New Supreme Court Ruling on Women's Civil Rights

Christy Brzonkala filed a federal lawsuit against two male classmates who gang-raped her in 1995, shortly after she enrolled as a student in Virginia Polytechnic Institute. On May 15, 2000, in United States v. Morrison, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional the civil rights remedy of the Violence Against Women Act on which Brzonkala relied to file her lawsuit. The Supreme Court concluded that Congress lacked the authority to enact the civil rights remedy and that the states were the appropriate source for legislation to redress gender-motivated violence.

Violence Against Women Act—Civil Rights Remedy

The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is a major national effort to end violence against women. The law was enacted in 1994 with the overwhelming support of Republicans and Democrats in both houses of the Congress. VAWA provides funding for programs ranging from domestic violence shelters and rape crisis centers to training for law enforcement and health care professionals. The recent Supreme Court case left all of these provisions untouched.

The VAWA provision—the civil rights remedy—that the Supreme Court struck down created a new legal tool for victims of gender-motivated violence. The law enabled victims to sue their attackers in federal or state court to recover damages for their injuries, impose monetary punishments, obtain orders of protection, and recover their attorneys’ fees. To win a VAWA civil rights remedy case, the party suing was required to prove that (1) she was the victim of a crime of violence as defined by the statute and (2) the perpetrator of the crime was motivated to commit the crime by the victim’s gender.

Congress enacted the VAWA civil rights remedy pursuant to its authority under both the Commerce Clause and Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution allows Congress to regulate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. Congress enacted VAWA following four years of legislative hearings during which lawmakers heard from advocates, academics, health care professionals, and law enforcement officials on the devastating impact that violence has on women’s lives.

As a result, Congress found that gender-motivated violence reduced women’s employment opportunities and productivity, increased the costs of health care and absenteeism to employers, and barred women from full participation in the work force. Congress recognized specifically that survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault had a hard time finding and keeping jobs, advancing in their careers, and gaining financial independence. Congress concluded that gender-motivated violence had a substantial effect on interstate commerce because far too many women lived in constant fear for their lives and safety and thus were not able to participate fully in the national economy.

Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment enables Congress to pass federal legislation to guarantee that no state deprives any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or equal protection of the laws. During the legislative hearings on VAWA, Congress learned that many state justice systems did not adequately address the problems of rape, sexual assault, and domestic violence. In particular, evidence showed that state law enforcement officials often treated violence against women less seriously than comparable violence against men and that women who complained of gender-motivated violence were often stigmatized and stereotyped when they sought help. Congress also heard from attorneys general from 38 states who filed a letter in support of federal assistance for victims of gender-motivated violence.

After studying this issue for four years, Congress enacted the civil rights remedy to offer an alternative federal remedy for victims who were frequently unable to find relief at the state level. Despite these congressional findings, the Supreme Court concluded that Congress lacked the power to enact the civil rights remedy under either the Commerce Clause or the Fourteenth Amendment, and the law was struck down. All pending lawsuits filed under the civil rights remedy, including Christy Brzonkala’s case, are now over. One possible result of this decision is that other federal civil rights laws, including those that protect women and minorities from discrimination in the workplace, may face new constitutional challenges in court.

Continued Efforts to Address Violence Against Women

We must remember that the civil rights remedy is the only VAWA provision that the Supreme Court found unconstitutional. Other important VAWA provisions, including funding for direct services and training, remain intact and need the continued support of local activists to ensure reauthorized funding. Unless Congress acts soon to reauthorize VAWA, funding for these programs will run out on October 1, 2000.

For more information on VAWA reauthorization, contact Wendy Pollack, National Center on Poverty Law, 312.263.3830 ext. 238. For VAWA reauthorization bill summaries and direct links to senators, representatives, and members of the media, visit www.stopfamilyviolence.org.

Advocates in Illinois and across the country are currently working to fill the gap left by the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Morrison. See the next issue of WomanView for an update on the Illinois Gender Violence Act and information on possible federal alternatives to VAWA’s civil rights remedy.