Blah Blah Blah

I think this will be the last Commerce Clause post for the foreseeable future. Thank God, I’m sick and tired of beating this dead horse.

Once again, Congress tries to use the open-ended Commerce Clause in lieu of (and sometimes in contradiction of) enumerated powers. Even though many of these laws regard issues every American would agree on, SCOTUS must strike the legislation if it is not an economic issue with interstate effects. The idea is to protect federalism.

United States v. Morrison (2000)

Facts
Congress used the Commerce Clause to pass the Violence Against Women Act. A woman was raped, and attempted to recover in federal court.

Question
Does Congress have the power to reach this type of activity under the Commerce Clause?

Holding
No

Reasoning
Rape is neither interstate nor economic activity. The plaintiff argued that rape affects interstate economic decisions such as tourism and business relocation. SCOTUS did not find this argument persuasive.

Note
It’s important to reiterate that SCOTUS is not saying that the federal government should allow rape. It is merely saying that the Commerce Clause is not the proper channel for legislation against such a crime.

summarized from Life of a Law Student