Associate Professor Shaakirrah R. Sanders contributed to Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Opinions of the United States Supreme Court, which has recently published by Cambridge University Press. Professor Sanders' commentary on United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000), discusses how the Morrison majority rejects jurisprudential precedent in it's interpretation of the Commerce Clause but accepts jurisprudential precedent in it's interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Enforcement Clause. Professor Sanders also discusses how the rewritten Morrison dissent incorporates feminist theory to illustrate they ways in which gender-motivated violence has economic consequences for young college women, who often truncate their education and curtail their economic prospects after a such an event. Professor Sanders concludes by reflecting on how gender-motivated violence continues to plague colleges and universities in the United States and ponders whether the civil remedy struck down in Morrison could have prevented the atrocities that are currently under investigation by the United States Department of Education. Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Opinions of the United States Supreme Court brings together a group of scholars and lawyers to rewrite, using feminist reasoning, the most significant US Supreme Court cases on gender from the 1800s to the present day. The twenty-five opinions in this volume demonstrate that judges with feminist viewpoints could have changed the course of the law. The rewritten decisions reveal that previously accepted judicial outcomes were not necessary or inevitable and demonstrate that feminist reasoning increases the judicial capacity for justice. Feminist Judgments opens a path for a long overdue discussion of the real impact of judicial diversity on the law as well as the influence of perspective on judging. You can find out more about the publication here.