AVERT Future Violence Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- May 19, 2026
Bottom line
The bill establishes a federal study and grant program to address animal cruelty, based on the premise that it is a predictor of future human violence, aiming to enhance prevention and intervention efforts.
What it actually does
This bill directs the Attorney General to conduct a comprehensive study on the underlying factors contributing to animal cruelty and its correlation with future acts of violence against humans. It also authorizes a federal grant program to assist eligible entities in developing and strengthening detection strategies, early intervention, and diversion resources for animal cruelty offenders, aiming to prevent future violence.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that animal cruelty is a significant indicator of future violence against humans, including domestic violence and child abuse. By funding a federal study to understand this link and providing grants for early intervention and rehabilitation programs, the bill can proactively prevent broader societal violence and protect both animals and vulnerable individuals.
Opponents contend
Critics might contend that while animal cruelty is abhorrent, dedicating federal resources to study it as a predictor of human violence and funding related grant programs could divert resources from more direct or proven methods of preventing human violence. Concerns could also be raised about the scope of 'animal cruelty' definitions or potential overreach in federal intervention into local matters.
The bill is concise and clearly written, making it accessible for readers to understand its provisions and implications quickly.
Section 1
Short Title
This section establishes the official short titles for the Act: the 'Animal Violence Exposes Real Threat of Future Violence Act of 2026' and the 'AVERT Future Violence Act of 2026.' These titles clearly communicate the bill's intent to address the link between animal cruelty and future human violence.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that a clear and impactful short title helps to communicate the bill's purpose effectively and garner public and legislative support for addressing the serious link between animal abuse and human violence.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against short titles, as they are primarily for identification and branding rather than substantive policy.
Tradeoffs
None significant for a short title.
Section 2
Definitions of 'Animal Cruelty' and 'Eligible Entity'
This section defines 'animal cruelty' to include intentional, knowing, or reckless harm, killing, neglect, or deprivation of an animal, while explicitly excluding customary practices like veterinary care, agriculture, hunting, pest control, research, self-defense, or euthanasia. It also defines 'eligible entity' broadly to include states, local governments, courts, Indian Tribes, and various organizations with a documented history of addressing animal cruelty or its link to interpersonal violence, such as animal shelters, mental health providers, and victim service providers.
Section 3
Attorney General Study on Animal Cruelty and Future Human Violence
This section directs the Attorney General, through the National Institute of Justice, to conduct a study within three years. The study will investigate underlying factors contributing to animal cruelty and analyze acts of animal cruelty as predictors of future violence against humans. It requires examining risk factors, correlations between specific acts of cruelty and risk factors, the likelihood of future human violence, types of human violence associated with animal cruelty, and areas for future research. It also mandates the development of best practices for early interventions and interventions for individuals who have committed animal cruelty to prevent future violence, with policy recommendations submitted to Congress.
Section 4
Stop Future Violence Grant Program
This section authorizes the Attorney General to establish a grant program to assist eligible entities in developing and strengthening detection strategies, early intervention, and diversion resources for animal cruelty offenders. Funds can be used for personnel, training, technical assistance, and data collection for apprehension, prosecution, adjudication, and mental/behavioral health treatment. Specific uses include training law enforcement, judges, prosecutors, and mental health professionals; developing specialized units; implementing effective policies; and expanding data collection systems to track animal cruelty cases.
The definition of 'animal cruelty' explicitly excludes customary veterinary, agricultural, hunting, trapping, fishing, sporting activities (not federally prohibited), predator/pest control, medical/scientific research, actions necessary to protect human life, and euthanasia.
Section 2(1)(B)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to clarify the scope and prevent unintended application of a broad definition. It ensures that common, legal activities involving animals are not inadvertently criminalized or targeted by the bill's study and grant programs.
Case for: Proponents argue that these exclusions are essential to prevent the bill from interfering with legitimate and necessary practices, such as farming, scientific research, and wildlife management, ensuring the bill's focus remains on malicious acts of cruelty.
Case against: Critics might argue that some of these exclusions, particularly those related to 'sporting activity' or 'animal management practice,' could be interpreted broadly to shield activities that some consider inhumane, potentially undermining the spirit of the bill.
Estimated impact: Clarifies the scope of the bill's application, affecting a wide range of industries and activities involving animals by explicitly exempting them from the definition of 'animal cruelty' for the purposes of this Act.