Violence Against Women Act Essay, Research Paper
The Violence Against Women Act creates a right to be & # 8220 ; free
from offenses of force & # 8221 ; that are gender motivated. It besides gives a
private civil right of action to the victims of these offenses. The
Senate study attached to the act states that & # 8220 ; Gender based offenses and
fright of gender based offenses & # 8230 ; reduces employment chances and
consumer disbursement impacting interstate commerce. & # 8221 ;
Sara Benenson has been abused by her hubby, Andrew Benenson,
since 1978. Because of this maltreatment, she sued her hubby under assorted
civil wrong claims and misdemeanors under the Violence Against Women Act. Now
Mr. Benenson is protesting the constitutionality of this act claiming
that Congress has no right to go through a jurisprudence that legislates for the
common public assistance.
However, Congress has a clear Constitutional right to modulate
interstate commercialism. This act is based entirely on interstate commercialism
and is thereforeConstitutional. Because of maltreatment, Sara Benenson was
afraid to acquire a occupation because it would anger her hubby. She was afraid
to travel back to school and she was afraid to travel shopping or pass any
money on her ain. All three of these things clearly interfere and
affect interstate commercialism. Women like Mrs. Benenson are the ground
the act was passed.
There has been a long history of opinions in favour of
Congress & # 8217 ; s power to pass utilizing the commercialism clause as a
justification. For the past 50 old ages, Congress & # 8217 ; s right to construe
the commercialism clause has been unchallenged by the Court with few
exclusions. There is no rational ground for this tribunal to travel against
the powerful case in points set by the Supreme tribunal to let Congress to
use the Commerce clause.
In the instance of Katzenbach v. McClung, the Court upheld an act
of Congress which was based on the commercialism clause, that prohibited
segregation. McClung, the proprietor of a barbecue that would non let
inkinesss to eat inside the eating house, claimed that his concern was
wholly intrastate. He stated that his concern had small or no
out of province concern and was hence non capable to the act passed
by Congress because it could non pass intrastate commercialism. The
Court nevertheless, decided that because the eating house received some of
it & # 8217 ; s nutrient from out of province that it was involved in interstate
The same logic should be applied in this instance. Even though
Sara Benenson & # 8217 ; s inability to work might non look to impact interstate
commercialism, it will in some manner as with McClung, therefore doing the act
constitutional. The Supreme Court had decided that any connexion with
interstate commercialism, every bit long as it has a rational footing, makes it
possible for Congress to pass it. In the United States v. Lopez
determination, The Supreme Court struck down the Gun Free School Zones Act.
It & # 8217 ; s logical thinking was that Congress had overstepped it & # 8217 ; s power to
legislate interstate commercialism. The Court decided that this act was
non sufficiently grounded in interstate commercialism for Congress to be
allowed to go through it.
The fortunes in this instance are wholly different than in
the instance of Sara Benenson. For one thing, the Gun Free Schoo
cubic decimeter Zones
Act was non about every bit good based in the commercialism clause as is our
instance. The Gun act said that force in schools kept pupil from
acquisition and hence limited their hereafter gaining power. It besides
said that force affected national insurance companies. These
connexions are tenuous at best and by and large excessively long term to be
considered. However, in the instance of Mrs. Benenson, her inability to
work and pass straight and instantly affected interstate commercialism.
Therefore, the Lopez determination should non hold any portion in the determination
of this instance.
The Supreme Court, in McCulloch v. Maryland, gave Congress the
right to do Torahs that are out of their rigorous Constitutional powers
so as to be able to carry through one of their Constitutional responsibilities. In
this instance, the Court allowed the federal authorities to make a bank.
There is no Constitutional right to make this and Maryland challenged
the creative activity of this bank. The high tribunal ruled that in order for
Congress to be able to carry through it & # 8217 ; s responsibilities. The same logic should
be applied here. The Violence Against Women Act is an illustration of
Congress transgressing it & # 8217 ; s direct Constitutional rights so it can
better regulate and facilitate interstate commercialism. In order for
Congress to pass interstate commercialism reasonably, it must let people
to be able to work and pass as they should be able to. If a adult female is
afraid of being abused if she gets a occupation or spends money, it affects
interstate commercialism. Thus The Violence Against Women Act is
Constitutionally based and necessary for interstate commercialism.
Violence against adult females is a awful offense. It destroys
adult females & # 8217 ; s self esteem, cryings apart households, and destroys lives. Many
times, it will take to slay or other awful offenses. What the
Violence Against Women Act is seeking to make is give adult females a arm to
protect themselves from violent partners. Without this act, many adult females
would be left incapable of acquiring any signifier of fiscal damages for
the old ages of agony and maltreatment they went through. It is incorrect to
deny adult females a tool to reconstruct they & # 8217 ; rhenium lives after an opprobrious
relationship. The old ages of maltreatment they went through makes it difficult if
non impossible for them to acquire a occupation or work in an office. These adult females
are afraid for the remainder of their lives that if they make a error or
displease the work forces around them, they will be beaten. This act allows
adult females to acquire some agencies of acquiring money to populate on while they rebuild
their lives. It allows them to seek professional aid if necessary.
Without this act, adult females would be forced on public assistance or worse. When this
happens, it benefits no 1. The Violence Against Women Act has a
strong Constitutional footing in the commercialism clause, despite what
Andrew Benenson says.
The Supreme Court has allowed many Acts of the Apostless such as this to stand
for the past 50 old ages. All the case in points of instances with similar
fortunes are to let the act to stand. Besides, we can non bury
the human facet of this instance. This act is a tool for adult females to reconstruct
their tattered lives after an opprobrious relationship. To declare his
act unconstitutional would be both lawfully and morally incorrect.