The Office on Violence Against Women released its FY 2026 Legal Assistance for Victims notice on June 4, 2026. The program anticipates $45 million across two categories: $40.3 million for approximately 50 standard awards and $4.7 million for approximately 10 awards under the Expanding Legal Services Initiative.

Faith-based organizations could apply on the same basis

The notice states that faith-based organizations meeting the program’s eligibility requirements may apply. The accompanying Justice Department guidance says faith-based organizations may seek OVW awards on the same basis as other organizations and that DOJ will not select recipients for or against an organization because of its religious character, motives or affiliation.

That provision does not mean every religious nonprofit qualifies or that a faith-based group has received an award. Applicants still had to satisfy the program’s organizational and service requirements, provide qualifying legal assistance and submit a required certification concerning the supervision, training and expertise of people providing legal services with grant funds.

Applications also had to include partnerships involving both a victim-service organization and an organization with experience providing attorney representation to victims. The notice says applications without the required partnerships would not be considered for funding.

No matching contribution was required. That could reduce one financial barrier for eligible service providers, including religious nonprofits with limited unrestricted funds.

Federal rules limit how funds may be used

Eligibility comes with civil-rights and program-compliance conditions. DOJ guidance says OVW recipients generally may not discriminate in the delivery of services or benefits on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion or disability, and may not discriminate in service delivery on the basis of age.

Direct federal financial assistance generally may not be used to support explicitly religious activities. Organizations receiving DOJ assistance also may not discriminate against beneficiaries because of their religion, religious belief, refusal to hold a religious belief or refusal to participate in a religious practice.

The guidance also addresses written notice to beneficiaries, accessibility, language access and confidentiality requirements. Those rules would apply if a faith-based applicant is selected for an award.

Applications went through two federal systems

Applicants had to submit materials in two stages. The Grants.gov deadline was July 31, 2026, at 11:59 p.m. Eastern time. The final JustGrants deadline was August 4, 2026, at 4:59 p.m. Eastern time.

The Office on Violence Against Women now lists the Legal Assistance for Victims opportunity as closed. The program funds comprehensive, direct legal services for adult and youth victims in legal matters relating to or arising from domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking. It is not a general violence-prevention grant.

Peer review comes before award decisions

Applications are evaluated by subject-matter experts in domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking and related fields. OVW’s 2026 peer-review guidelines say reviewers score applications against the requirements in the funding notice, while their recommendations remain advisory to the agency’s final funding decisions.

OVW anticipates notifying applicants by September 30, 2026. That is an expected notification date, not a guarantee that awards will be announced on that exact day.

For religious service providers, the practical takeaway is limited but clear: qualifying faith-based organizations were allowed to compete for the FY 2026 funding, no match was required, and any recipients will have to follow federal civil-rights, privacy, accessibility and religious-activity rules. The next significant update will be the award list and whether it identifies faith-based organizations among the selected providers.

Sources

• FY 2026 Legal Assistance for Victims Program Notice of Funding Opportunity

The changes come primarily through Chapter 97, an omnibus public-safety law, and Chapter 75, which creates uniform firearm-transfer procedures. A separate Safe at Home law also adds protections for people using Minnesota’s address-confidentiality program.

Arrest window expands from 72 hours to 14 days

Under Chapter 97, a peace officer may arrest a person anywhere without a warrant, including at the person’s residence, when the officer has probable cause to believe the person committed nonfelony domestic abuse within the preceding 14 days, excluding the day probable cause was established. The alleged assault does not have to have occurred in the officer’s presence.

The change replaces the previous 72-hour window. It applies to probable-cause arrests for qualifying nonfelony domestic abuse; it does not create a blanket 14-day arrest period for every crime.

Chapter 97 also establishes a separate warrant-seeking direction. If an officer has probable cause to believe a person committed domestic abuse, harassment or stalking, violated an order for protection, or violated a domestic-abuse no-contact order, but the person was not arrested, the officer should seek an arrest warrant from a judge without undue delay. That duty is separate from the 14-day warrantless-arrest authority.

Police reports are required even without an arrest

For qualifying domestic-violence-related offenses involving a family or household member, an investigating officer must prepare a written police report regardless of whether an arrest occurs.

The report must include information such as the victim’s name, address and telephone number when provided; whether an arrest occurred; the arrested person’s name; and a brief summary of the incident. A copy must be provided at no cost upon request to the domestic-abuse victim, the victim’s attorney or organizations designated by the Department of Public Safety’s Office of Justice Programs to provide victim services.

Chapter 97 separately requires law-enforcement agencies to submit specified domestic-violence investigation information for state collection. That data system and the commissioner of public safety’s annual reporting requirement take effect January 1, 2028. The required information includes later arrests, firearm possession, referrals for prosecution and the basis for determining that an incident constituted domestic abuse.

Detention and release rules change

A person arrested for harassment or stalking, domestic abuse, violation of an order for protection, or violation of a domestic-abuse no-contact order must initially be brought to a police station or county jail. An arresting officer may not issue a citation in lieu of that initial arrest and detention.

For a harassment, stalking or domestic-abuse charge, the officer in charge of the station or the county sheriff must issue a citation in lieu of continued detention unless release reasonably appears to pose a threat to the alleged victim or another family or household member, threaten public safety, or create a substantial likelihood that the person will not appear for later proceedings.

In assessing the threat to the alleged victim or household members, officials must consider relevant domestic-violence history, including previous arrests or convictions, prior orders for protection, harassment restraining orders or domestic-abuse no-contact orders, and pending petitions for an order for protection or harassment restraining order.

If the person is not released by citation, the person must be brought before the nearest available district court judge without unnecessary delay. The judge must review the arrest and detention facts, consider information presented by the prosecutor, and determine whether release would threaten the alleged victim, another family or household member or public safety, or whether the person presents a substantial likelihood of failing to appear. The judge may impose conditions such as no contact, staying away from the alleged victim’s home, firearm restrictions or other safety conditions.

Firearm transfers must follow a standard process

Chapter 75 establishes a statewide process when a court orders a person subject to a firearm prohibition to transfer firearms. The court must set a compliance deadline that accounts for the person’s custody status and the location of the firearms.

Approved transfer destinations are:

• the person’s local law-enforcement agency;
• a federally licensed firearms dealer; or
• an eligible third party who may lawfully receive the firearms and does not reside with the person.

For this process, the local law-enforcement agency generally means the full-time police department of the municipality where the subject resides, or the county sheriff if there is no such department. If the subject elects that agency as the recipient, the agency must accept the transfer.

A transfer to a third party must be completed at the local law-enforcement agency. It must either be supervised by an agency peace officer or occur in an agency-provided, video-monitored safe zone. The subject must give the agency at least 24 hours’ notice of the date and time, and the transfer must be documented.

Transfers may be temporary or permanent. A transfer required by a lifetime firearm ban must be permanent. A temporary transfer changes possession but not ownership or title. A law-enforcement agency or federally licensed dealer may charge a reasonable storage fee for a temporary transfer. If the fee is not paid within 60 days, the firearm is considered abandoned under the statute.

Proof, nonpossession filings and compliance hearings

The person subject to the order must file proof of transfer or a declaration of nonpossession with the court. Proof of transfer must identify whether the transfer was temporary or permanent and include the subject’s name, the transfer date and the serial number, manufacturer and model of each firearm when available.

When a transfer is made to a federally licensed dealer, the subject must file a copy of the proof of transfer with the court within two business days after being served with the order and attest that all firearms owned or possessed at the time of the order have been transferred and that the person currently possesses none.

For a third-party transfer, the third party must sign an affidavit under oath before a notary public stating either that the firearms were permanently transferred or that the third party will store them temporarily until the subject is legally permitted to possess firearms. The affidavit must identify the firearms to the extent possible. If the subject claims not to own or possess firearms, the subject must file a declaration stating that the person neither owned nor possessed firearms when the order was issued and does not currently own or possess any.

The court issuing a transfer order must hold a compliance hearing within 10 business days unless it waives the hearing after determining that the subject complied, filed the required proof or affidavit, or submitted a credible declaration of nonpossession. If the court finds probable cause to believe the subject is not complying or the subject fails to appear, the court may issue an arrest warrant, notify the local law-enforcement agency and initiate contempt proceedings.

Safe at Home protections also expand

Separate changes to Minnesota’s Safe at Home address-confidentiality program also take effect August 1. The program is administered by the secretary of state and is available to Minnesota residents who are victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, harassment or stalking, or who otherwise fear for their personal safety.

The changes prohibit discrimination based on participation in Safe at Home, add emancipated minors as potential participants, create a gross-misdemeanor penalty for a violation that causes bodily harm, and establish additional steps before a court may direct disclosure of a participant’s confidential address. The secretary of state may request reconsideration of such an order or intervene in the proceeding.

What residents and agencies should watch next

Police departments, sheriffs, prosecutors and courts must implement the new arrest, reporting, detention and firearm-transfer requirements beginning August 1. Local agencies will need updated policies, forms and procedures, while courts will handle case-specific deadlines, transfer orders and release conditions.

For residents involved in a case, the practical changes are immediate: police may have up to 14 days to make a warrantless probable-cause arrest for qualifying nonfelony domestic abuse; qualifying investigations must produce a written report even without an arrest; and court-ordered firearm transfers must use an approved recipient and be documented through proof of transfer, a required third-party affidavit or a declaration of nonpossession.

Sources

• Minnesota Session Laws, Chapter 97
• Minnesota House: Changes to the Safe at Home address confidentiality program
• League of Minnesota Cities: Domestic Violence Arrest Timelines, Reporting, and Firearm Surrenders

The proposal, called the Protecting Victims Amendment Act of 2026, was announced Friday, April 24. It is not law yet. The measure still needs action by the D.C. Council before any new penalties or enforcement provisions could take effect.

For Washington residents, the practical issue is how the District handles cases where a court order is already in place, a household assault is alleged, or a child is exposed to domestic violence. Protection orders are meant to create enforceable boundaries for victims and families. The bill seeks to raise the consequences when those orders are repeatedly violated.

What the proposal would change

According to the D.C. Mayor’s Office announcement and the administration’s one-page summary, the bill would create stronger penalties for repeat violations of civil protection orders. It also would expand tools available in domestic-violence cases, including provisions tied to pretrial detention decisions.

The one-pager says the measure would create or expand offenses connected to assaults committed inside a home. It also includes provisions for situations where a child witnesses domestic violence, a point likely to draw attention from parents, schools, family advocates and service providers who deal with the longer-term effects of household violence.

The bill is framed by District and federal officials as an effort to close gaps in victim protection. Local reporting by The Washington Post and NBC4 Washington described the proposal as part of a broader push by officials to respond to serious violence connected to domestic incidents and to strengthen enforcement when court orders are ignored.

Why the court process matters

The most immediate local impact, if the Council eventually approves the bill, would be inside the justice system. Prosecutors could have additional charges or penalties to pursue in certain domestic-violence cases. Judges could have more specific statutory tools to consider when evaluating repeat violations or risk in some cases.

That does not mean every person accused in a domestic-violence case would be detained. The bill should be read as a proposed change to the legal framework, not as an automatic outcome for all defendants. Pretrial detention decisions still depend on the facts of a case, the charges, applicable law and court review.

For victims and families, the central question is whether the proposal would make protection orders more meaningful when violations happen more than once. For defendants, the proposal raises the stakes of repeated order violations and certain alleged conduct inside the home. For police, prosecutors and courts, it could affect how cases are charged, argued and reviewed.

What happens next

The next step is legislative, not administrative. The D.C. Council would need to review the bill, and it could hold hearings, take testimony, amend the language or decline to advance it. Until that process happens, the proposed penalties are not in effect.

Residents who follow public safety, family court issues or neighborhood violence prevention should watch for a Council hearing notice, committee action and any changes to the bill text. The final version, if one moves forward, could differ from the proposal announced by Bowser and Pirro.

The key takeaway for now is simple: D.C. officials have proposed a tougher domestic-violence enforcement package, but the law has not changed yet. The Council process will determine whether the District adopts the new penalties and how broadly they would apply.

Sources

• D.C. Mayor’s Office announcement on Protecting Victims Amendment Act of 2026
• NBC4 Washington report on proposed D.C. domestic-violence protections