This bill reinstates Post-9/11 Educational Assistance benefits for spouses or children who lost them due to a service member's administrative separation or conviction for dependent abuse.
Angus King
Senator
ME
The Safeguarding Department of Veterans Affairs Dependent Education Benefits Act of 2025 aims to protect education benefits for victims of abuse. This bill allows spouses or children to petition for the reinstatement of Post-9/11 Educational Assistance benefits that were previously transferred but terminated due to the service member's conviction or administrative separation for dependent abuse. The process requires victims to apply with evidence, and denials can be appealed to the Secretary of Defense or Homeland Security.
The Safeguarding Department of Veterans Affairs Dependent Education Benefits Act of 2025 addresses a tough, real-world problem: what happens to a spouse or child’s education benefits when the service member who transferred them gets booted from the military for dependent abuse? This bill creates a new section, 3319A, in the law that allows the military services to reinstate those crucial Post-9/11 Educational Assistance benefits that were terminated.
When a service member transfers their GI Bill benefits to a spouse or child, those benefits often disappear if the service member is separated or convicted for a dependent-abuse offense and receives a discharge status that doesn’t meet the VA’s standards. This bill recognizes that penalizing the victim—who is often already dealing with trauma—by stripping away their education money is fundamentally unfair.
Under this new rule, if you’re the spouse or dependent child whose benefits were cut off due to the service member’s abuse-related separation or conviction, you can apply to have them reinstated. The military branch involved must determine that the abuse offense was the main reason the benefits were terminated. They can only reinstate the amount of benefits that hadn’t been used yet when the service member left. This provides a clear path for victims to regain the educational opportunities they were promised, which is a massive financial and life-planning relief.
One of the most important provisions here is the requirement that the Secretary of the relevant military branch must work with Veterans Service Organizations (VSOs) to ensure the application process is “trauma-informed.” This means the process shouldn’t require victims to re-live their trauma unnecessarily or navigate a cold, bureaucratic maze. For someone trying to rebuild their life after abuse, a sensitive, supportive application process is just as critical as the benefit itself. The application requires “enough proof” showing the applicant was the victim of the abuse that led to the service member’s discharge.
To make a determination, the military service must establish, based on a “preponderance of the evidence” in the administrative separation record, that the service member committed the abuse offense. This standard means it’s more likely than not that the abuse occurred. However, there’s a slight catch here: the law says the Secretary may reinstate the benefits, which means it’s discretionary, not mandatory. While the intent is clearly positive, this discretionary language could lead to inconsistent decisions across different military branches if the regulations aren’t crystal clear.
If the military branch denies the application for reinstatement, the dependent isn't left without recourse. The bill establishes a review process: you can ask the Secretary of Defense or Homeland Security (depending on the branch) to review the denial. They have 30 days to respond and must publish public guidance explaining exactly how to request this review. This oversight mechanism is key, ensuring that local administrative errors or biases can be corrected at a higher level.
Finally, the Secretaries must develop regulations defining what counts as a “dependent-abuse offense.” This definition needs to cover various types of abuse under military, federal, state, and even foreign laws, provided the conduct happened while the service member was on active duty. This ensures the definition is broad enough to cover the diverse circumstances military families face globally. The bill also confirms that, like all other GI Bill programs, you can only collect benefits from this new section or other programs (like Chapter 30 or 35) — you have to pick one, not stack them.