Domestic violence and gun violence prevention advocates are urging the Illinois General Assembly to pass a bill to strengthen state laws protecting people who file restraining orders.

The proposed law is named for domestic violence victim Karina González, who was shot and killed by her husband. The measure would require law enforcement officers to quickly remove guns from people who have orders of protection against them.

Amanda Pyron, executive director of The Network, says Karina's Bill would close numerous loopholes in the current law.

"Karina's Bill will clarify and strengthen the law to give law enforcement a clear directive to remove the firearm from the home when an order of protection is granted with the firearm remedy by a judge," she contended. "So this isn't something that survivors can do on their own."

González and her 15-year-old daughter were shot and killed shortly after obtaining a restraining order in July against her husband Jose Alvarez. Backers are asking legislators to pass the bill during the year-end session, which begins October 24th. Gun rights advocates oppose it, claiming it violates the Second Amendment.

Illinois enacted a "red flag" gun law in 2018 that gives courts authority to use emergency orders to remove guns from people who are a danger to themselves and others. However, Illinois has rarely used such emergency orders.

State Sen. Celina Villanueva, D-Chicago, said the presence of firearms in the home significantly increases the likelihood of death or serious injury.

"One research study of intimate partner homicides found that among victims who had orders of protection, one-fifth of victims were killed within two days of the order being issued. About one-third were killed within a month. This is unacceptable," she continued.

Records show that González reported her husband's abusive behavior to the police and took out an order of protection against him. The order required Alvarez to voluntarily surrender the gun and move out of the house. He did neither. Alvarez was charged with first-degree murder and is being held without bail.


get more stories like this via email

Domestic-violence prevention organizations in Minnesota continue to express relief over a U.S. Supreme Court ruling dealing with abusers having access to firearms.

In an 8-to-1 decision released Friday, the court upheld a federal law barring people subject to a domestic-violence restraining order from owning guns. Violence Free Minnesota reported from 1989 to 2018, guns were used in nearly half of cases around the state in which adult women were killed by an intimate partner.

Connie Moore is executive director of Alexandra House, a service organization for survivors in the Twin Cities. She noted weapons are also used to intimidate a partner who is planning to escape a dangerous situation.

"Many victim/survivors have reported about a gun being pointed at them and threatening, 'I'll kill you if you leave me,'" Moore observed.

Moore noted there are still challenges in ensuring a gun's removal, even when a restraining order has been issued. Minnesota does have a law covering the removal process but support groups said there is uneven enforcement around the country. This decision comes two years after the Supreme Court greatly expanded gun rights.

Moore pointed out the federal law not only protects survivors and their children, but also first responders in 911 calls stemming from domestic violence.

"We know that domestic calls for law enforcement are one of the most dangerous calls that they go on," Moore emphasized.

She pointed to the three first responders killed earlier this year in a call in the suburb of Burnsville. The tragedy led to a change in state law concerning straw purchases of guns.

Meanwhile, survivor groups also press for reforms when it comes to obtaining a protection order, noting there are a range of barriers just getting that step taken care of.


get more stories like this via email

Ohio advocates said the Biden administration's new Title IX regulations better protect victims of sexual assault, even as a group of states temporarily blocked the new rules, following controversy over expanded protections for transgender and LGBTQ+ students.

The federal civil rights legislation has continually morphed since it was created in the 1970s to ban discrimination in education programs and student activities receiving federal funding.

Emily Gemar, director of public policy for the Ohio Alliance to End Violence, said Ohioans should feel encouraged the latest batch of rules helps create a safer and more supportive environment for students who've experienced sexual assault.

"One of the changes that the Department of Education has included in its final regulations: They've reinstated that investigations have to be prompt, which was something that the Trump administration had removed," Gemar pointed out.

The final rules clarify the steps a school must take to protect students and employees from discrimination based on pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity and sex characteristics. It also protects against retaliation for people who exercise their Title IX rights. The new rules go into effect on August 1.

Gemar added communities can play a role in creating a violence-free environment for young people.

"We should all want at the end of the day is to send not only just our young schoolchildren, but our young adults into environments that have these protective measures in place," Gemar asserted. "To appropriately address sex-based harassment and other forms of sex-based discrimination."

Studies have found approximately 26% of all female undergraduate students and nearly 7% of all male undergraduate students have experienced sexual assault, according to the American Association of University Women.


get more stories like this via email

Four years after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers are still studying its effects on society.

A new report focusing on domestic violence during the pandemic revealed social backgrounds and life circumstances played a significant role in how survivors view their abuse.

Paige Sweet, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Michigan and author of the report, conducted interviews with 50 pandemic-era abuse survivors in Michigan, most of whom were struggling financially. Sweet said the small group who experienced it as a novel period of violence were likely to be middle-class.

"These survivors often didn't have to rely on things like domestic violence shelters," Sweet pointed out. "They often had good social networks, so, like, someone could go stay at their parent's house, for example, when the violence increased in the relationship."

At the height of the pandemic, domestic violence care providers reported an increased danger for anyone experiencing abuse, due to more time spent at home with their abusers.

Sweet pointed out survivors who live in marginalized communities experienced abuse during the pandemic as just another social crisis.

"They were sort of used to thinking of their relationship as something that was regularly disrupted by things like arrests, by things like homelessness," Sweet outlined. "Family and friends having to come stay in their house."

Sweet added many middle-class survivors were willing to seek therapy to help stay in their relationships and they were not "deathly afraid" of their abusers. But those living in poverty often were forced back into abusive situations because they depend on their abusers financially.

The research showed domestic abuse is often part of many other social problems knitted into survivors' lives, and Sweet argued there must be resources in place to address the issues.

"To stabilize their families, to stabilize their housing situations, to have access to good jobs, good food," Sweet emphasized. "In order for them to stay away from abusive relationships, they have to have those things secured."

She added policies should focus not just on treating or responding to abuse but on building up families to help prevent it.


get more stories like this via email