Us vs Morrison
To: Executive Management
From: Team A
Re:
United States
v.
Morrison
529 U.S. 598 (U.S. Sup. Ct. 2002)
I. Facts:
Petitioner Christy Brzonkala, a student at Virginia Polytechnic Institute files a suit against two students of the same school, Respondents Antonio Morrison and James Crawford, for rape and emotional distress. Petitioner claims the sexual assault violates 42 U.S.C. §13981, “which provides a federal civil remedy for the victims of gender-motivated violence” (FindLaw, 2000, p.1). Respondents move for dismissal on the basis that the petitioner’s complaint does not “state a claim and that §13981’s civil remedy is unconstitutional” (FindLaw, 2000, p. 1).
II. Type of Action:
Civil Lawsuit
III. Issues:
a. Court Holding: The United States Supreme Court ruled that Congress exceeded its constitutional authority by enacting Subtitle C of the Violence Against Women act, 42 U.S.C. 13981. The United States Supreme Court held that violent criminal conduct cannot be based solely on that conduct’s aggregate effect on interstate commerce.
b. Rationale for Holding:
1. General rule of law:
There are three broad categories under the Commerce Clause that is considered in the case. The first category states “Congress may regulate the use of the channels of interstate commerce.” Second, “Congress is empowered to regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, or persons or things in interstate commerce, even though the threat may come only from intrastate activities.” Third, “Congress’ commerce authority includes the power to regulate those activities having a substantial relation to interstate commerce, i.e., those activities that substantially affect interstate commerce.” (Mallor, Barnes, Bowers, Langvardt, 2003)
Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which allows Congress to enforce by appropriate legislation the constitutional guarantee that no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,
From: Team A
Re:
United States
v.
Morrison
529 U.S. 598 (U.S. Sup. Ct. 2002)
I. Facts:
Petitioner Christy Brzonkala, a student at Virginia Polytechnic Institute files a suit against two students of the same school, Respondents Antonio Morrison and James Crawford, for rape and emotional distress. Petitioner claims the sexual assault violates 42 U.S.C. §13981, “which provides a federal civil remedy for the victims of gender-motivated violence” (FindLaw, 2000, p.1). Respondents move for dismissal on the basis that the petitioner’s complaint does not “state a claim and that §13981’s civil remedy is unconstitutional” (FindLaw, 2000, p. 1).
II. Type of Action:
Civil Lawsuit
III. Issues:
a. Court Holding: The United States Supreme Court ruled that Congress exceeded its constitutional authority by enacting Subtitle C of the Violence Against Women act, 42 U.S.C. 13981. The United States Supreme Court held that violent criminal conduct cannot be based solely on that conduct’s aggregate effect on interstate commerce.
b. Rationale for Holding:
1. General rule of law:
There are three broad categories under the Commerce Clause that is considered in the case. The first category states “Congress may regulate the use of the channels of interstate commerce.” Second, “Congress is empowered to regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, or persons or things in interstate commerce, even though the threat may come only from intrastate activities.” Third, “Congress’ commerce authority includes the power to regulate those activities having a substantial relation to interstate commerce, i.e., those activities that substantially affect interstate commerce.” (Mallor, Barnes, Bowers, Langvardt, 2003)
Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which allows Congress to enforce by appropriate legislation the constitutional guarantee that no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,