In the United States v. Morrison case of 1976, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning federal jurisdiction over criminal offenses. The defendant, Morrison, was charged with murder committed in Indian country and argued that he should be tried under tribal law rather than federal law due to his Native American heritage. However, because the crime occurred on land held by the U.S government in trust for an Indian tribe (which is considered "Indian Country"), it fell under federal jurisdiction according to Title 18 of United States Code Section 1153 - also known as Major Crimes Act. This act gives Federal courts jurisdiction over certain major crimes committed by Indians within Indian Country regardless of whether they are recognized members of a tribe or not. The court rejected Morrison's argument and upheld his conviction stating that Congress has broad power to regulate affairs with Native Americans including defining criminal conduct within their territories.

I'm sorry, but there seems to be a mistake in your request. The United States v. Morrison case was decided by the Supreme Court in 2000, not 1976. In this case, four justices dissented: Justices Souter, Stevens, Ginsburg and Breyer. They argued that Congress had the authority under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution to enact a federal civil remedy for victims of gender-motivated violence as part of Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The dissenting opinion emphasized that such violent acts have substantial effects on interstate commerce and thus fall within Congressional power to regulate it. Furthermore, they contended that majority's decision failed to respect established precedent regarding congressional power under Commerce Clause and ignored extensive legislative record demonstrating VAWA’s impact on interstate commerce.