In 1994, Christy Brzоnkаlа, а female student at Virginia Pоlytechnic Institute and State University, alleged that she was sexually assaulted by twо male students. Brzonkala filed a complaint against these students, and one, Antonio Morrison, was initially suspended for two semesters. The university ultimately overturned his suspension as "excessive," however, Brzonkala ultimately dropped out of school but sued both students and Virginia Tech in federal court, arguing that the sexual assault violated the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA), which allowed sexual assault victims to sue their assaulters in federal court. Congress passed this law, in part, because of the economic impact that gender-motivated violence can have. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Morrison (2000) that VAWA was unconstitutional. Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that "Gender-motivated crimes of violence are not, in any sense of the phrase, economic activity. . . If the allegations here are true, no civilized system of justice could fail to provide [Brzonkala] a remedy for the conduct of . . . Morrison. But under our federal system that remedy must be provided by the Commonwealth of Virginia, and not by the United States." Based on the information in the passage, respond to the following questions: A) Identify a common constitutional provision that is involved in both United States v Morrison (2000) and United States v Lopez (1995) B) Explain how the facts of United States v Lopez and the facts of United States v Morrison led to a similar holding in each case. C) Explain how the decision in both United States v Lopez and United States v Morrison strengthened state power in the context of the Tenth Amendment.