United States v. Morrison

E48111

U.S. Supreme Court case federal courts case landmark United States constitutional law case

United States v. Morrison is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment by striking down parts of the Violence Against Women Act.

Statements (50)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	U.S. Supreme Court case ⓘ federal courts case ⓘ landmark United States constitutional law case ⓘ
arguedDate	1999-11-09 ⓘ
citation	529 U.S. 598 ⓘ
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted	Commerce Clause ⓘ surface form: Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
country	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decidedBy	Rehnquist Court ⓘ
decisionDate	2000-05-15 ⓘ
defendant	Antonio J. Morrison ⓘ James Crawford ⓘ
dissentingOpinionBy	David H. Souter NERFINISHED ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED ⓘ
docketNumber	99-5 ⓘ
fullCaseName	United States, Petitioner v. Antonio J. Morrison et al. ⓘ
held	Congress lacked authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to enact the civil remedy provision of the Violence Against Women Act ⓘ Congress lacked authority under the Commerce Clause to enact the civil remedy provision of the Violence Against Women Act ⓘ Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment does not authorize Congress to regulate private conduct ⓘ gender-motivated crimes of violence are not economic activity that substantially affects interstate commerce ⓘ
impact	limited Congress’s use of Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to remedy private discrimination and violence ⓘ narrowed Congress’s ability to regulate non-economic activity under the Commerce Clause ⓘ
issue	whether Congress could create a federal civil remedy for victims of gender-motivated violence ⓘ
joinedDissent	John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED ⓘ Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ
joinedMajority	Anthony M. Kennedy NERFINISHED ⓘ Antonin Scalia NERFINISHED ⓘ Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ
jurisdiction	federal question jurisdiction ⓘ
lawInvolved	Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 ⓘ surface form: Violence Against Women Act of 1994
lowerCourt	United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ⓘ
lowerCourtDisposition	affirmed ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
originatedFrom	Brzonkala v. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University ⓘ
plaintiff	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
rearguedDate	2000-01-11 ⓘ
relatedTo	City of Boerne v. Flores ⓘ Katzenbach v. Morgan ⓘ United States v. Lopez ⓘ
reporter	United States Reports ⓘ
struckDown	42 U.S.C. § 13981 ⓘ
subjectMatter	civil rights enforcement ⓘ gender-motivated violence ⓘ
topic	federalism in the United States ⓘ limits on federal power under the Commerce Clause ⓘ scope of Congress’s enforcement power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
volume	529 ⓘ
year	2000 ⓘ

Referenced by (7)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution → citedIn → United States v. Morrison ⓘ

Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment → interpretedByCase → United States v. Morrison ⓘ

substantial effects doctrine → limitedByCase → United States v. Morrison ⓘ

William H. Rehnquist → notableCaseParticipation → United States v. Morrison ⓘ

Gonzales v. Raich → relatedCase → United States v. Morrison ⓘ

United States v. Lopez → subsequentCitationIn → United States v. Morrison ⓘ

Enforcement Clause → usedInCase → United States v. Morrison ⓘ