Editing Commerce Clause (section)

=== ''United States v. Morrison'' ===
''Lopez'' was clarified by the Rehnquist Court in ''[[United States v. Morrison]]'', {{ussc|529|598|2000}}. In ''Morrison,'' the Court invalidated §&nbsp;40302 of the [[Violence Against Women Act]] ("VAWA"), which created civil liability for the commission of a gender-based violent crime but without any jurisdictional requirement of a connection to interstate commerce or to commercial activity.<ref>42 U.S.C. §&nbsp;13981(c).</ref> Once again, the Court stated it was presented with a congressional attempt to criminalize traditional local criminal conduct. As in ''Lopez'', it could not be argued that state regulation alone would be ineffective to protect the aggregate effects of local violence. The Court explained that in both ''Lopez'' and ''Morrison'', "the noneconomic, criminal nature of the conduct at issue was central to our decision." Furthermore, the Court pointed out that neither case had "'express jurisdictional element which might limit its reach (to those instances that) have an explicit connection with or effect on interstate commerce.'"<ref>Id. at 1751.</ref> In both cases, Congress criminalized activity that was not commercial in nature without including a jurisdictional element establishing the necessary connection between the criminalized activity and interstate commerce.