Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 10 P25 potx

select particular items from an appropriations
bill and veto them individually. This authority,
called the “line-item veto,” is popular because it
allows the executive to cancel specific appro-
priations items from bills that are hundreds of
pages long. The legislature can override the veto
by a two-thirds majority vote.
In the 1980s and early 1990s, Presidents
RONALD REAGAN and GEORGE H.W. BUSH called for a
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT that would provide
the president with a line-item veto. After years
of debate, Congress rejected the idea of enacting
such an amendment and instead approved
federal line-item veto authority in a 1996 statute
known as the Line-Item Veto Act (2 U.S.C.A. §§
691–692). The act gave the president the ability
to cancel individual tax and spending measures
included in federal legislation.
Members of Congress who were opposed to
the act immediately filed a federal lawsuit,
arguing that the act was unconstitutional. In
Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811, 117 S.Ct. 2312, 138
L.Ed.2d 849 (1997), the
SUPREME COURT con-
cluded that the plaintiffs did not have standing
to bring the action and dismissed the case. A key
point in the ruling was that a
PLAINTIFF had to
show an actual injury resulting from the law.
The senators and representatives had argued
that the constitutional

SEPARATION OF POWERS had
been violated by the act, but the Court found
that this was not an actual injury. Therefore, the
Supreme Court had no jurisdiction.
Two groups of plaintiffs then filed suit,
arguing that they had been injured. One group
included the City of New York, two hospital
associations, one hospital, and two unions that
represented
HEALTH CARE employees. They chal-
lenged a line-item veto that President
BILL
CLINTON
had made in the 1997 Balanced Budget
Act. The other group was the Snake River Potato
Growers, Inc., which consisted of approximately
30 potato growers located throughout Idaho.
The collective opposed President Clinton’s
cancellation of a provision of the Taxpayer Relief
Act of 1997. Both groups of plaintiffs argued that
the line-item vetoes had deprived them of federal
funds. The U.S. district court found that the
parties had standing and that the act violated the
Presentment Clause under Article I of the
Constitution. The Supreme Court eventually
resolved the matter in Clinton v. City of New
York, 524 U.S. 417, 118 S. Ct. 2091, 141 L. Ed. 2d
393 (1998).
The Court, in a 6–3 vote, agreed that the
Line-Item Veto Act, which empowered the

president to cancel individual portions of bills,
violated the Presentment Clause. Under the
Presentment Clause, after a bill has passed both
Houses, but “before it become[s] a Law,” it
must either be approved (signed) or returned
(vetoed) by the president. By canceling only
parts of the legislation, President Clinton had,
in effect, amended the laws. The Court con-
cluded that there was no constitutional autho-
rization for the president to amend legislation at
his discretion.
One widely used means of congressional
oversight has been the legislative veto. A
legislative veto is a statutory device that subjects
proposals and decisions of
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
administrative agencies to additional legislative
consideration. The legislature may disapprove
agency action by a committee, one-house, or
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION.
Since it was first used in the 1930s, the
legislative veto has been the subject of contro-
versy. The legislative veto circumvents traditional
bill-passing procedures in that the legislative
action is not presented to the executive for
approval. This veto has been defended on the
ground that it is not a legislative act. In
IMMIGRATION and Naturalization Service v. Chadha,
462 U.S. 919, 103 S. Ct. 2764, 77 L. Ed. 2d 317
(1983), the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated

legislative veto provisions involving immigration
and naturalization on the ground that these
provisions violated the separation of powers
between the legislative and executive branches.
Despite Chadha, Congress has not systematically
removed legislative veto provisions from federal
statutes, and some states continue to use the
legislative veto.
FURTHER READINGS
Cameron, Charles M. 2000. Veto Bargaining: Presidents and
the Politics of Negative Power. New York: Cambridge
Univ. Press.
Lipson, G. V., ed. 2002. Presidential Vetoes: Challenges and
Bibliography. Hauppauge, N.Y.: Novinka.
Mason, Edward Campbell. 1967. The Veto Power: Its Origin,
Development, and Function in the Government of the
United States, 1789–1889. New York: Russell & Russell.
National Conference of State Legislatures. “Gubernatorial
Veto Authority with Respect to Major Budget Bill(s)”
www.ncsl.org (accessed August 20, 2009).
CROSS REFERENCES
Legislation; Legislative History; Presidential Powers.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
228 VETO
VEXATIOUS LITIGATION
A legal action or proceeding initiated maliciously
and without
PROBABLE CAUSE by an individual who
is not acting in
GOOD FAITH for the purpose of

annoying or embarrassing an opponent.
The U.S. legal system permits persons to file
civil lawsuits to seek redress for injuries
committed by a defendant. However, a legal
action that is not likely to lead to any practical
result is classified as vexatious litigation. Such
litigation is regarded as frivolous and will result
in the dismissal of the action by the court. A
person who has been subjected to vexatious
litigation may sue the plaintiff for
MALICIOUS
PROSECUTION
, seeking damages for any costs and
injuries associated with the original lawsuit.
Litigation is typically classified as vexatious
when an attorney or a pro se litigant (a person
representing himself without an attorney)
repeatedly files groundless lawsuits and repeat-
edly loses. Under the
COMMON LAW, the frequent
incitement of lawsuits by an attorney consti-
tuted the crime of
BARRATRY. In modern law,
however, barratry is viewed as an archaic crime
and is rarely enforced. Attorneys who encourage
vexatious litigation are subject to discipline for
violating rules of professional conduct and may
be suspended from the
PRACTICE OF LAW or
disbarred.

Sometimes pro se litigants who have lost
their initial lawsuits file new actions based on
the dispute contained in the original suit.
Because the judgment of the original case is
dispositive, a court will ultimately dismiss these
new actions. To avoid the expenditure of court
resources, as well as the costs associated with the
defendant’s defense of repeated frivolous claims,
a court may issue an order forbidding the pro se
litigant to file any new actions without permis-
sion of the court.
Vexatious litigation is a type of malicious
prosecution that enables the defendant to file a
tort action against the plaintiff. A plaintiff in a
malicious prosecution must prove that a legal
proceeding (or multiple proceedings) was
instituted by the defendant, that the original
proceeding was terminated in favor of the
plaintiff, that there was no probable cause for
the original proceeding, and that malice, or a
primary purpose other than that of bringing the
original action, motivated the defendant. A
plaintiff in such an action may recover, for
example, the expenses incurred in defending the
original suit or suits, as well as resulting
financial loss or injury. A plaintiff may also
recover damages for mental suffering of a kind
that would normally be expected to follow from
the original action.
VICARIOUS LIABILITY

The TORT doctrine that impose s responsibility
upon one person for the failure of another, with
whom the person has a special relationship (such
as
PARENT AND CHILD, employer and employee, or
owner of vehicle and driver), to exercise such care
as a reasonably prudent person would use under
similar circumstances.
Vicarious liability is a legal doctrine that
assigns liability for an injury to a person who
did not cause the injury but who has a parti-
cular legal relationship to the person who did
act negligently. It is also referred to as imputed
NEGLIGENCE. Legal relationships that can lead to
imputed negligence include the relationship
between parent and child,
HUSBAND AND WIFE,
owner of a vehicle and driver, and employer and
employee. Ordinarily the independent negli-
gence of one person is not imputable to another
person.
Other theories of liability that are premised
on imputed negligence include the
RESPONDEAT
SUPERIOR
doctrine and the FAMILY CAR DOCTRINE.
Both of these doctrines focus on specific
types of relationships between agents and
principals.
The doctrine of

RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR (Latin
for “let the master answer”) is based on the
employer-employee relatio nship. The doctrine
makes the employer responsible for a lack of
care on the part of an employee in relation to
those to whom the employer owes a duty of
care. For respondeat superior to apply, the
employee’s negligence must occur within the
scope of her employment.
The employer is charged with legal respon-
sibility for the negligence of the employee
because the employee is held to be an agent of
the employer. If a negligent act is committed by
an employee acting within the general scope of
her or his employment, the employer will be
held liable for damages. For example, if the
driver of a gasoline delivery truck runs a red
light on the way to a gas station and strikes
another car, causing injury, the gasoline delivery
company will be responsible for the damages if
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
VICARIOUS LIABILITY 229
the driver is found to be negligent. Because the
company will automatically be found liable if
the driver is negligent, respondeat superior is a
form of
STRICT LIABILITY.
Another common example of imputed
negligence is attributing liability to the owner
of a car, where the driver of the car committed a

negligent act. This type of relationship has been
labeled the family car doctrine. The doctrine is
based on the assumption that the head of the
household provides a car for the family’s use
and, therefore, the operator of the car acts as an
agent of the owner. When, for example, a child
drives a car registered to a parent for a family
purpose, the parent is responsible for the
negligent acts of the child at the wheel.
Liability can also be imputed to an owner of
a car who lends it to a friend. Again, the driver
of the car is acting as the agent of the owner. If
the owner is injured by the driver’s negligence
and sues the driver, the owner can lose the
lawsuit because the negligence of the driver can
be imputed to the owner, thereby rendering
him contributorily negligent. This concept is
known as imputed contributory negligence.
Vicarious liability can arise in the context of
other principal-agent relationships. For in-
stance, if a general partner in a partnership
commits a tort committed in the course of the
partnership’s business, the partnership and the
other partners can be liable.
FURTHER READINGS
Kionka, Edward J. 2006. Torts. St. Paul, MN: Thomson/
West.
Rothstein, Mark A., Charles B. Craven, Elinor P. Schroeder,
and Elaine W. Shoben. 2005. Employment Law. St. Paul,
MN: Thomson/West

CROSS REFERENCES
Employment Law; Scope of Emp loyment; Tort Law.
VICE
A fault, flaw, defect, or imperfection. Immoral
conduct, practice, or habit.
In
CIVIL LAW, redhibitory vices are defects or
flaws in the subject matter of a sale that entitle
the buyer to return the item and recover the
purchase price.
A vice crime is any type of immoral and
illegal activity, such as prostitution, the sale of
DRUGS AND NARCOTICS, and gambling.
VICE CRIMES
A generic legal term for offenses involving immo-
rality, including
PROSTITUTION, LEWDNESS, LASCIVI-
OUSNESS
, and OBSCENITY.
VICE PRESIDENT
The vice president of the United States occupies
a high position in government, but is given little
responsibility under the U.S. Constitution. A
person elected vice president presides over the
Senate, but apart from that duty, he or she must
rely upon the president to assign additional
responsibilities. The Constitution requires that
a vice president of the United States must be a
native-born citizen, 35 years of age or older, who
hasresidedintheUnitedStates foratleast14 years.

The
ELECTORAL COLLEGE chooses the vice president,
who holds office for a term of four years.
Until 1804, under Article II, Section 2, Clause
3, of the Constitution, each member of the
Electoral College was permitted to vote for two
persons. The person receiving the highest total
became president, and the person receiving
the second highest total became vice president.
The ratification of the
TWELFTH AMENDMENT to the
Constitution, in 1804, changed this procedure
by requiring each elector to vote for president
and vice president on separate ballots instead of
voting for two persons on a single ballot.
During the early years of the Republic, the
vice president was limited to the only functi on
set forth in the Constitution, that of president of
the Senate. (As such, he or she occupies a largely
ceremonial role, having no vote unless the
senators are equally divided on a particular
issue.) In 1841, however,
JOHN TYLER became the
first vice president to take over the presidency
because of the death of the chief executive,
President
WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON. Article II of
the Constitution was silent on the matter of
succession, so some political leaders suggested
that Tyl er serve as acting president. Tyler

rejected this idea and announced that he would
assume the full powers and duties of the office,
setting a precedent that would be followed by
other vice presidents.
Presidential succession was clarified by the
Twentieth and Twenty-fifth Amendments to the
Constitution. Under the
TWENTIETH AMENDMENT,
if a president-elect dies before assuming office,
the vice president elect becomes president.
Under the
TWENTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT, if the presi-
dent is removed from office, dies, or resigns
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
230 VICE
during his or her term of office, the vice president
becomes president. Eight U.S. presidents have
died in office, with the result that the vice
president assumed the presidency. In 1974 Vice
President
GERALD R. FORD became president when
RICHARD M. NIXON resigned in the face of
IMPEACHMENT charges.
The Twenty-fifth Amendment also provi des a
method for the vice president to become acting
president. If the president transmits a message to
both houses of Congress stating that he or she
cannot discharge the powers and duties of the
office, the vice president becomes acting presi-
dent. Until the president subsequently transmits

a written declaration to the contrary, the vice
president remains acting president.
In addition, the amendment concerns the
determination of whether a president is unable
to govern. In such a case, the vice president and
a majority of the cabinet may transmit to both
houses of Congress a declaration that the
president is unable to discharge the powers
and duties of the office. If this occurs, the vice
president must immediately assume the powers
and duties of the office as acting president.
The president may resume his or her duties
by notifying the president pro tempore of the
Senate and the Speaker of the House of
Representatives that the disability no longer
exists. However, within four days, the vice
president and the majority of the cabinet may
send a declaration to Congress disputing the
assertion of the president that he or she is able to
discharge the duties of the office. If this happens,
Congress must vote by a two-thirds majority in
both houses that the president is unable to serve.
Otherwise, the president will reassume office.
The Twenty-Fifth Amendment has been
invoked during two brief periods of time. In
1985, when President
RONALD REAGAN underwent
cancer surgery, he transferred power to Vice
President
GEORGE H.W. BUSH for a period of eight

hours. Several commentators expected Bush to
take charge under the amendment four years
earlier, in 1981, when Reagan was shot by John
Hinckley Jr. However, the president did not
yield control even though later reports showed
that he was in critical condition. In June 2002
President
GEORGE W. BUSH temporarily trans-
ferred power to Vice President Dick Cheney
while he underwent a colonoscopy.
If a vice president dies in office or resigns,
the Twenty-fifth Amendment authorizes the
president to choose a new vice president,
subject to confirmation by a majority vote of
both hous es of Congress. This situation oc-
curred twice during the Nixon and Ford
administrations. In 1973, President Nixon
appointed Gerald R. Ford to replace Vi ce
President Spiro T. Agnew, who resigned amidst
criminal
BRIBERY charges. When Nixon resigned
in August 1974 because of the
WATERGATE
scandal, Ford became president. Ford then
appointed Nelson A. Rockefeller vice president.
The executive functions of the vice president
include participation in all cabinet meetings
and, by statute, membership in the
NATIONAL
SECURITY COUNCIL

, the Domestic Council, and the
BOARD OF REGENTS of the Smithsonian Institution.
Although the vice pre sident may take an active
role in establishing policy in the
EXECUTIVE
BRANCH
by serving on such committees and
councils, the relative power of the vice pre-
sident’s office depends upon the duties dele-
gated by the president.
Since the early 1990s, vice presidents such as
AL GORE and Dick Cheney have played significant
roles on both the domestic and international
fronts. Gore, for example, was heavily involved
in establishing environmental policy during
President
BILL CLINTON’s administration. Like-
wise, Cheney—who served as secretary of
defense under
GEORGE H.W. BUSH—was highly
influential in establishing the international
agenda of President George W. Bush.
The events that occurred during and after the
SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, T ERRORIST ATTACKS demon-
strate the importance of the vice president’s
The official seal of
the office of the vice
president of the
United States.
BETTMANN/CORBIS.

GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3
RD E DITION
VICE PRESIDENT 231
position. Immediately after the attacks began,
SECRET SERVICE agents removed Vice President
Cheney to a secret bunker beneath the White
House. President Bush was in Florida when the
attacks occurred, and Cheney maintained con-
tact with him throughout the confusing morn-
ing. When reports indicated that terrorists were
flying a hijacked plane toward Washington,
Cheney reportedly ordered that the plane
should be shot down by the military. Several
passengers on the flight attacked the terrorists
before military action was necessary, though the
plane crashed in Pennsylvania and killed
everyone on board.In the days that followed
the attacks, Cheney was moved to a number of
secret locations in order to separate him from
Bush. The fear was that terrorists would launch
assassination attempts.
FURTHER READINGS
Purcell, L. Edward. 2001. Vice Presidents: A Biographical
Dictionary. New York: Checkmark Books.
Waldrop, Carol C. 2006. Vice Presidents: Biographies of the
45 Men Who Have Held the Second Highest Office in
the United States. Jefferson, N. Car.: McFarland and
Company.
VICTIM-ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
A government program that provides information

and aid to persons who have suffered direct
physical, emotional, or pecuniary harm as a result
of the commission of a crime.
All 50 states have government-funded enti-
ties that provide services to
VICTIMS OF CRIME.In
addition, the
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’s Office for
Victims of Crime (OVC), which was established
in 1984 under the
VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT, oversees
many federal programs that benefit crime
victims. These programs provide information
to victims about their rights as well as emotional
and financial support.
Victim-assistance programs appeared for
the first time in the early 1970s as part of the
VICTIMS’ RIGHTS movement. Victims complained
that police and prosecutors did not keep them
informed about ongoing investigations and
prosecutions. Most importantly, victim-rights
advocates argued for the establishment of
victim-compensation funds. States began to
enact victim-compensation statutes and, by
2003, all 50 states had such funds in place.
These laws authorized the creation of
programs that pay victims compensation for
certain losses associated with a criminal act.
Compensation is generally provided for lost
earnings, medical expenses, mental health

counseling, and funeral expenses. However,
these programs do not fully compensate victims
because losses are capped at fixed amounts. In
addition, victims must satisfy threshold require-
ments: (1) they must report the crime to law
enforcement within a specific period of time
(usually 30 days); (2) the crime must have
occurred within the state that the claim is made;
(3) a claim must be filed with the compensation
program within a specific amount of time; (4)
the victim must cooperate fully with the
investigation and prosecution of the crime;
and (5) the victim cannot have been commit-
ting a crime or have been involved in any
misconduct connected to the incident. Some
states limit compensation benefits only to
victims who have low incomes, while other
compensation programs may only pay benefits
to victims who are physically injured or to the
families of victims who are killed.
Though some compensation funds are paid
for with taxpayer money, most state programs
are funded by fees and charges paid for by
offenders. For example, some states require an
offender to pay a set penalty fee, such as $50 for
each felony charge. This creates a compensation
pool, which encourages victims to sue when
those victims would otherwise be discouraged at
the prospect of trying to make a criminal pay a
court judgment.

Apart from compensation programs, federal
and state laws mandate that victims be kept
informed about the criminal investigation and
prosecution. Though police and prosecutors
may contact victims, most jurisdictions have
employees who serve as victim advocates.
Victim advocates counsel victims and their
families, update them about the criminal case,
prepare victims to testify at trial, and help them
apply to the compensation fund. In addition,
they help victims prepare impact statements
that are either given orally or submitted in
writing to the court before the
DEFENDANT is
sentenced. Crime victims may also receive
restitution directly from the defendant. Judges
routinely order the person convicted of a crime
to pay for any damage to the victim’s property.
Since the late 1990s, many states have
provided crime victims with online access to
their programs and services, which has in-
creased the number of individuals willing to
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
232 VICTIM-ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
reach out for help by making it easier for them
to do so. In 2008 the New York State Crime
Victims Board’s website was singled out for its
particularly friendly
INTERNET design, which
features a prominent link on the home page

(“Need Help? Don’t Wait, Click Here”) that
redirects a visitor to a comprehensive overview
of services the board provides. It also features a
“Locate a Program” function that provides two
ways to search for a victim-assistance program:
by county or by a 5-, 10-, 25-, or 50-mile radius
from a particular zip code. The website’s
navigation is streamlined with information no
more than four mouse clicks away from the
home page. In addition, victim-assistance-
program professionals also have access to a
secure portion of the website, which allows
them to participate in Web forums to foster
discussion, share info rmation, and answer
questions.
Victim-assistance programs have fared less
well during the global economic downturn that
began in 2008. Programs in many states have
suffered drastic budget cuts, while a few state
programs are facing elimination altogether.
In Tampa, Florida, for examp le, the victim-
assistance program is $140 million in debt, and
the county administrator’s office is targeting the
program for elimination, a move that would
save $2.5 million annually.
FURTHER READINGS
Beloof, Douglas E. 1999. Victims in Criminal Procedure.
Durham, N.C.: Carolina Academic Press.
Davis, Joseph A., ed. 2001. Stalking Crimes and Victim
Protection: Prevention, Intervention, Threat Assessment,

and Case Management. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press.
Jerin, Robert A., and Laura J. Moriarity. 1998. Victims of
Crime. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Office for Victims of Crime Website. Available online at
www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc (accessed January 10, 2010).
CROSS REFERENCES
Victims of Crime; Victims of Crime Act of 1984; Victims’
Rights.
VICTIMLESS CRIMES
Crime where there is no apparent victim and no
apparent pain or injury. This class of crime
usually involves only consenting adults in activi-
ties such as
PROSTITUTION, SODOMY, and GAMING
where the acts are not public, no one is harmed,
and no one complains of the activities. Some
groups advocate legalizing victimless crimes by
removing these acts from the law books. Other
critics complain that there is no such thing as a
victimless crime; whenever one of these crimes is
committed but goes unpunished, individual
mores, societal values, and the
RULE OF LAW are
undermined or compromised, rendering society
itself the victim.
VICTIMS OF CRIME
Victims have always had the right to sue for
money damages a person who injures them
during a criminal act. For most crime victims,
however, this solution has generally not proved

practical because victims frequently do not
know who committed the crime against them
and the criminals are not always appreh ended.
Even when a criminal is available to be sued, the
victim may not have adequate funds to pay for a
lawsuit, or the criminal may have no money to
pay damages if the victim is successful.
Background and History
Victims’ rights as a concept in American
CRIMINAL LAW has had a patchy history. The
prosecutorial-centered approach to criminal law
developed in both the English and American
COMMON LAW systems tended to marginalize the
victim’s position in the criminal process. Other
than their testimony, there was no formal role
for victims during the criminal trial, and little
way for them to obtain compensation for the
harms inflicted on them following the trial.
Following
WORLD WAR II, especially, Ameri-
can law seemed to be more interested in the
rights of the criminally accused. This was
evident after the Supreme Court’s Miranda
ruling (
MIRANDA V. ARIZONA, 1966) and subse-
quent cases, which laid new boundaries for the
constitutional rights of suspects. Many victims
came to believe that they had fewer rights than
the criminals who had injured them. In
addition, some victims became so alienated

from the criminal justice process that prosec u-
tors had difficulty persuading them to testify at
trial.
In the 1970s, however, the phrase “victims’
rights” was increasingly heard as a rallying cry
for those who felt that justice was not meted out
equally to victims. Groups such as the
NATIONAL
ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN
(NOW), MOTHERS
AGAINST DRUNK DRIVING
(MADD), and various
child advocacy groups raised the conscious-
ness of the public regarding the treatment
of victims by the criminal justice system. In
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
VICTIMS OF CRIME 233
response, the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, under President
RONALD REAGAN, set up the President’sTaskForce
on
VICTIMS OF CR IME. In 1982, the task force issued
a report that was strongly critical of existing
victims’ rights programs. The report particularly
criticized existing victims-compensation pro-
grams, which were described as “inadequate” in
terms of resources and difficult to utilize.
Federal Victim Compensation Laws
As a result of the findings, the federal govern-
ment passed the Victim and Witness Protection
Act, Pub. L. No. 97-291, 96 Stat. 1248 (1982),

providing restitution for crime victims and
allowing the use of “victim impact statements”
at federal sentencing hearings. In 1984, Con-
gress passed the
VICTIM OF CRIME ACT (VOCA), an
attempt by the federal government to establish
help for crime victims on a nationwide scale.
Among other things, the act created a federal
victims’ compensation account funded by fines
assessed in federal criminal convictions. It also
established funding to help state programs that
compensate the victims of crime. The act has
resulted in the distribution of over $1 billion in
funds to victims of crime since it began.
Another notable federal law that was enacted
to help victims of crime was the
VIOLENCE
AGAINST WOMEN ACT
(VAWA), Pub. L. No. 103-
322, tit. IV, 108 Stat. 1902 (1994). The act aided
the victims of gender-based crimes by establish-
ing new rights for those victims at trial and
allotting funding to various organizations that
assist those victims.
In 2004, Congress sought to extend the
protections offered in VOCA by passing the
Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), also known
as the Justice for All Act, co dified at 18 U.S.C. §
3771. CVRA defines the rights of crime victims
to include the right of notice to proceedings, the

right to be reasonably heard at proceedings, and
the right to full and timely restitution as
provided in law. It affords victims an unprece-
dented right to seek
MANDAMUS when they are
denied the rights guaranteed by federal law.
Victims may even move to re-open a plea
agreement or sentence under certain circum-
stances. In treating the victim as a presumptive
equal with the parties in many respects, CVRA
raises numerous issues yet to be determined in
the
CASE LAW as to how the vict im might be
permitted in the future to present evidence at
sentencing or other proceedings regarding
harms caused by the offense.
State Victim Compensation Laws
Following the lead of the federal government, all
50 states have enacted victim-compensation
statutes, which authorize payment of money
from the public treasury to crime victims so that
they are not forced to bear the full burden of the
crime. Although compensation can be provided
for lost earnings, medical expenses, and the
replacement of property, the majority of plans do
not replace every dollar lost.
Most compensation plans provide benefits
only to victims who have low income or few
resources, although some plans allow anyone
who is an innocent victim or did not contribute

to the cause of her injuries to receive benefits.
Some plans pay benefits only to victims who are
physically injured or to the families of victims
who are killed.
An individual who wishes to apply for
victim compensation must do so promptly after
the injury. Ordinarily, this is done by filling out
a form provided by the state official or victim-
compensation board responsible for adminis-
tering the program. States generally will not
consider applications filed later than a specified
period after the crime.
As part of a victim-compensation plan, a state
may take any profit a criminal makes from the
crime and hold it in trust to pay victims who
successfully sue the criminal. This feature is
designed to encour age victims who would
ordinarily not sue because they are aware that
most criminals cannot pay judgments. Under
such a plan, any money paid to a convicted
criminal for a book, story, or dramatization of the
crime must be turned over to the state, and the
funds deposited intoaspecial
ESCROW account and
held available to pay any victim who successfully
sues the criminal. Forty-one states have adopted
such laws, and the federal government estab-
lished a similar process in the
VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT
OF

1984 (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 3681–3682).
These statutes are known as “Son of Sam”
laws, after David Berkowitz, a New York serial
killer who left a note signed “Son of Sam” at the
scene of one of his crimes and was thereafter
nicknamed Son of Sam by the New York press.
The first Son of Sam law (N.Y. Exec. Law § 632-a
[McKinney 1990]) was enacted by the New
York state legislature in 1977 after it learned
that Berkowitz was planning to sell his story of
serial killing.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
234 VICTIMS OF CRIME
The U.S. SUPREME COURT struck down the New
York law in Simon & Schuster v. New York
Victims Crime Board, 502 U.S. 105, 112 S. Ct.
501, 116 L. Ed. 2d 476 (1991). The Court held
that the law was based on the content of a
publication and therefore violated the
FIRST
AMENDMENT
. New York quickly amended its law
to apply to any economic benefit the criminal
derived from the crime, not just the proceeds
from the sale of the offender’s story. This
redefinition was intended to eliminate the
unconstitutional regulation of expressive activity
and reconceptualize the law as a regulation of
economic proceeds from crime. Other states have
modified their laws as well, but it remains to be

seen whether they will be found constitutional.
Other State Victims’ Rights Laws
Most states have adopted other provisions in
support of victims ’ rights. The majority of these
provisions have been codified through legisla-
tion, but several take the form of state
constitutional amendments. These laws require
victims to be treated with dignity and fairness,
and many require that the victim be kept
informed of the status of the case and be
notified when the crimin al is released from
prison. A key part of these initiatives concerns
“victim impact statements.” A victim impact
statement is made by the victim or a member of
the victim’s family at the time of sentencing or
during a
PAROLE hearing. The speaker describes
the impact the crime has had upon the victim
and her family.
In Booth v. Maryland, 482 U.S. 496, 107 S.
Ct. 2529, 96 L. Ed. 2d 440 (1987), the U.S.
Supreme Court forbade the use of victim impact
statements in death penalty cases. The Court
reasoned that the imposition of
CAPITAL PUNISH-
MENT
could be based on subjective feelings for the
victim rather than objective criteria indicating
the defendant’sguilt.InPayne v. Tennessee, 501
U.S. 808, 111 S. Ct. 2597, 115 L. Ed. 2d 720

(1991), however, the Court reversed itself and
held that the
EIGHTH AMENDMENT does not bar the
jury from considering victim impact statements.
Victim Advocates
In response to the growing support for victims’
rights, the criminal justice system has created
An Automated Victim Notification
System
C
B
rime victims commonly worry about the day
when an inmate convicted in their case is
released from custody. Women who have been
stalked and victimized by boyfriends and former
spouses fear that they will return again. Only rarely
is the victim promptly notified of an inma te’s
release. In 1997 the state of Kentucky addressed
this problem by introducing the first completely
automated victim notification system.
The Kentucky system, called Victim Infor-
mation and Notification Everyday (VINE), is a
statewide system that seeks to help crime victims,
especially those who have been subjected to
domestic violence. The VINE system keeps tabs
on inmates in Kentucky’s17stateprisonsand83
cou nty jails.
To obtain information, a person dials a toll-fre e
number and supplies the prisoner’s name or prison
identification number. A computer then provides

information as to where the prisoner is incarcer-
ated, the telephone number and address of the jail
or prison, the date of the inmate’s next parole
hearing, and the date the sentence expires.
In addition, a person may confidentially register
with the automated system and request to be
notified when an inmate is released. Registered
persons automatically receive a telephone call
within ten minutes of an inmate’stransferor
release, giving them time to take precautions.
FURTHER READINGS
“VINE Brochure.” Available online at gov.state.ky.us/domviol/
vinebrch.htm (accessed February 27, 2004).
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
VICTIMS OF CRIME 235
the position of victim advocate. Victim advo-
cates first gained prominence during the
women’s and victims’ rights movements of the
1970s and 1980s.
RAPE and domestic abuse
counselors saw the need for advocates to
support and guide victims through the ordeal
of trial.
Victim advocates counsel victims and their
families, keep them informed about the prog-
ress of an investigation, prepare them for trial,
refer them to needed service s, explain court
proceedings, and act as a liaison with state and
local agencies. By providing support to people
who have been devastated by a crime, they free

police officers and prosecutors from the task of
dealing with distraught families and friends.
Victim advocates may work in conjunction with
VICTIM ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS, governmental pro-
grams that provide information and aid to
persons who have suffered direct physical,
emotional, or pecuniary harm as a result of
the commission of a crime.
FURTHER READINGS
Boland, Mary L. 2001. Crime Victims’ Guide to Justice.
Naperville, Ill.: Sphinx Pub.
Dubber, Markus Dirk. 2002. Victims in the War on Crime:
The Use and Abuse of Victims’ Rights. New York: New
York Univ. Press.
Karmen, Andrew. 2007. Crime Victims: An Introduction to
Victimology. 6th ed. Belmont, California: Thomson
Wadsworth.
Sgarzi, Judith M., and Jack McDevitt, eds. 2003. Victimology:
A Study of Crime Victims and Their Roles. Upper Saddle
River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Tobolowsky, Peggy M. 2001. Crime Victim Rights and
Remedies. Durham, N.C.: Carolina Academic Press.
CROSS REFERENCES
Shield Laws; Stalking; Victim Assistance Program; Victims
of Crime Act of 1984; Victims’ Rights.
VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT OF 1984
The Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (VOCA) was
an attempt by the federal government to help
the victims of criminal actions through means
other than punishment of the criminal. It

created a federal victim-compensation account
funded by fines assessed in federal criminal
convictions, and it established provisions to
assist state programs that compensated the
victims of crimes. The compen sation system is
still in existence, having distributed over $1
billion in funds since it began.
The statute, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 10601,
was a direct result of a task force set up by the
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT under the auspices of Presi-
dent RONALD REAGAN. Called the President’s Task
Force on Victims of Crime, the report issued by
the task force in 1982 was harshly critical of
existing victim-compensation programs. “In
many states, program availability is not adver-
tised for fear of depleting available resources or
overtaxing an insufficient staff. Victim claims
might have to wait months until sufficient fines
have been collected or until a new fiscal year
begins and the budgetary fund is replenished,”
according to the report.
VOCA established the Crime Vi ctim’s Fund,
which is supported by all fines that are collected
from persons who have been convicted of
offenses against the United States, except for
fines that are collected through certain environ-
mental statues and other fines that are specifi-
cally designated for certain accounts, such as the
Postal Service Fund. The fund also includes
special assessments collected for various federal

crimes under 18 U.S.C. § 3613, the proceeds of
forfeited appearance bonds, bail bonds, and
collateral collected, any money ordered to be
paid into the fund under section 3671(c)(2) of
Title 18; and any gifts, bequests, or donations to
the fund from private entities or individuals.
The first $10 million from the fund, plus an
added amount depending on how much has
been deposited in the fund for that fiscal year,
goes to child-abuse prevention and treatment
programs. After that, such sums as may be
necessary are made available for the U.S .
Attorneys’ Offices and the
FEDERAL BUREAU OF
INVESTIGATION
to improve services for the benefit
of crime victims in the federal criminal justice
system, and for a Victim Notification System.
Once those distributions have been made,
the fund is distributed to victim-compensation
programs in two different ways. One is to
eligible victim-compensation programs. The
law sets up a number of criteria as to whether
a program is eligible, including: 1) whether it is
a program operated by the state that offers
compensation to victims and survivors of
victims of criminal violence; 2) whether the
program promotes victim cooperation with the
reasonable requests of law enforcement author-
ities; 3) whether the state certifies that grants

received under this section will not be used to
supplant state funds that are otherwise available
to provide victim compensa tion; 4) whether the
program makes compensation awards to vic-
tims who are nonresidents of the state on the
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
236 VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT OF 1984
basis of the same criteria that are used to make
awards to victims who are residents of such
state; 5) and whether the program provides
compensation to victims of federal crimes
occurring within the state on the same basis
that such program provides compensation to
victims of state crimes. The program also must
not deny compensation to any victim because of
that victim’s familial relationship to the of-
fender, or because of the sharing of a residence
by the victim and the offender, nor may it
provide compensation to any person who has
been convicted of an offense under federal law
with respect to any time period during which
the person is delinquent in paying a fine, other
monetary penalty, or restitution imposed for
the offense.
The other way the fund provides compen-
sation is to give the money directly to the
governor of a state for the financial support of
eligible victim-assistance programs. The gover-
nor must certify that priority for money from
the fund will be given to eligible victim-

assistance programs providing assistance to
victims of sexual
ASSAULT, spousal abuse, or
CHILD ABUSE; and he must certify that funds will
be made available for grants to programs that
serve previously underserved populations of
victims of violent crimes.
A small percentage of the fund is reserved
for demonstration projects, program ev aluation,
compliance efforts, and training and technical
assistance services to eligible victim-assistance
programs. The fund also has recently expanded
to apply to potential victims of
TERRORISM and is
authorized to set aside $50,000,000 from the
amounts transferred to it in response to the
SEPTEMBER 11TH ATTACKS as an antiterrorism
emergency reserve.
In 2004 Congress sought to extend the
protections offered in VOCA by passing the
Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), sometimes
known as the Justice for All Act, codified at 18
U.S.C.A. § 3771. CVRA defines the rights of
crime victims to include the right of notice to
proceedings, the right to be reasonably heard at
proceedings, and the right to full and timely
restitution as provided in law. The CVRA
affords victims an unprecedented right to seek
MANDAMUS when they are denied the rights
guaranteed by federal law. Victims may even

move to re-open a plea agreement or sentence
under certain circumstances. In treating the
victim as a presumptive equal with the parties in
many respects, the CVRA raises numerous
issues yet to be determined in the
CASE LAW as
to how the victim might be permitted in the
future to present evidence at sentencing or
other proceedings regarding harms caused by
the offense.
FURTHER READINGS
Greer, Desmond S. 1994. “A Transatlantic Perspective on
the Compensation of Crime Victims in the United
States.” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 85
(Fall).
Karmen, Andrew. 2007. Crime Victims: An Introduction
to Victimology. 6th ed. Belmont, Calif. Thomson
Wadsworth.
Roland, David L. 1989. “Progress in the Victim Reform
Movement: No Longer the 'Forgotten Victim.'” Pep-
perdine Law Review 17 (December).
CROSS REFERENCES
Victim Assistance Program; Victims of Crime; Victims’
Rights.
VICTIMS’ RIGHTS
See VICTIMS OF CRIME.
VIDAL V. GIRARD’S EXECUTORS
Vidal v. Girard’s Executors43 U.S. (2 How.)
127, 11 L. Ed. 205, was an 1844 decision in
which the Supreme Court held that the city of

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, had power, pur-
suant to its charter, to accept and administer a
CHARITABLE TRUST.
Stephen Girard was a native of France who
emigrated to the American colonies shortly
before the Declaration of Independence. Prior
to 1783 he became a resident of the city of
Philadelphia, where he died, a childless wid-
ower, in December 1831. In addition to some
minor real estate holdings near Bordeaux,
France, Girard owned real property in the
United States that had cost him $1.7 million
and
PERSONAL PROPERTY worth approximately $5
million. On December 25, 1830, he executed a
will making various bequests to his relatives and
friends, to the city of New Orleans, and to
specified charities. His will and two codicils
were admitted to probate on December 31,
1831. His closest relatives were a brother and a
niece, who sought to have a portion of his will
set aside, and three other nieces, who were
named defendants in the action. The lower
court ruled in favor of the defendants, and the
plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
VIDAL V. GIRARD’ S EXECUTORS 237