Connection lost
Server error
UNITED STATES v. MORRISON Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The Supreme Court struck down a federal law providing a civil remedy for gender-motivated violence. It held that Congress lacked authority under the Commerce Clause, as the regulated activity was non-economic, and under the Fourteenth Amendment, as the law targeted private, not state, action.
Legal Significance: This case significantly narrowed Congress’s Commerce Clause power by reinforcing the distinction between economic and non-economic activity from United States v. Lopez. It also affirmed the strict state-action requirement for legislation enacted under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.
UNITED STATES v. MORRISON Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Christy Brzonkala, a student at Virginia Polytechnic Institute (Virginia Tech), alleged she was raped by two varsity football players, Antonio Morrison and James Crawford. After a university disciplinary process resulted in Morrison’s initial punishment being set aside, Brzonkala filed suit in federal court. She sued Morrison and Crawford under 42 U.S.C. § 13981, a provision of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) that created a federal civil remedy for victims of gender-motivated violence. The United States intervened to defend the statute’s constitutionality. Congress had justified the law under its Commerce Clause power and its enforcement power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, citing extensive findings that gender-motivated violence has a substantial aggregate effect on interstate commerce and that state justice systems often failed to provide adequate remedies due to gender bias. The lower courts found the statute unconstitutional, leading to this appeal.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does Congress have the authority under the Commerce Clause or Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to enact a statute providing a federal civil remedy for gender-motivated violence committed by private individuals?
No. The Court held that 42 U.S.C. § 13981 is unconstitutional because Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does Congress have the authority under the Commerce Clause or Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to enact a statute providing a federal civil remedy for gender-motivated violence committed by private individuals?
Conclusion
Morrison solidified the Rehnquist Court's revival of federalism-based limits on congressional power, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip e
Legal Rule
(1) Under the Commerce Clause, Congress may not regulate non-economic, violent criminal Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteu
Legal Analysis
The Court analyzed the statute under both proffered sources of congressional power. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The Supreme Court struck down the Violence Against Women Act’s federal