Site Loader
Rock Street, San Francisco

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

commercialism.

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.

33b

Post Author: admin