Violence Against Women Act :: essays research papers

     The Violence Against Women Act creates a right to be "free from crimes ofviolence" that are gender motivated. It also gives a private civil right ofaction to the victims of these crimes. The Senate report attached to the actstates that "Gender base crimes and fear of gender based crimes...reduces concern opportunities and consumer spending affecting interstatecommerce."      Sara Benenson has been abused by her husband, Andrew Benenson, since 1978.Because of this abuse, she sued her husband under various tort claims andviolations under the Violence Against Women Act. Now Mr. Benenson isprotesting the constitutionality of this act claiming that relation has noright to pass a law that legislates for the common welfare.     However, Congress has a clear Constitutional right to regulate interstatecommerce. This act is based totally on interstate commerce and is thereforeConstitutional. Because of abuse, Sara Benenson was afraid to get a jobbecause it would anger her husband. She was afraid to go back to school andshe was afraid to go shopping or spend any money on her own. All three ofthese things clearly interfere and affect interstate commerce. Women likeMrs. Benenson are the sympathy the act was passed.     There has been a long history of judgements in favor of Congresss power tolegislate using the commerce clause as a justification. For the olden fiftyyears, Congresss right to interpret the commerce clause has beenunchallenged by the Court with few exceptions. There is no rational reasonfor this court to go against the powerful precedents set by the Supreme courtto allow Congress to use the Commerce clause.     In the case of Katzenbach v. McClung, the Court upheld an act of Congresswhich was based on the commerce clause, that prohibited segregation. McClung,the owner of a barbeque that would not allow blacks to eat inside therestauran t, claimed that his calling was completely intrastate. He statedthat his business had little or no out of state business and was thereforenot subject to the act passed by Congress because it could not legislateintrastate commerce. The Court however, decided that because the restaurantreceived some of its food from out of state that it was involved ininterstate commerce.     The same logic should be utilise in this case. Even though Sara Benensonsinability to work might not seem to affect interstate commerce, it will insome way as with McClung, thus making the act constitutional. The SupremeCourt had decided that any connection with interstate commerce,as long as ithas a rational basis, makes it possible for Congress to legislate it.