United States v. Morrison

Background

A college student says two male students at her university attacked and raped her. She sued them under a federal law (part of the Violence Against Women Act) that created a civil right to sue for gender-motivated violence. Lower courts split, and the Fourth Circuit en banc struck down the federal civil remedy. The United States asked the high court to decide whether Congress had constitutional power to create that federal cause of action.

Reasoning

The central question was whether Congress could use its power over interstate commerce or its power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment to create a nationwide private civil lawsuit for gender-motivated violence. The Court said no. On the Commerce Clause it held that violent, noneconomic crimes are not the kind of activity Congress may reach simply by adding up their national effects; the statute lacked a limiting jurisdictional element and relied on an attenuated chain from local crime to national economic effects. On Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment the Court said Congress may only enact corrective measures aimed at state action, but this law targets private individuals nationwide and is not properly tailored or directed at discriminatory state officials or practices.

Real world impact

As a result, the federal private right to sue under that statute cannot be used. Victims who had hoped to sue under the federal law must instead rely on state criminal prosecutions or state civil claims. The opinion leaves in place narrower federal tools tied to interstate activity or criminal statutes that specifically reach interstate conduct.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Thomas agreed with the outcome but wrote separately criticizing the Court’s existing Commerce Clause test. Justices Souter and Breyer dissented, arguing Congress had assembled extensive evidence and that the statute could be sustained under prior commerce-power decisions.