[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 100 (Thursday, July 27, 2000)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1359-E1360]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 INTRODUCTION OF THE ``VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN CIVIL RIGHTS RESTORATION 
                             ACT OF 2000''

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 27, 2000

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am proud and honored today to be joined 
by Ms. Baldwin, Ms. Maloney and 40 other co-sponsors to introduce the 
``Violence Against Women Civil Rights Restoration Act of 2000.''
  The Violence Against Women Act of 1994, or ``VAWA,'' was historic 
legislation that contained a broad array of laws and programs to

[[Page E1360]]

address domestic violence and sexual assault in our country.
  In addition to funding numerous programs such as law enforcement and 
prosecution grants to combat violence against women, a National 
Domestic Violence Hotline, and battered women's shelters and services, 
VAWA created both civil and criminal causes of action to target 
domestic violence and sexual assault.
  A few months ago, the Supreme Court struck down a provision of VAWA, 
which allowed victims of gender-motivated violence to sue their 
attackers in federal court. Importantly, that case, United States v. 
Morrison, did not affect the validity of the rest of VAWA, which is 
clearly constitutional.
  But, Morrison is just the latest in a series of cases in which the 
Supreme Court has, in my view, improperly narrowed Congress' authority 
to legislate under the Commerce Clause.
  The Court's 5-4 majority disregarded the mountain of evidence that 
Congress had amassed through four years of hearings, documenting the 
effects of violence against women on interstate commerce. The Court's 
majority substituted its own judgment for that of Congress--and this 
from supposedly ``conservative'' Justices who purport to defer to 
Congressional findings.
  The Morrison decision vividly demonstrates the important role the 
next President will have in shaping the composition of the Supreme 
Court, and ensuring that the Court respect Congress' authority to 
protect the civil rights of our citizens.
  In response to the Morrison decision, I am introducing the ``Violence 
Against Women Civil Rights Restoration Act of 2000.'' This legislation 
will restore the ability of victims of gender-motivated violence to 
seek justice in federal court, where there is a connection to 
interstate commerce.
  For example, a rape victim could bring a civil suit against her 
attacker in federal court where the attacker crosses a state line; if 
he uses a facility or instrumentality of interstate commerce--such as 
the roads, the telephone, or the Internet; or if he uses a gun, weapon, 
or drug that has traveled in interstate commerce. In addition, she 
could bring a case where the intent of the offense is to interfere with 
her participation in commercial or economic activity.
  The bill also authorizes the Attorney General to prevent 
discrimination in the investigation and prosecution of gender-based 
crimes. This bill will ensure that all victims have fair and equal 
access to the courts.
  I want to thank the domestic violence and sexual assault communities 
for their support of this legislation, especially NOW Legal Defense and 
Education fund, who defended Christy Brzonkala before the Supreme 
Court, and who has been instrumental in drafting this bill.
  I look forward to working with the Majority, the Senate, and the 
White House to help pass this bill into law and restore the civil 
remedy for victims of gender-based violence.

                          ____________________