Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 704.0

529US3

Unit: $U54

[10-04-01 09:35:40] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 598 (2000)

629

Souter, J., dissenting

gress, here showing the effects of violence against women
on interstate commerce.2 Passage of the Act in 1994 was
preceded by four years of hearings,3 which included testi-
mony from physicians and law professors; 4 from survivors

2 It is true that these data relate to the effects of violence against women
generally, while the civil rights remedy limits its scope to “crimes of vio-
lence motivated by gender”—presumably a somewhat narrower subset
of acts. See 42 U. S. C. § 13981(b). But the meaning of “motivated by
gender” has not been elucidated by lower courts, much less by this one,
so the degree to which the ﬁndings rely on acts not redressable by the
civil rights remedy is unclear. As will appear, however, much of the
data seems to indicate behavior with just such motivation.
In any event,
adopting a cramped reading of the statutory text, and thereby increas-
ing the constitutional difﬁculties, would directly contradict one of the
most basic canons of statutory interpretation. See NLRB v. Jones &
Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U. S. 1, 30 (1937). Having identiﬁed the prob-
lem of violence against women, Congress may address what it sees as the
most threatening manifestation; “reform may take one step at a time.”
Williamson v. Lee Optical of Okla., Inc., 348 U. S. 483, 489 (1955).

3 See, e. g., Domestic Violence: Terrorism in the Home, Hearing before
the Subcommittee on Children, Family, Drugs and Alcoholism of the Sen-
ate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, 101st Cong., 2d Sess.
(1990); Women and Violence, Hearing before the Senate Committee on the
Judiciary, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. (1990); Violence Against Women: Victims
of the System, Hearing on S. 15 before the Senate Committee on the Judi-
ciary, 102d Cong., 1st Sess. (1991) (S. Hearing 102–369); Violence Against
Women, Hearing before the Subcommittee on Crime and Criminal Justice
of the House Committee on the Judiciary, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. (1992);
Hearing on Domestic Violence, Hearing before the Senate Committee on
the Judiciary, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. (1993); Violent Crimes Against Women,
Hearing before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 103d Cong., 1st
Sess. (1993); Violence Against Women: Fighting the Fear, Hearing before
the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. (1993)
(S. Hearing 103–878); Crimes of Violence Motivated by Gender, Hearing
before the Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights of the House
Committee on the Judiciary, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. (1993); Domestic Vio-
lence: Not Just a Family Matter, Hearing before the Subcommittee on
Crime and Criminal Justice of the House Committee on the Judiciary, 103d
Cong., 2d Sess. (1994).

4 See, e. g., S. Hearing 103–596, at 1–4 (testimony of Northeastern Univ.
Law School Professor Clare Dalton); S. Hearing 102–369, at 103–105 (testi-
mony of Univ. of Chicago Professor Cass Sunstein); S. Hearing 103–878,