Attorney General Josh Kaul speaks with reporters outside the Wisconsin Supreme Court in February 2023. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul spoke Tuesday to the Attorney General’s Sexual Assault Response Team about cuts to the federal Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) that reduced Wisconsin payments from $40 million to $13 million a year. The Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) has requested an additional $66 million in the 2025-27 state budget to make up for the reduction.

Kaul also discussed lawsuits by his office and other state AGs around the country against the Trump administration to try to ensure funds designated to states continue to be issued.

“My office works closely with a number of other AGs around the country, and we have been in regular communication both about what’s happening and about potential litigation strategies to address policies that would be harmful to the people of our states and that can be challenged on legal grounds,” he said.  

He recounted how Wisconsin and 22 other states challenged an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) freeze on funds (grants and loans) resulting in a Jan. 31 temporary restraining order and the release of funds.

“The Trump administration’s attempts to withhold federal funding from Wisconsin hurts kids, families, seniors and communities across our state,” Gov. Evers said in response to the January order. “This was a bad idea from the beginning, and I will continue to fight these efforts every step of the way.”

Kaul told the sexual assault response team members the freeze would have affected such programs as Meals on Wheels, Head Start, VOCA, the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, which supports law enforcement and multi-jurisdictional enforcement efforts as well as programs funded under the Violence Against Women Act. He expressed concern about other efforts to freeze “categories of funding or to essentially shut down agencies.”

Kaul said, there are two questions he has to answer in deciding if Wisconsin has legal standing to challenge a Trump administration policy:

1. Is it harmful to Wisconsinites?
2. Is there a strong legal basis for bringing a challenge?

“Different people have different opinions about what’s harmful to Wisconsinites, but it’s helpful to us to hear about the impacts that these policies are having so that we can assess them as fully as possible and share that information with our colleagues,” he said. “On the legal basis for a lot of the actions that have been being taken recently, we have had strong legal bases for the challenge because they either were made in contradiction to existing contracts, or they weren’t done consistent with the way that policies need to be adopted by the federal government.”

Kaul asked the sexual assault response team attendees to communicate with the DOJ about effects they are experiencing to the agencies they represent.  

“Please let us know if you’re seeing impacts on programs because we’re committed to stepping up,” he said.

“We want to make sure that people in policy-making roles in Washington are aware of the impacts that some of these changes are having,” said Kaul. “Because while litigation is one approach, it’s not the only thing that can be done to respond to these things.”

Kaul was also asked whether the Trump administration was respecting the orders of the courts.

“In terms of ensuring compliance with court orders, that’s something that we’ve monitored closely in the case involving the federal funding freeze,” he said. “For example, we initially saw that there were areas where we believed the federal government was not fully in compliance with the court’s order, so the states went back to court and filed what’s called a motion to enforce; we identified areas where funding had remained frozen, and we asked the court to follow up. In response to that, the federal government did follow up. They worked to address issues.”

He also talked about the “disconnect” between the federal government complying with court orders and Trump administration statements.

“In court, the federal government has been clear that they’re trying to comply with court orders, and they’re trying to meet those obligations,” he said. “I know there have been some incidents in just the past few days where that’s been in dispute, but generally speaking, that’s what we’ve seen so far. The rhetoric we’ve seen has been somewhat different.”

However, on Feb. 7 Kaul and 22 other AGs filed a motion that the Trump Administration was blocking dollars to states under the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure, Investment, and Jobs Act, that should have been unfrozen after the January temporary restraining order was issued.

Kaul said that if the Trump administration defies court orders, Democratic AGs will sue to seek relief in cases they are involved in.

“We have three co-equal branches of government, and for hundreds of years, the principle that the courts get to say what the law is has been respected by different administrations,” Kaul said. “So it’s vital that we uphold that principle.”

State asked to fill the gap after big cut 

In 2024 approximately $40 million Wisconsin had been receiving annually under the Victims of Crimes Act (VOCA), collected from federal prosecution of crimes with the fees and penalties distributed to states, dropped to $13 million.

Kaul noted that the decrease in VOCA funding began as a result of policies implemented during the first Trump administration, but the funding hadn’t “rebounded” under President Biden.

VOCA dollars are the largest funding source for Wisconsin’s  victim service organizations.

Kaul said his office has tried to “smooth” the distribution of grant funds by not having big swings in the amount awarded to agencies year to year and by using American Rescue Plane Act (ARPA) dollars to supplement funding during the Biden Administration.

“As many of you who work with victim advocacy organizations know, there has been a significant cutback in funding to organizations around the state,” said Kaul. “I’ve had a chance to talk to many organizations and hear from people about the impacts of those cutbacks, and we’re hearing everything you expect. There have been places where they’ve had to lay off staff. There have been places where programs have been cut. There are places where essential services can no longer be provided. That is a travesty for crime victims who aren’t getting the same level of services they used to, and it’s also damaging to public safety because enforcement often relies on the critical work that victim advocates do in supporting victims who subsequently feel empowered to work with law enforcement.”

Kaul said that for the 2025-27 state budget, the DOJ had requested “significant additional investment in victim services,” $66 million, which was supported by the governor’s office and Badger State Sheriffs Association to fund victim service organizations.

“So now the funding proposal is at the Legislature, and legislators are going to make a decision as to whether to provide additional funding for victim services and if so, at what level,” Kaul said. “We’re hoping to find legislators who will champion victim service funding, and I know that others have been involved in talking to legislators to make sure that they’re familiar with the importance of this issue as well.”

Kaul encouraged the sexual assault response team members to participate in hearings of the Joint Finance Committee (the Legislature’s budgeting committee) which will be holding listening sessions around the state.

“They’re interested in public input, and so I encourage those of you who have seen the impacts of these funding cuts to reach out and let legislators, and in particular, members of the Joint Finance Committee, to let them know what the impacts have been from these reductions in funding and why it’s so important that we keep victim service funding in Wisconsin,” Kaul said.