This week, the US Senate will begin debating provisions of the Violence Against Women Act that extend protection to undocumented immigrants and same-sex couples, because Republicans are so opposed to extending protection to undocumented immigrants and same-sex couples that they're willing to contest something called the Violence Against Women Act. The debate promises to be extraordinarily depressing, like Issa hearing-level depressing, and so I'd recommend that if you sit at a desk, please equip it with a pillow ASAP, so you don't accidentally concuss yourself when slamming your forehead into your desk during the proceedings.
According to The Hill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has filed a motion to proceed to a vote on the legislation. Republicans, who are certainly not fighting a war on women how dare you suggest such a thing when in fact it is YOU that is doing the declaration of war on women simply in pointing out that it seems that women are being warred upon, are "scrambling" to file alternative legislation so their opposition to the Violence Against Women Act doesn't get read like they're a party in favor of violence against women.
But even though they say they have good reason for opposing VAWA, every reason they've given has made them sound like anti-woman dicks. Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions has his manties in a knot over a provision that would allow non-Natives to be prosecuted by tribal authorities for domestic violence that occurs on reservations. Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, the Republican party's Twitter answer to Horse_ebooks (seriously— read his Twitter feed. It's a thing of barely cogent beauty), says there are problems with the Act's constitutionality. Others are concerned that undocumented immigrants will somehow figure out a way to game the system and get temporary visas by abusing the abuse protection provisions newly available to them. Still others are concerned that considering violence between same sex partners "domestic" will dilute the definition of "domestic."