Description
#2: Read the Supreme Court decision in U.S. vs.
Morrison (2000). The question presented to the Supreme
Court was:
Does Congress have the authority to enact the Violence
case. Against Women Act of 1994 under either the Commerce
Clause or Fourteenth Amendment?
The Supreme Court considered a suit brought by a former
student of Virginia Polytechnic Institute (Brzonkala) who
alleged two university athletes raped her. The defendant
players and university argued that the Violence Against
Women Act, which allowed victims of gender
-motivated
violence to bring federal civil suits for damages (a federal
cause of action), was unconstitutional under the Commerce
Clause. The Court agreed with the defendants, in concluding
that Congress must distinguish between "what is truly
national and what is truly local"--and that its power under
the Commerce Clause reaches only the former.
In a one to two page (single spaced) response answer the
following questions:
1. Why did Ms. Brzonkala, a Pennsylvania resident, file
suit in U.S. District Court Eastern District of
Pennsylvania (federal court) instead of state court?
2. Did the Supreme Court find that the section of the
Violence Against Woman Act allowing a cause of
action to bring a federal civil suit for damages
violated the Fourteenth Amendment?
3. Do you believe the Supreme Court made the right
decision? If so, why. If not, why not?
4. Some constitutional scholars say that the Commerce
Clause of the United States Constitution is the most
important power conveyed upon Congress. The
United States Constitution, Article I, Section 8 states:
“the Congress shall have Power...To regulate
Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the
several States, and with the Indian Tribes (the
“Commerce Clause”).” Do you believe the scholars
are right? Why or why not?
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
U.S. v. Morrison 529 U.S. 598 (2000) – Outline
Thesis statement: The decision of U.S. v. Morrison was in line with an emerging federalism
jurisprudence, one that focusses on a Congress with limited powers and state sovereignty over
the redress of certain issue through federal approaches.
I.
Introduction
II.
Why Ms. Brzonkala Filed Suit in a Federal Court
III.
The Supreme Court’s Decision in U.S. v. Morrison
IV.
Whether the Supreme Court Made the Right Decision
V.
Whether the Commerce Clause is the Most Important Power of Congress
VI.
Conclusion
Running head: U.S. V. MORRISON
1
U.S. v. Morrison 529 U.S. 598 (2000)
Name
Institution
U.S. V. MORRISON
2
U.S. v. Morrison 529 U.S. 598 (2000)
Introduction
In 1994, the U.S. Congress enacted the Violence against Women Act, which provided
that victims of gender-based violence could seek federal remedy even though no criminal
charges were preferred against the alleged perpetrator of the violence. The case of United
States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000) is a U.S. Supreme Court decision that found a
significant provision of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 to be unconstitutional for
violating the Commerce Clause. The decision was in line with an emerging federalism
jurisprudence, one that focusses on a Congress with limited powers and state sovereignty
over the redress of some important issues through federal legislation.
Why Ms. Brzonkala Filed Suit in a Federal Court
The plaintiff, Christy Brzonkala, filed suit in a federal court because the local court
did not find sufficient evidence to charge the perpetrators with the crime. In the fall of 1994,
Christy Brzonkala, a freshman student at Virginia Polytechnic Institute (Virginia Tech), was
raped and assaulted several times by her fellow students James Crawford and Antonio
Morrison (United States v. Morrison, n.d.). In 1995, she filed a complaint against Crawford
and Morrison under the Virginia Tech Sexual Assault Policy. After the proceedings,
Morrison was found liable for sexual assault and was suspended. Crawford was, however, not
punished. A state grand jury did not charge either man due to insufficient evidence.
Brzonkala then filed suit under the Violence Against Women Act as it offered a civil remedy
to gender violence victims even in the absence of criminal charges.
The Supreme Court’s Decision in U.S. v. Morrison
Yes, the Supreme Court found that section 13981which allowed the cause of action to
be brought for civil remedy was unconstitutional under either the Fourteenth Amendment or
the Commerce Clause. The court ruled that Congress lacked the au...
Review
Review
