims of 
severe forms of trafficking who demonstrate that their trafficking 
experience was at least one central reason for their unlawful presence 
in the United States. For the purposes of this section (and similarly 
for sections 801, 805 and 812 of this Act), I

[[Page E2606]]

understand that the term ``at least one central reason'' is intended to 
mean that the unlawful presence was caused by, or related to, the 
trafficking experience and its concurrent process of victimization. 
Just as this section provides a waiver of unlawful presence 
inadmissibility for T visa victims, I would hope that DHS will exercise 
its discretion determining good moral character so that T visa 
recipients are not barred from attaining adjustment of status from a T 
visa.
  Section 804 provides that aliens can qualify for T status if they 
respond to and cooperate with requests for evidence and information 
from law enforcement officials. I also want to emphasize that state and 
local law enforcement officials investigating or prosecuting 
trafficking-related crimes are permitted to file a request (and 
certification) asking DHS to grant continued presence to trafficking 
victims. This section changes references in the INA to conform to the 
transfer of immigration functions from the Department of Justice to the 
Department of Homeland Security by replacing references to the Attorney 
General with references to the Secretary of Homeland Security.
  I believe the expansions in protections for children contained in 
this Act are particularly important. Section 805 ensures that immigrant 
children who are victims of incest and child abuse get full access to 
VAWA protections. The application for adjustment of status to permanent 
residence of an alien who self-petitioned for permanent residence shall 
also serve as an adjustment application for any derivative children. 
Derivative children of self-petitioners will receive lawful permanent 
residency along with their self-petitioning parents. This section 
removes the requirement that abused adopted children must live with the 
abusive parent for two years and assures that child VAWA self-
petitioners and derivative children have access to VAWA's aging out 
protections and can additionally access any Child Status Protection Act 
relief for which they qualify. It allows assures victims of child abuse 
and incest who were under 21 when abused have additional time until 
they turn 25 to file VAWA self-petitions. In this context, I understand 
that the term ``at least one central reason'' is intended to mean that 
the they delay in filing was caused by, or related to, the child abuse 
or incest and its concurrent process or victimization.
  Section 811 defines a ``VAWA petitioner'' as an alien who has applied 
for classification or relief under a number of provisions of the INA. I 
want to emphasize the importance of the fact that the law assures that 
adjudication of all forms of immigration relief related to domestic 
violence, sexual assault, trafficking or victims of violent crime 
continue to be adjudicated by the specially trained VAWA unit.
  In 1997, the Immigration and Naturalization Service consolidated 
adjudication of VAWA self-petitions and VAWA-related cases in one 
specially trained unit that adjudicates all VAWA immigration cases 
nationally. The unit was created ``to ensure sensitive and expeditious 
processing of the petitions filed by this class of at-risk applicants . 
. .'', to ``[engender] uniformity in the adjudication of all 
applications of this type'' and to ``[enhance] the Service's ability to 
be more responsive to inquiries from applicants, their representatives, 
and benefit granting agencies.'' See 62 Fed. Reg. 16607-16608 (1997). T 
visa and U visa adjudications were also consolidated in the specially 
trained VAWA unit. (See, USCIS Interoffice Memorandum HQINV 50/1, 
August 30, 2001, from Michael D. Cronin to Michael A. Pearson, 67 Fed. 
Reg. 4784 (Jan. 31, 2002)). This specially trained VAWA unit assures 
consistency of VAWA adjudications, and can effectively identify 
eligible cases and deny fraudulent cases. Maintaining a specially 
trained unit with consistent and stable staffing and management is 
critically important to the effective adjudication of these 
applications.
  Consistent with these procedures, I recommend that the same specially 
trained unit that adjudicates VAWA self-petitions, T and U visa 
applications, process the full range of adjudications, adjustments, and 
employment authorizations related to VAWA cases (including derivative 
beneficiaries) filed with DHS: VAWA petitions T and U visas, VAWA 
Cuban, VAWA NACARA (Sec. Sec. 202 or 203), and VAWA HRIFA petitions, 
106 work authorization under section 814(c) of this Act), battered 
spouse waiver adjudications under 216(c)(4)(C), applications for parole 
of VAWA petitioners and their children and applications for children of 
victims who have received VAWA cancellation. I also encourage DHS to 
promote consistency in VAWA adjudications by defining references to 
``domestic violence'' in the INA as ``battery or extreme cruelty,'' the 
domestic abuse definition codified in the Violence Against Women Act of 
1994 (``VAWA 1994''), the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant 
Responsibility Act of 1996 (``IIRIRA'') and regulations implementing 
the battered spouse waiver.

  The Secretary of Homeland Security can remove the conditional status 
of an alien who became a permanent resident, as the spouse of a U.S. 
citizen or permanent resident without joint filing of a petition with 
the U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, upon the showing of 
hardship, battery, or certain other factors. Applications for such 
relief may be amended to change the ground or grounds for such relief 
without having to be resubmitted.
  VAWA 2000 allowed victims of domestic violence abused by U.S. citizen 
and lawful permanent resident spouses to file VAWA self-petitions from 
outside of the U.S. if they had been abused in the U.S. or if their 
abuser was a member of the uniformed services or a government employee. 
Modeled after the VAWA 2000 protection offered to children on VAWA 
cancellation of removal grantees, existing parole provisions should be 
used to ensure that approved VAWA petitioners, their derivative 
children and children of traffic-king victims, can enter the U.S.
  Section 812 provides that an alien who is a VAWA petitioner or is 
seeking cancellation of removal or VAWA suspension as a battered alien 
is not subject to the penalties for failing to depart after agreeing to 
a voluntary departure order, if the battery or extreme cruelty, 
trafficking, or criminal activity provided at least one central reason 
related to the alien's failure to depart. In this context it is my 
understanding that the term ``at least one central reason'' is intended 
to mean that the failure to depart was caused by, or related to, the 
battering or extreme cruelty experience and its concurrent process of 
victimization.
  Section 813 is designed to address a number of problems for immigrant 
victims in removal proceedings. The definition of exceptional 
circumstances will now include battering or extreme cruelty. Important 
clarifications are made to assure that immigration judges can grant 
victims the domestic violence victim waivers we created in VAWA 2000. I 
particularly want to emphasize the importance of the protections from 
reinstatement of removal we create in this Act for immigrant victims. 
Under current law DHS has the discretionary authority to consent to the 
readmission of a previously removed alien (using the existing I-212 
process). DHS should make use of its discretion in granting readmission 
to appropriately assist aliens with humanitarian cases including but 
not limited to, victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, victims 
of trafficking and crime victims who are cooperating in criminal 
investigations.
  Under current law, victims of domestic abuse, sexual assault, 
stalking, or trafficking who have been ordered removed, including 
expedited removal, are subject to reinstatement of removal if they 
depart the U.S. and attempt to reenter the U.S. Once they are 
reinstated in removal proceedings, they cannot obtain VAWA, T, and U 
relief, even if they have a pending application for such relief. 
Recognizing these harsh consequences, Congress encourages DHS to make 
use of its discretionary authority to consent to the admission of such 
previously removed aliens (using the existing I-212 process).

  Section 814 provides that an alien whose petition as a VAWA 
petitioner has been approved may be granted work authorization. U visa 
applicants are provided work authorization under existing law. I want 
to emphasize that this section gives DHS statutory authority to grant 
work authorization to approved VAWA self-petitioners without having to 
rely upon deferred action. I believe that one of the most important 
protections offered by this section toward prevention of domestic 
violence is that Section 814 of this bill provides that an alien spouse 
admitted under the A (foreign diplomats), E-3 (Australian investor), G 
(international organizations), or H (temporary worker) visa non-
immigrant programs accompanying or following to join a principal alien 
shall be granted work authorization if the spouse demonstrates that 
during the marriage he or she (or a child) has been battered or has 
been subjected to extreme cruelty perpetrated by the principal alien. 
This section is intended to reduce domestic violence by giving victims 
tools to protect themselves and hold abusers accountable. Research has 
found the financial dependence on an abuser is a primary reason that 
battered women are reluctant to cooperate in their abuser's 
prosecution. With employment authorization, many abused spouses 
protected by this section will be able to attain work providing them 
the resources that will make them more able to safely act to stop the 
domestic violence. The specially trained CIS unit shall adjudicate 
these requests.
  I believe that Section 817 of this Act contains same of the most 
important protections for immigrant victims. This section is enhances 
VAWA's confidentiality protections for immigrant victims and directs 
immigration enforcement officials not to rely on information provided 
by an abuser, his family members or agents to arrest or remove an 
immigrant victim from the United States. Threats of deportation are the 
most potent tool abusers of immigrant victims use to maintain control 
over and silence their victims and to avoid criminal prosecution. In 
1996, Congress created special

[[Page E2607]]

protections for victims of domestic violence against disclosure of 
information to their abusers and the use of information provided by 
abusers in removal proceedings. In 2000, and in this Act, Congress 
extended these protections to cover victims of trafficking, certain 
crimes and others who qualify for VAWA immigration relief. These 
provisions are designed to ensure that abusers and criminals cannot use 
the immigration system against their victims. Examples include abusers 
using DHS to obtain information about their victims, including the 
existence of a VAWA immigration petition, interfering with or 
undermining their victims' immigration cases, and encouraging 
immigration enforcement offices to pursue removal actions against their 
victims.
  Immigration enforcement agents and government officials covered by 
this section must not initiate contact with abusers, call abusers as 
witnesses or rely on information furnished by or derived from abusers 
to apprehend, detain and attempt to remove victims of domestic 
violence, sexual assault and trafficking, as prohibited by section 384 
of IIRIRA. In determining whether a person furnishing information is a 
prohibited source, primary evidence should include, but not be limited 
to, court records, government databases, affidavits from law 
enforcement officials, and previous decisions by DHS or Department of 
Justice personnel. Other credible evidence must also be considered. 
Government officials are encouraged to consult with the specially 
trained VAWA unit in making determinations under the special ``any 
credible evidence'' standard. I believe that all investigation and 
enforcement of these provisions should be done by the Office of 
Professional Responsibility of the Justice Department. For consistency, 
these cases need to be centralized in one division and I believe that 
this office is best equipped to address these cases.

  The current practice of granting deferred action to approved VAWA 
self-petitioners should continue. Aliens with deferred action status 
should not be removed or deported. Prima facie determinations and 
deferred action grants should not be revoked by immigration enforcement 
agents. The specially trained Citizenship and Immigration Services 
(CIS) unit should review such cases to determine whether or not to 
revoke a deferred action grant. Immigration enforcement officials at 
the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement do not have authority 
to overrule a CIS grant of deferred action to an alien victim. 
Immigration enforcement officers should refer aliens they encounter who 
may qualify for relief under this Act to immigration benefits 
adjudicators handling VAWA cases at CIS.
  VAWA confidentiality protections in IIRAIRA are amended to conform 
with current practice extending these protections to the Department of 
Homeland Security in addition to the ``Department of Justice and to 
expand confidentiality protections to the Department of State. These 
protective provisions were designed to assure that the Secretary of 
Homeland Security, the Attorney General and the Secretary of State may 
not use information furnished by, or derived from information provided 
solely by, an abuser, crime perpetrator or trafficker to make an 
adverse determination of admissibility or. removal of an alien. 
However, information in the public record and government data-bases can 
be relied upon, even if government officials first became aware of it 
through an abuser.
  This section provides that this provision shall not apply to prevent 
information from being disclosed (in a manner that protects victim 
confidentiality and safety) to the chairs and ranking members of the 
House and Senate Judiciary Committees, including the Immigration 
Subcommittees, in the exercise of their oversight authority. This 
section also gives the specially trained VAWA unit the discretion to 
refer victims to non-profit, non-governmental organizations to obtain a 
range of needed assistance and victim services. Referrals should be 
made to programs with expertise in providing assistance to immigrant 
victims of violence and can only be made after obtaining written 
consent from the immigrant victim. Nothing in this section shall be 
construed as affecting the ability of an applicant to designate a safe 
organization through which governmental agencies may communicate with 
the applicant.
  This section requires that the Department of Homeland Security and 
the Department of Justice provide guidance to their officers and 
employees who have access to information protected by Section 384 of 
IIRAIRA, including protecting victims of domestic violence, sexual 
assault, trafficking and other crimes from the harm that could result 
from inappropriate disclosure of information. Congress encourages the 
DHS's specially trained VAWA unit and CIS VAWA policy personnel: (1) to 
develop a training program that can be used to train DHS staff, trial 
attorneys, immigration judges, and other DOJ and DOS staff who 
regularly encounter alien victims of crimes, and (2) to craft and 
implement policies and protocols on appropriate handling by DHS, DOJ 
and DOS officers of cases under VAWA 1994, the Acts subsequently 
reauthorizing VAWA, and IIRIRA.

  Section 825 contains a number of amendments particularly important to 
me. Protecting victims of domestic violence from deportation and 
assuring that they can have their day in court before an immigration 
judge to file for VAWA related immigration relief is a central focus of 
all VAWA immigration protection I have been involved in developing 
since 1994. This section contains amendments that clarify the VAWA 2000 
motions to reopen for abused aliens, enabling otherwise eligible VAWA 
applicants to pursue VAWA relief from removal, deportation or 
exclusion. This section provides that the limitation of one motion to 
reopen a removal proceeding shall not prevent the filing of one special 
VAWA motion to reopen. In addition, a VAWA petitioner can file a motion 
to reopen removal proceedings after the normal 90-day cutoff period, 
measured from the time of the final administrative order of removal. 
The filing of a special VAWA motion to reopen shall stay the removal of 
the alien pending final disposition of the motion, including exhaustion 
of all appeals, if the motion establishes a prima facie case for the 
relief. One VAWA 2005 post-enactment motion to reopen may be filed by a 
VAWA applicant. Aliens who filed and were denied special VAWA motions 
under VAWA 2000 may file one new motion under this Act.
  Additionally, I feel it is very important that the system of services 
we provide to domestic violence victims, rape victims and trafficking 
victims and our protection order courtrooms and family courts are 
places to which victims can safely turn for help without worrying that 
their abuser may have sent immigration enforcement officers after them 
when they are seeking service and protection. Section 825(c) 
establishes a system to verify that removal proceedings are not based 
on information prohibited by section 384 of IIRIRA. When any part of an 
enforcement action was taken leading to such proceedings against an 
alien at certain places, DHS must disclose these facts in the Notice to 
Appear issued against the alien. DHS must certify that such an 
enforcement action was taken but that DHS did not violate the 
requirements of Section 384 of IIRIRA. The list of locations includes: 
a domestic violence shelter, a rape crisis center, and a courthouse if 
the alien is appearing in connection with a protection order or child 
custody case. Persons who knowingly make a false certification shall be 
subject to penalties. Removal proceedings filed in violation of section 
384 of IIRIRA shall be dismissed by immigration judges. However, 
further proceedings can be brought if not in violation of section 384.
  I also want to highlight the important protections for all battered 
women and stalking victims contained in Section 827 of this bill. With 
respect to laws and regulations governing identification cards and 
drivers' licenses, DHS and the Social Security Administration shall 
give special consideration to victims of domestic abuse, sexual 
assault, stalking, or trafficking who are entitled to enroll in state 
address confidentiality programs, and whose addresses are entitled to 
be suppressed under State or Federal law (including VAWA 
confidentiality provisions), or suppressed by a court order.
  The REAL ID Act of 2005 imposed a new national requirement that all 
applicants for driver's licenses or state identification cards must 
furnish their physical residential address in order to obtain a 
federally valid license or identification card. This requirement 
jeopardizes those victims of domestic abuse, sexual assault, stalking, 
or trafficking who may be living in confidential battered women's 
shelters or fleeing their abuser, stalker, or trafficker. In 
recognition of the dangers of this requirement, this provision 
instructs DHS and the Social Security Administration to give special 
consideration to victims of domestic abuse, sexual assault, stalking, 
or trafficking by allowing certain victims to use an alternate safe 
address in lieu of their physical residential address.
  I understand that a driver's license or identification card is 
necessary for victims to board an airplane or train to flee danger. 
Many confidentiality programs are currently in place on both federal 
and state levels to ensure that the dual goals of economic security and 
victim safety are reached by allowing an individual to choose an 
alternate address on her driver's license. This will provide an 
exception for those victims who are entitled to enroll in state address 
confidentiality programs, whose addresses are entitled to be suppressed 
under State or Federal law or suppressed by a court order, or who are 
protected from disclosure of information pursuant to 8 U.S.C. Section 
1367, ensuring the continued protection and necessary mobility for 
these women and their families.
  As Ranking Member' of the House Judiciary Committee, I have been 
particularly concerned about the significant delays that have occurred 
between the effective dates of VAWA 1994 and VAWA 2000 laws and the 
issuance of implementing regulations that are needed so that

[[Page E2608]]

immigrant victims can receive the protections Congress has created for 
them. Section 828 requires that regulations implementing both this Act 
(including materials and dissemination under section 834) and the Act 
reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act in 2000, (``VAWA 2000''), 
be issued within 180 days of this Act's enactment. In applying such 
regulations, in the case of petitions or applications affected by the 
changes made by the Acts, there shall be no requirement to submit an 
additional petition, application, or certification from a law 
enforcement agency with the date of the application for interim relief 
establishing the priority date of counting time towards adjustment of 
status. However, the Department of Homeland Security may request 
additional evidence be submitted when the documentation supporting an 
outstanding VAWA self-petition or justifying interim reliefs now 
insufficient. The Department of Homeland Security shall also craft and 
implement policies and protocols implementing VAWA confidentiality 
protections under Section 384 of IIRAIRA as amended by this Act.
  Lastly, I want to provide important background information about the 
reasoning behind The International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 
2005 (IMBRA) that is included in this VAWA 2000 legislation. The final 
IMRBA legislation combines provisions that created a significant role 
for the government in information collection and distribution to 
foreign fiancees and spouses with regulation of the International 
Marriage Broker Industry. IMBRA has been designed to address concerns 
about U.S. citizen abusers who use the K visa process to petition for 
aliens outside the United States and abuse them. This Act, establishes 
the first meaningful federal regulations on international marriage 
broker agencies (IMBs), companies jn the business of matching mostly 
American male clients to foreign women who will join them in the United 
States as fiances or spouses. There have been numerous cases of foreign 
women who were matched with American men, came to the U.S. live with 
their new spouses and were subjected to domestic violence, sexual 
assault or other forms of extreme cruelty. In some cases, the 
perpetrators have successfully used IMBs and the immigration system to 
bring in a series of fiances or spouses who have all suffered from 
domestic violence from the American sponsor and client. This bill is 
designed to inform foreign spouses and fiancees entering the United 
States of the laws relating to such abusive crimes, and the 
availability of help. In addition, it seeks to prevent abusers from 
using the immigration system to find new victims.

  Sections 832, 833 and 834 are designed to prevent further abuse by 
instituting measures to distribute information that can help the K visa 
recipients learn about domestic violence protections available to them 
in the United States. These sections also provide them with specific 
information about their U.S. citizen petitioners' criminal conviction 
history. Additionally, this section limits the ability of abusive U.S. 
citizens to repeatedly petition for K visas for aliens outside the U.S.
  A consular officer may not approve a fiancee visa petition without 
verifying that the petitioner has not previously petitioned for two or 
more aliens applying for spousal or fiancee K visas. If the petitioner 
has had such a petition previously approved, the consular officer must 
verify that two years have elapsed since the filing of the previous 
petition. The Secretary of Homeland Security may grant waivers of the 
two-year waiting period or the limit on filing more. than two 
petitions. The waivers included here were designed to give DHS the 
discretion to waive both the time and number limitations when K fiance 
visa applications are filed by nonabusive U.S. citizens. Such waivers 
may be appropriate, for example, for non-abusive U.S. citizens who live 
abroad or were raised abroad and may be more likely to marry foreign 
spouses, or in cases of unusual circumstances, such as the sudden death 
of an alien approved for a prior K visa. Section 832(a) includes a 
domestic violence victim waiver modeled after the waiver created for 
immigrant victims of domestic violence by VAWA 2000 (INA Section 
237(a)(7)). Waivers shall be granted when tbe U.S. citizen petitioner 
demonstrates that they have been' subjected to battering or extreme 
cruelty, that there was a connection between the criminal conviction 
and the abuse. including efforts to escape the abuse and that they were 
not the primary perpetrator of abuse in the relationship.
  Section 832(a)(2) of VAWA 2005 requires that U.S. citizen petitioners 
filing K visa applications for spouses they married abroad provide 
under oath the same criminal information required for K fiance visa 
petitioners. This section also creates a database to track serial K 
applications. Upon approval of a second K visa for a spouse or fiance 
the U.S. citizen petitioner will be entered into the multiple visa 
tracking database and will be notified that this petition and all 
future petitions will be entered into the database maintained by the 
Department of Homeland Security. Once two espousal or fiance K visas 
have been approved, for each subsequent petition filed, DHS will notify 
both tbe citizen petitioner and foreign-born spouse about the number of 
previously filed petitions in the database for a 10-year period. All 
future K applications will trigger similar notice. The domestic 
violence pamphlet developed under Section 833 of this Act will be sent 
to the K beneficiary inunigrant spouse along with the multiple filing 
data base information.
  Under this Act, IMBs are required to comply with mandatory collection 
of criminal background information on each U.S. client, including 
arrest and conviction information, information on any temporary or 
permanent protection order issued against the U.S. client, and 
information on where the person has lived, prior marriages and children 
they have under the age of 21. The IMB must also conduct a sex offender 
registry search on the U.S. client.


                               Conclusion

  I am once again honored to have played a role in reauthorizing the 
Violence Against Women Act and the protections it affords to immigrant 
women who suffer from battery and extreme cruelty in our Nation. We 
have made important changes and adjustments to current law that will 
ensure that the broad range of domestic violence victims have access to 
the immigration relief they need to escape from abuse and begin to 
rebuild their lives, and those of their children. I am particularly 
pleased that Congress was able to agree upon passage of the first 
legislation to provide fiancees and spouses applying for K visas from 
abroad the ability arm themselves with what can be life saving 
information and to truly regulate the international marriage broker 
industry. I offer my sincere appreciation to the chairman of the 
Judiciary Committee, F. James Sensenbrenner, who worked with me for the 
better part of this year on this bill in shared commitment to protect 
victims of domestic violence. In addition, I must thank Congressman 
Rick Larsen of Washington for his leadership on protecting unsuspecting 
foreign women who become victims of abuse by sponsoring IMBRA and 
working with Chairman Sensenbrenner and me on bringing IMBRA into this 
bill. I also offer special thanks to my Senate colleagues, Senator 
Arlen Specter, Senator Patrick Leahy, Senator Joseph Biden and Senator 
Ted Kennedy for their hard cooperative work to ensure that the Violence 
Against Women Act of 2005 could be passed into law this year.
  I worked closely with Chairman Sensenbrenner to develop legislative 
history for the protections offered to immigrant victims contained in 
Protection of Battered and Trafficked Immigrants Title of the Violence 
Against Women Act of 2005. The Committee on the Judiciary of the House 
of Representatives Report to accompany H.R. 3402 that was published on 
September 22, 2005, provides important legislative history on this 
Title. Since section numbers have changed in the final bill, I include 
here cross reference list that will facilitate relating the sections of 
the final VAWA 2005 provisions we are voting on today with the 
legislative history sections that describe and support these 
provisions.

   Final VAWA 2005 Section Number and House Committee Report Section 
                                 Number

       801 (Treatment of Spouse and Children of Victims)--901(a).
       802 (Presence of Trafficking Victims)--903(b).
       803 (Adjustment of Status for Trafficking Victims--903 & 
     903(a).
       804 (Protection and Assistance to Trafficking Victims)--
     901(d).
       805 (Protecting Victims of Child Abuse)
       805 (a) and (b)--912(b) and (c).
       805 (c)--912(d).
       805(d)--931.
       811 (VAWA Petitioner Definition and VAWA Unit)--911, 902, 
     914, 918.
       812 (Exception to Voluntary Departure)--919.
       813(a) (Exceptional Circumstances)--937.
       813(b) (Discretion to Readmission Instead of Reinstatement 
     of Removal)--915.
       813(c) (Domestic Violence Victim Waiver Clarification)--
     935.
       814(a) (VAWA HIRIFA and VAWA Cuban Adjustment 
     Improvements)--936, 917.
       814(b) (Work Authorization for VAWA Petitioners)--915(a).
       814 (c) and (d) (Work Authorization for Abused A, E-3, G, H 
     Spouses)--933.
       814(e) (Limitation on Petitioning for Abuser)--917(g).
       815, 823, 824 (Clarification and Corrections Regarding VAWA 
     NACARA VAWA HRIFA, VAWA Cuban Adjustment Applicants--917.
       816 (VAWA Protection for Elder Abuse Victims)--913.
       817 (VAWA Confidentiality Protections)--921, 915.
       821 (a) and (b) (Duration of T and U Visa Status)--901(b).
       821(c) (Change of Status to T or U Visa Status)--901(c).
       822 (Technical Corrections)--941.
       823 (VAWA Cuban Adjustment Improvements)--917(d).
       824 (VAWA HRlFA Improvements)--917(e).
       825 (Deportation and Deportation Proceedings)--936, 921(f).
       826 (Protection of Abused Juveniles)--921(d).

[[Page E2609]]

       827 (Identification Documents for Domestic Violence and 
     Crime Victims)--None.
       828 (Rulemaking)--900.
       831, 832, 833, 834, Subtitle D, International Marriage 
     Broker Regulation--916, 922.

                          ____________________