In the United States v. Morrison case, the Supreme Court ruled that parts of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) were unconstitutional. The plaintiff, Christy Brzonkala, had sued Antonio Morrison and James Crawford under VAWA after they allegedly raped her while all three were students at Virginia Tech University. However, in a 5-4 decision led by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the court found that Congress had overstepped its authority under both the Commerce Clause and Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment when it created a federal civil remedy for victims of gender-motivated violence. The majority opinion held that neither provision gave Congress power to regulate non-economic violent criminal conduct based solely on its aggregate effect on interstate commerce or to provide remedies for harm caused by private individuals rather than state actors.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Morrison case argued that Congress had sufficient authority under the Commerce Clause to enact a federal civil remedy for victims of gender-motivated violence. The dissenters, Justices Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer and Stevens believed that such violent acts have an aggregate economic impact on interstate commerce which justifies Congressional intervention. They also contended that this law was part of a larger legislative scheme to eliminate discriminatory practices harmful to women's employment opportunities and economic status. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority’s interpretation of Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment as limiting Congress' power only to state actions rather than individual ones; instead arguing it should be interpreted more broadly allowing Congress to regulate private conduct if necessary for enforcing equal protection rights.