01/12/2026
โVAWA just became much harder to prove.โ
Letโs clear something up early: VAWA was ๐ป๐ผ๐ ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐๐ฒ๐ป. What changed is how USCIS is ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐๐ถ๐ฐ๐๐น๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฒ๐๐ฎ๐น๐๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด the concept of ๐ฆ๐น๐ต๐ณ๐ฆ๐ฎ๐ฆ ๐ค๐ณ๐ถ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ต๐บ.
That distinction matters more than people realize.
Congress never provided a precise definition of โbattery or extreme cruelty.โ
What USCIS has now clarified is ๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ธ ๐ฐ๐ง๐ง๐ช๐ค๐ฆ๐ณ๐ด ๐ข๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ฆ๐น๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ค๐ต๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ข๐ญ๐บ๐ป๐ฆ ๐ช๐ต.
The emphasis is no longer just on whether conduct was hurtful, but on whether it was ๐ฒ๐
๐๐ฟ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ, whether it reflected an ๐ถ๐ป๐๐ฒ๐ป๐ ๐๐ผ ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐๐ฟ๐ผ๐น ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ฑ๐ผ๐บ๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐๐ฒ, and whether it resulted in ๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐๐ฎ๐น ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ฝ๐ต๐๐๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐น ๐ถ๐ป๐ท๐๐ฟ๐.
Ordinary marital conflict doesnโt meet that bar. Hurtful behavior alone doesnโt either. Context, pattern, and impact now sit front and center.
Importantly, this clarification does ๐ป๐ผ๐ mean that physical violence is required. Extreme cruelty without battery remains fully valid. Psychological abuse can qualify. Sexual abuse and exploitation can qualify. Non-violent conduct may qualify when it forms part of a broader pattern of coercive control. USCIS continues to evaluate cases holistically and on a case-by-case basis.
Where this becomes critical is in how ๐ฝ๐๐๐ฐ๐ต๐ผ๐น๐ผ๐ด๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐น ๐ถ๐ป๐ท๐๐ฟ๐ is documented.
USCIS now explicitly requires evidence of mental or physical health injury connected to the abusive conduct. Officers are exercising discretion, which means credibility, clinical detail, and clear causal links matter more than ever.
This is where psychological evaluations move from being โhelpfulโ to, in many cases, ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ถ๐๐ถ๐๐ฒ.
A proper evaluation does more than confirm distress. It documents psychological harm, links symptoms to specific abusive behaviors, explains fear and coercion, and supports a finding of dominance rather than mutual conflict.
This is especially crucial in cases where there is no battery and the government may question whether the relationship reflects abuse or simply ongoing arguments.
Weโre already seeing increased scrutiny around claims of โmutual conflict.โ Well-constructed evaluations, including appropriate psychological testing, can distinguish coercive behavior from reciprocal disagreement, demonstrate asymmetric power dynamics, and address this issue head-on before it becomes an RFE.
Because there is no checklist and no formula, evidence quality matters. Generic or templated evaluations increase risk. Clinically grounded, case-specific evaluations strengthen credibility and make an officerโs discretionary decision easier, not harder.
The takeaway is simple: the bar wasnโt reinvented, it was clarified.
Extreme cruelty now demands clearer proof of ๐ถ๐บ๐ฝ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ถ๐ป๐๐ฒ๐ป๐, and psychological evaluations are no longer optional in many VAWA cases.
When done correctly, they can make the difference between uncertainty and approval.
