H.R. 8813 (119th)Bill Overview

Supporting Survivors from Faith-based Communities Act

domestic policy
Cosponsors
Support
Bipartisan
Introduced
May 14, 2026
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

Establishes a grant program to create and operate a National Faith-Based Resource Center addressing domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking among people of faith. Grants go to consortia of eligible entities (including faith-based and culturally specific organizations) to provide training, technical assistance, and coordination with legal, housing, and victim service stakeholders.

Why people may split

Left emphasizes survivor-centered safeguards and outreach benefits

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a fairly well-structured authorization creating a new grant program to establish a national faith-based resource center, containing clear purpose statements, definitions, allowable uses, application requirements, funding authorization, and reporting obligations.

Establishes a grant program to create and operate a National Faith-Based Resource Center addressing domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking among people of faith.

Grants go to consortia of eligible entities (including faith-based and culturally specific organizations) to provide training, technical assistance, and coordination with legal, housing, and victim service stakeholders.

The bill authorizes $2 million annually for FY2027–2031, forbids use of funds for proselytizing, requires reporting, and directs the Attorney General to publish model State legislation addressing religious divorce denial.

Passage55/100

Modest price tag and victim-support focus increase viability, but religion-related eligibility and model law provisions create political and stakeholder uncertainty.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a fairly well-structured authorization creating a new grant program to establish a national faith-based resource center, containing clear purpose statements, definitions, allowable uses, application requirements, funding authorization, and reporting obligations.

Contention55/100

Left emphasizes survivor-centered safeguards and outreach benefits

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedFederal agencies · States

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitProvides specialized training for faith leaders to identify and support victims, improving victim-centered care within…
  • Potential benefitBuilds coordination between faith communities and service providers, potentially improving referrals and access to serv…
  • Potential benefitCreates a national resource center and jobs for training, administration, and technical assistance positions.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesAuthorizes approximately $10 million over five years, increasing federal spending on a new grant program.
  • StatesMay raise church-state concerns despite restrictions on proselytizing, prompting legal or public scrutiny.
  • Potential burdenApplication requirements and consortium experience thresholds may burden smaller faith groups and limit applicants.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Left emphasizes survivor-centered safeguards and outreach benefits
Progressive90%

Likely to view the bill positively as a targeted, survivor-centered effort to include faith communities in evidence-based responses.

The explicit exclusion of organizations that prioritize family preservation over survivor safety and the proselytizing prohibition are viewed as important safeguards.

May push for greater funding and stronger protections for marginalized survivors.

Leans supportive
Centrist80%

Generally favorable toward a focused, low-cost federal program that strengthens victim services and coordinates stakeholders.

Values the built-in safeguards (no proselytizing, victim-centered requirement) and reporting requirements.

Would want clarity on measurable outcomes, grant selection criteria, and fiscal oversight.

Leans supportive
Conservative45%

Mixed view: supportive of engaging faith communities to help victims, but wary of federal programs influencing religious practice.

Concerned the eligibility exclusions and model State code on religious divorce denial could intrude into religious autonomy.

Approves of the non-proselytizing rule, but suspects bias in training content and potential marginalization of traditional faith teachings.

Split reaction
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood55/100

Modest price tag and victim-support focus increase viability, but religion-related eligibility and model law provisions create political and stakeholder uncertainty.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • Stakeholder reaction from diverse faith communities
  • Potential legal challenges over eligibility or religious implications
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Left emphasizes survivor-centered safeguards and outreach benefits

Modest price tag and victim-support focus increase viability, but religion-related eligibility and model law provisions create political an…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a fairly well-structured authorization creating a new grant program to establish a national faith-based resource center, containing clear purpose statements, defin…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis