advocating for land rights and environmental issues, Indigenous communities, the freedoms of expression, assembly, and association, minority communities, and LGBTQI+, women’s, youth, and religious rights. (7) Environmental human rights defenders are vulnerable to reprisals because such human rights defenders pose challenges to financial interests and often live in remote areas where government oversight is weak and powerful actors can use corrupt practices and brute force to seize resources with impunity. (8) Women human rights defenders often face additional grave risks, including gender-based violence, reprisals against their children, use of digital disinformation campaigns against them, and stigmatization from their families, workplaces, and communities. (9) Many human rights defenders who have been forced into exile desire to continue their advocacy from abroad, yet such human rights defenders lack the legal protections and support they need to continue such advocacy. (10) The United States has a strong legacy of supporting human rights defenders. Given the rising number of human rights defenders at risk, the United States should elevate and enhance such support, especially at embassies, consulates, and foreign missions of the United States. (11) The training and guidance for individuals and organizations working with the United States Government, including members of the Foreign Service, on recognizing and responding to reprisals against human rights defenders is insufficient, leading to ad hoc and inconsistent responses, while human rights defenders who are at risk are frequently unaware of how to safely work with United States officials abroad and the resources that are available to human rights defenders. (12) The United States has neither a coherent strategy to strengthen protections for human rights defenders, nor adequate measures to prevent and respond to cases in which members of foreign security forces, law enforcement, judicial institutions, criminal groups, or private companies contribute to