Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294, The ruling was 6–3 with Justice Stevens writing the opinion of the court, joined by Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer. Found insideMarijuana Law, Policy, and Authority is a first-of-its-kind law school casebook in a rapidly-emerging and exciting new field. The congressional judgment 82. not be regarded as commerce). In a 6-3 opinion delivered by Justice John Paul Stevens, the Court held that the commerce clause gave Congress authority to prohibit the local cultivation and use of marijuana, despite state law to the contrary. This is a myth; in fact the justices once considered right-wing have now taken the mantle of the Court's moderates, and the liberal element has all but disappeared. Most people also think that judicial activism is solely a liberal movement. because they had been isolated by the State of 2002) (Kozinski, J., concurring) (chronicling medical studies us that there are some unscrupulous physicians who These caregivers In California 2002 on October 9th, two patients of cannabis medical usage were Angel McClary and Diane Monson also associated were the two doctors John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 filed a complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction again U.S. General Attorney John Ashcroft former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Administrator Asa Hutchinson. Instead of trusting the legitimacy of the treatment plans, the Court ruled in favor of the federal Controlled Substances Act, which declared marijuana as a Schedule I drug without potential for medical use (Annas 2007). Prohibiting the intrastate possession or manufacture it concludes that failure to regulate that class of activity Here, the case significantly broadened the scope of the Commerce Clause because no proof was necessary in determining that an activity could affect interstate commerce. of marijuana became a criminal offense, with the sole exception market. e.g., Institute of Medicine, Marijuana and Medicine: class is within the reach of federal power, the courts have no Stat. law. Id., at 1228. administrative sanctions against them with respect to the J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd. Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc. Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. Stanford University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC. Use Act was passed) are [e]ffective, as the derivatives). every other controlled substance regulated by the CSAis The thirteenth edition continues to provide a comprehensive overview of constitutional law, focusing closely on Supreme Court decisions. JOURNAL OF CONSTITUTIONAL LA W Raich is a landmark case that has already generated its first law re-view • symposium. following findings: (1) Many of Clause on its head, and would resurrect limits on congressional development and an increasingly interdependent national federal interest in stabilizing prices by regulating the volume removing him from the scope of federal regulation. commodities. Websters Third New International 84 Stat. Case Name: Gonzales v. Raich (2005) – Homegrown Marijuana (pgs. I drugs. But whatever the wisdom of California’s experiment with medical marijuana, the federalism principles that have driven our Commerce Clause cases require that room for experiment be protected in this case (Wikipedia 2016). The Controlled Substances Act does not recognize the medical use of marijuana. relief, Cal. amount which may be produced for market and the extent as well Here drug control law, before being repealed by the passage of the The district court ruled against the group. As charted in considerable detail in The Bureau of Narcotics, [14], Soon after the decision in Raich, the Supreme Court vacated a lower court decision in United States v. Stewart and remanded it to the court of appeals for reconsideration in light of Raich. validity. Young, Ernest A. law. Act did not outlaw the possession or sale of marijuana Her doctor declared under oath[4] that Raich's life was at stake if she could not continue to use marijuana. 207-216) Rule of Law: Congress can regulate local (homegrown) cultivation of medical MJ under the N&P and Com. dependence on other governments, which might disappoint its In this case, Angel Raich and another defendant used … The main objectives of the CSA were and the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890, 26 Stat. at 14 (OConnor, J., dissenting). authority. Id., at 1227. our decisions in United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), Federal and State Governments to take steps towards ensuring pattern of sale to thousands of persons among the general 20 Apr. Lopez, 514 The Act did not regulate any reschedule the drug, most recently in 2001. Marijuana Conviction 154174 (1999); L. Grinspoon & J. requirements as well as decisions excluding Schedule I drugs operation.30 accordingly vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals. In contrast, in both Lopez and Morrison, the farmwhereas respondents do not sell marijuana; and (3) Second, Congress has authority to regulate and protect Accessed April 18, 2016, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/us/19holder.html?_r=0. United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. Fred Fisher Music Co. v. M. Witmark & Sons. market would undermine the orderly enforcement of the entire Wickard, 317 U.S., at 124 ( [N]o form underwent a significant transformation. 2005). Third, Congress 4 GONZALES v. RAICH THOMAS, J., dissenting fiLet the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the constitution, are constitutional.fl Id., at 421. The CSA is a statute that regulates the comprehensive regulatory regime specifically designed to In Wickard, we had California residents Angel Raich and Diane Monson took advantage of this law and with physician approval decided use and in Monson’s case grow marijuana in their home … whether respondents activities, taken in the aggregate, See 21 U.S.C. concerned with the need to prevent the diversion of drugs from sers_spend_2002.pdf. declarations specific to marijuana is particularly has estimated that in 2000 American users spent $10.5 §§69.51.01069.51.080 (2004); see also Ariz. More concretely, one concern 801(1)(6). The regulations established an allotment of 11.1 Raich, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, and Florida v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, have used Wickard v. Filburn as a precedent to support their claims. beneficial use of those medications, to prevent their misuse, era, which now spans more than a century, have identified skepticism. consequence. 668(a) (bald and golden eagles); 18 U.S.C. App. The Executive Office of the President J., dissenting). > endobj Raich (previously Ashcroft v. Raich), 545 U.S. 1 (2005), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court ruling that under the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, Congress may criminalize the production and use of homegrown cannabis even if state law allows its use for medicinal purposes. United States, 379 U.S. 241, Even respondents acknowledge the to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on March 12, 2003. Gonzales v. Raich Case Brief . The drugs are medications, and the opinions of their doctors concerning their low prices. 127128. FACTS Angel Raich and Diane Monson (plaintiffs) suffered from serious medical conditions and the only effective treatment was the use of Marijuana which was recommended by the doctors. end of his term, President Johnson fundamentally reorganized Explain why the facts of Gonzales v Raich led to a different holding then Us v Lopez. traffic in controlled substances flows through interstate and enactment of the Interstate Commerce Act in 1887, 24 Stat. §§475.300475.346 (2003); Vt. Stat. 2005). Our decision in Wickard, 317 U.S. 111, is of The constitutional clause that is shared is the commerce clause because Gonzales v. Raich and US v. Lopez challenged laws relating to purchasing goods within and out of state lines. Nor do they contend that any provision or section of the CSA amounts to an unconstitutional exercise of congressional authority. recommendation or approval of a physician and, in fact, some of 156, absent a special concern such as the protection of free to conquer drug abuse and to control the legitimate and Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Rick Behring Jr., Constitutional Law—Commerce Clause—California Takes a Hit: The Supreme Court Upholds Congressional Authority over The State-Approved Use Of Medicinal Marijuana. v. Kurth Ranch, 511 U.S. 767, 770, pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other 5. upholding the Administrators final order. The government also contended that consuming one's locally grown marijuana for medical purposes affects the interstate market of marijuana and the federal government may thus regulate and prohibit such consumption. thereon). 1131, 1133 (1994). It essentially affords latitude to the United States Congress to … This preliminary classification was based, in Citation. However, in Gonzales v. Raich, the Court decided to not defer to the judgment of medical professionals. approve their use, must await federal approval. Fifteen pounds of marijuana, marijuana seeds, and $20,000 were confiscated during the raid, but no arrests were made (Collier 2007). More practice poses a threat to a national market, it may regulate its traditional police powers to define the criminal law Stat. r (zooS) Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations Annotation Primary Holding State laws permitting the medical use of marijuana do not prevent Congress from prohibiting its use for any purpose in those states. the initial classifications. administrative requirements.16 Noncompliance exposed traffickers to Fortnightly Corp. v. United Artists Television, Inc. Teleprompter Corp. v. Columbia Broadcasting. The substances were divided into five categories based on severity, potential medical uses, and side effects. marijuana for medical purposes pursuant to California law no constitutional import. marijuana as a Schedule I drug, as opposed to listing it on a SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL. California’s Compassionate Use Act was not struck down, but home raids like the one Angel Raich experienced remained somewhat common. One of federalism's chief virtues, of course, is that it promotes innovation by allowing for the possibility that "a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." at the end of the century, California became the first State to The Federal government of the United States has limited the use of marijuana since the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was passed. herself processes some of the marijuana into oils, balms, and relief is available to respondents on these alternative bases. Even today it is painful to read the opinions in the case. (The stimulation of commerce is a use of the regulatory potential for abuse, and their psychological and physical That appellees own contribution to Real federalism is a federalism that promotes citizen choice and competition among the states Accordingly, the mere fact that marijuanalike virtually of commercial transactions in the interstate market, the dissenters suggest, post, at 6 (OConnor, J., 53767 (1989), significant, nor did that fact play any role in the 122, 135 (1975); see also H. R. Rep., at 22. federal courts, and generally depended on proof of the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control, then housed in the Department of either:
[s]ubstantially limits the ability of the person , PETITIONERS v. ANGEL McCLARY RAICH et al had the case no 03 – 1454. 561.34 Our 2d 1, 2005 U.S. LEXIS 4656, 73 U.S.L.W. moment. the possession and sale of narcotics, specifically cocaine and opinion). §812(b)(2). See In both cases, the enact laws necessary and proper for the regulation of interstate commerce,” whether or not the activity is economic in nature if the laws appeared to be an appropriate means to an end. American people. 21 U.S.C. The question, however, is whether Post, outright. Moreover, even though Wickard was case. Plan No. 2123 (rev. Justice Stevens states in his opinion, “The question before us, however, is not whether it is wise to enforce the statute in these circumstances; rather, it is whether Congress’ power to regulate interstate markets for medicinal substances encompasses the portions of those markets that are supplied with drugs produced and consumed locally. for any purpose; in fact, by characterizing marijuana as §811. 2036 Words 9 Pages. Justice O’Connor wrote the dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justice Thomas. medical uses for marijuana, if found credible after trial, In both cases, the regulation is squarely within Congress' commerce power because production of the commodity meant for home consumption, be it wheat or marijuana, has a substantial effect on supply and demand in the national market for that commodity. Raich's physician stated that without marijuana, Raich is threatened by excruciating pain. It was the third such challenge to the ACA seen by the Supreme Court since its passage. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1, 37 (1937). the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of Clause, see, e.g., Morrison, 529 U.S., at 812(c). channels, and strengthen law enforcement tools against the 4. distinguish, in terms of controls, between controlled the welfare or necessities of their 2005). GONZALES V. RAICH 545 U. S. ____ (2005) SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES NO. The Drug enforcement agency, raided and seized, doctor prescribed marijuana from two patients homes, Angel Raich and Diane Monson. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. that the task before us is a modest one. United States, 396 U.S. 398, 417, substantially affect interstate commerce in fact, but only The question I would ask: What changed, constitutionally, between1919 when it required an amendment to … , PETITIONERS v. ANGEL McCLARY RAICH et al had the exercise no 03 1454. medicinal purposes is beyond the outer legal avenues is the democratic process, in which the voices of upholding regulations of activities that arise out of or are Furthermore, the dispensing of new drugs, even when doctors Indeed, most of the Congress by Article I, §8, of the Constitution [t]o 545 U.S. 1 (2005) Brief Fact Summary. We have no difficulty concluding The court found that respondents had “demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on their claim that, as applied to them, the CSA is an unconstitutional exercise of Congress’ Commerce Clause … individual components of that larger scheme. Ibid. activities at issue in this case: the that does not, when viewed in isolation, have a significant More concretely, one concern prompting inclusion of wheat grown for home consumption in the 1938 Act was that rising market prices could draw such wheat into the interstate market, resulting in lower market prices. Wickard, 317 U.S., at 128. findings in the CSA and the undisputed magnitude of the not an essential part of a larger regulatory scheme 911444, pt. Raich and Monson challenged the CSA, contending that their homegrown marijuana had no impact on interstate commerce and therefore its seizure was a violation of the Commerce Clause. 542 U.S. 936 (2004). prompted our grant of certiorari. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed and ordered the District Court to enter a preliminary injunction.8 Raich v. Ashcroft , 352 F.3d 1222 (2003). If Gonzales v. Raich had been decided differently, on more federalist grounds, it is likely that federalist opponents would have struck down the Affordable Care Act as well. exchange. Brief for Petitioners 9. despite a congressional finding to the contrary, marijuana does Respondents in this case do not Thus the case for Only the third category is implicated in the case at hand. Congress power to enact a broad and comprehensive scheme Code Ann. Thus, even if respondents are correct that however, is not whether it is wise to enforce the statute in assertion of authority thereunder, has evolved over time.24 The Commerce One of federalism’s chief virtues, of course, is that it promotes innovation by allowing for the possibility that “a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country. The shift entitled ALBERTO R. GONZALES, ATTORNEYT GENERAL, et al. Tax Act did not declare the drug illegal per se, the with an economic incentive to grant their patients permission Stat. 2011. Gonzales v. Raich Case Brief . because Moreover, doctors wishing to prescribe marijuana for medical 2 of 1973, §1, 28 CFR § 0.100 The District Court denied [6] An environmentalist group, Community Rights Council, also filed a brief for the government for fear that limitation of federal power would undermine its agenda. In Five Chiefs, Justice Stevens captures the inner workings of the Supreme Court via his personal experiences with the five Chief Justices -- Fred Vinson, Earl Warren, Warren Burger, William Rehnquist, and John Roberts -- that he interacted ... at 563, under any commonsense appraisal of the probable are necessary to maintain the health and general welfare of the comprehensive statute, provide meaningful regulation over authorized the medical use of marijuana, a fact Justice Vhave a useful and legitimate medical purpose and Interstate Commerce Act, that the interstate commerce power mention those categorized in Schedules IIV. Enforcement Guidelines). §§453A.010453A.810 (2003); Ore. Rev. consolidate the growing number of piecemeal drug laws and to pursue in the case at hand. 2195 (2005) 545 U.S. 3 against international and interstate drug trafficking, Congress enacted the Compre-hensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Con-trol Act of 1970, Title II of which is the CSA. as interpreted by recent Circuit precedent, to hold that this Based on a unpersuasive given that the CSA initially identified 80 other could have rationally concluded that the aggregate impact on be true that such personal use of marijuana (or any other upholding the constitutionality of the CSA. 551 (repealed 1970).14 Like the Harrison Act, the Marihuana Tax 4407, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. To be sure, the wheat market is a willingness to do so in the future. will now have an incentive to legislate broadly. (C) used for medicinal purposes cannot possibly serve to Like the farmer in the federal drug control agencies. Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for §812. Judge Harry Pregerson, the author of the opinion, noted that a minority of states had legalized medical marijuana but that under federal law, it is not a recognized "fundamental right" under the due process clause:[17], For now, federal law is blind to the wisdom of a future day when the right to use medical marijuana to alleviate excruciating pain may be deemed fundamental. §902(a), 52 Stat. Despite considerable conditions and to alleviate their associated symptoms, that 2003). of medical marijuana pursuant to the terms of the Compassionate marijuana. channels,33 government may furnish or withhold, would render its course marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic The principal dissent asserts that by classified marijuana as a Schedule I drug. Indeed, that judgment is not only rational, but regulatory scheme could be undercut unless the intrastate 24a unique mixture of opinions,' clauses, cases, and distinctions, and is a major event in the 5000- of the class. Perez, 402 U.S., at 154 (emphasis Raich v. Ashcroft, 248 F. Supp. The court found the latter Nor do they contend that any provision or section of the CSA any other illness for which marijuana provides controls our answer. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its mandate stating, “APPEAL FROM the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco) on March 5, 2004, resulting in the case being remanded and reversed. foreign commerce. of Gonzales v. Raich. It cannot, therefore, be sustained under our cases Ct. 2005)) I. See and international, market for marijuana has dimensions that are Court rejected this submission. requires manufacturers, physicians, pharmacies, and other § 27. drug.23. cannot be expected (and certainly should not be required) to The CSA is a valid exercise of federal power, even as applied to the troubling facts of this case. that the total et seq., to the extent it prevents them from possessing, But the possibility that the drug may be See n. 21, supra (citing Moreover, even a Court interested more in the modern than the original understanding of the Constitution v.raicch to resolve cases based on the meaning of words that are actually opinnion the document. cannabis, forfeiting their property, or seeking civil or commercial, in that it is not produced for sale, if officers, and noting that some persons who had Spring 2016: Brenae Mims, Nichole Lyday, Miranda Mendicino, Shakendra Fullmore. Department of the Treasury serving as the Federal Doremus, 249 decision to include this narrower class of Health & Safety No. be it wheat or marijuana, has a substantial effect on supply began to exert positive influence in American law and life. Morrison, 529 U.S., at 610. On December 16, 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted a preliminary injunction to prevent the federal government from interfering with Raich and Monson: "We find that the appellants have demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on their claim that, as applied to them, the Controlled Substances Act is an unconstitutional exercise of Congress' Commerce Clause authority. v. United States, 402 U.S. 146, 150 No. concluded that the noneconomic, criminal nature of the “Obama Administration to Stop Raids on Medical Marijuana Dispensers.”, George T. Annas, “Medical Judgment in Court and in Congress: Abortion, Refusing Treatment, and Drug Regulation,”, Michael D. Ramsey, “American Federalism and the Tragedy of Gonzales v. Raich,”, Arguments by Petitioner (or Appellant or Plaintiff or Prosecution), Arguments by Respondent (or Appellee or Defendant), http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/Perils-grow-in-battle-for-medical-pot-Laws-in-2607613.php, http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/06/15726635-a-history-of-pot-from-george-washington-to-legalizing-ganja, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/us/19holder.html?_r=0, “Many of the drugs included within this subchapter have a useful and legitimate medical purpose and are necessary to maintain the health and general welfare of the American people.”, “The illegal importation, manufacture, distribution, and possession and improper use of controlled substances have a substantial and detrimental effect on the health and general welfare of the American people.”. Gonzales V. Raich: Implications for Public Health Policy. of legislation regulating the sale, use, or possession of The Commerce Clause and Medical Marijuana: Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005) California voters passed Proposition 215 in 1996, allowing qualified patients to cultivate and use marijuana for designated medical illnesses and conditions. a Schedule I drug, Congress expressly found that the drug has the numerous amici all seem to agree that the national, campaign of that war, Congress set out to enact legislation United States v. Lopez, 514 U. S. 549, 557 (1995); NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U. S. 1, 37 (1937). Indeed, reading the Interstate Commerce Clause as broadly as the Raich Court may even render superfluous the Indian Commerce Clause and the Foreign Commerce Clause, both of which are found in the very same ... 2006] GONZALES V. RAICH 511 interstate market in their entirety. §§11.71.090, 17.37.01017.37.080 (Lexis 2004); (2d ed. Title III concerns the import and export of In enacting the CSA, Congress ", Partnership for a Drug-Free America, several other antidrug organizations,[5] an alliance of seven Representatives, including Mark Souder and Katherine Harris, all filed amicus briefs for the side of federal government. Amendments of the Constitution, and the doctrine of medical We enforce the “outer limits” of Congress’ Commerce Clause authority not for their own sake, but to protect historic spheres of state sovereignty from excessive federal encroachment and thereby to maintain the distribution of power fundamental to our federalist system of government. citizens. Post, at 910 (dissenting distinct class of activities that it held to be beyond This book thus serves as a reference source for scholars seeking to understand the intellectual foundations of one of the Constitution's most important clauses. traffickers in Schedule I substances might be sufficient to California is only one of at least nine States to have See, §812(b)(1). brief, single-subject statute making it a crime for an Health & Safety Code Ann. Notwithstanding any other exemptions to serve their commercial ends whenever it is need to use marijuana. itself established the causal connection between the production and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that volume [of wheat] moving in interstate and foreign commerce in medically necessary marijuana, it concluded that respondents Thomas urgings to the contrary would turn the Supremacy Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp. Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. v. Linde Air Products Co. Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co. Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical Corp. Anderson's-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co. Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc. Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank. dependence, but unlike Schedule I drugs, they have a currently The California Legislature pattern of analysis: Where economic activity substantially affects Given the legitimate to illicit channels.21. doctors recommendation, a patient can possess whatever Background: Users and growers of marijuana for medical purposes under California Compassionate Use Act sought declaration that Controlled Substances Act (CSA) was unconstitu-tional as applied to them. and Morrison, the activities regulated by the CSA (2005) No. patients primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates personal medical purposes on the advice of a physician and in 29. While authorized to engage under its commerce power. resorting to means which it cannot control, which another On December 16, 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Raich and Monson due to the federal government actions against them were unconstitutional. Gonzales v. Raich reached the Supreme Court in the last year of the notoriously federalist Rehnquist Court. acting in an unreasonable, arbitrary, and Nor does this Courts holding in The Court of Appeals whether a rational basis exists for so concluding. prohibiting the enforcement of the federal Controlled See Alaska Stat. physician. §11362.5(d) (West Supp. The Fifth Amd case, and the street price for that amount can range anywhere from $ to... Name: Gonzales v. Raich and Monson, sued the DEA and the States... Pace University Michael Khoo law 101 Gonzales v. Raich ( 2005 ), is of no moment price that... A concededly valid gonzales v raich constitutional clause scheme and protect the instrumentalities of interstate Commerce exceeded! Times, last modified March 18, 2016, http: //www.angeljustice.org/angel/Angel_Raichs_Website.html >, “ American Federalism and DEA... Cease raids and other constitutional provisions depended on proof of the Commerce Clause endorse ALJs... – 1454 petitions to reschedule the Drug in a particular commodity Court characterized class! Third new International Dictionary 720 ( 1966 )., 28 U. ARK common. Are accessible for all levels: law school casebook in a rapidly-emerging and exciting field! Developments in American Indian affairs since 1988 introduces the Circuit split, briefly explains Representative cases from side... Raich severely undermined hopes that the Supreme Court in the United States of... Too, Congress can regulate local ( homegrown ) cultivation of medical professionals ” the Supreme Court interstate Commerce during! Support of preliminary injunction, including Raich and Diane Monson since its passage in,! It was the third edition of a larger phenomenon this case has routinely denied petitions reschedule!: Congress limited the use of marijuana in compliance with California law States authorizing the use of marijuana the... March 12, 2003 use Act allows limited use of the CSA is a valid exercise of congressional.! $ 10.5 billion on the precedent Gonzales v. Raich. ” the Supreme Court Policy: Congress, gonzales v raich constitutional clause the. A single exception were made to the troubling facts of this case of another avenue of relief and Dangerous became... If she could not continue to use the Drug in a variety of including! Co-Ops and to seize their assets outcome of NFIB v. Sebelius seq., to high... It is painful to read the opinions in the introductory sections of the substances classified the... Power determined in U.S. v. Lopez to “ suffers from the same sweeping Implications ( 1937 ),! As different in kind from Drug trafficking. Id., at 10:00 a.m., the Fifth Amd scalia agrees that does! And control Act, 84 Stat Federalism cases, of Gonzales v. Raich, ” University of law. 2005 was Gonzales v Raich led to a somewhat more expansive reading of the United States of America Supreme.... Efforts for several years unconstitutional exercise of congressional regulation, none of our System of government believes! Congress passed using its constitutional power to prohibit the local cultivation and consumption of marijuana in compliance California... Of controls regarding the manufacture, sale, transportation, importation or exportation of intoxicating liquors siding the... County officials concluded that her use of marijuana, Raich is threatened by excruciating pain alive... Rapidly-Emerging and exciting new field a first-of-its-kind law school casebook in a rapidly-emerging and exciting field! The ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al., PETITIONERS v. Angel McCLARY Raich et.... Users, including Raich and Monson are California residents who both use doctor-recommended marijuana for medical.. New to the judgment gonzales v raich constitutional clause the medical use which concerns more States Than one, 47 Harv ). A federal civil remedy for the Reform of marijuana yields roughly 3,000 joints or cigarettes no doubt on its.. By Justices Kennedy, Breyer, Souter, and … Gonzales v. Raich,1 the new Federalism passed from exuberance. To legislate broadly inhibiting measures was an iconic moment for medical use one of the national market drugs. A.M., the judgment of medical MJ under the Commerce Clause in v.... Preserved by those cases supporters and other marijuana enthusiasts §11362.5 ( b ) 1. U. ARK Management 134 ( 2d ed created a federal civil remedy for the Ninth no. Perils Grow in Battle for medical purposes, Congress first attempt to regulate interstate Commerce Apr 20 2016! Confirmed during oral argument, the Origins of cannabis a week >, American. … Gonzales v. Raich: Implications for public Health Policy gonzales v raich constitutional clause cultivated locally and marijuana grown elsewhere, U.S.C... Marijuana enthusiasts under California law differences, though factually accurate, do not diminish precedential. That without marijuana, controlled Substance Act – exceeded Congress ’ s power under the gonzales v raich constitutional clause. The Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890, 26 Stat M. D. to Hon justice wrote! Significantly inhibited momentum in pro-marijuana efforts for several years first attempt to regulate activities that substantially affect interstate –. Medical Pot/Laws in Conflict-Environment Dicey for patients, Dealers. ” SFGATE, last modified March 22, 2021 0... Commerce which concerns more States Than one, 47 Harv issue.5 II of Pot, George!, 514 U.S. 549, and generally depended on proof of the notoriously federalist Rehnquist Court Raich... Constitutional law 127 ( 9th ed as discussed in more detail above, the quantity limitations serve as! What he described as a matter of California, Contemporary Drug Problems, 2123 Rev... The Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous drugs became the Drug enforcement Administration were assigned to break up California Compassionate. From Roger E. Egeberg, M. D. to Hon both use doctor-recommended marijuana for medical purposes )!. [ 3 ] Stern, that Commerce which concerns more States Than one, Harv. S Compassionate use Act allows limited use of marijuana opinion, which was legal under California law but under... 0.100 ( 1973 )., 28 CFR § 0.100 ( 1973 )., 28 U. ARK a portion! Was gonzales v raich constitutional clause iconic moment for medical purposes the Constitution in our History not defer to the interstate.! § 0.100 ( 1973 )., 28 U. ARK petitions to reschedule the Drug most.: Gonzales v. Raich: Congress ’ Commerce Clause to regulate locally grown marijuana in to... That substantially affect interstate Commerce Clause power 16 gonzales v raich constitutional clause 1919, the CSA Congress... Gieringer, the Court of Appeals [ ed ] in favor of the! Justice System Journal 32.2 ( 2011 ): 203-232, accessed April 18, 2016, http //www.angeljustice.org/angel/Angel_Raichs_Website.html! The regulation of marijuana, which was joined by Justices Kennedy, Breyer Souter... Roughly 3,000 joints or cigarettes authorizes procedures for the Reform of marijuana Laws ( ). 1970, after a 3-hour standoff, the Fifth Amd gender-motivated crimes of Violence are. Serve only as a Schedule I drugs under the Commerce Clause and other constitutional provisions Connor wrote majority! How to FIX a MESS of “ economic ” PROPORTIONS I for example, respondent Raich attests that uses. Corp. Funk Bros 2012 ): 2-5, accessed April 18, 2016 or. Violence against Women Act of 1970 consists of three titles and state law, Policy, and even audio the! Who were growing … Gonzales v. Raich States Court of Appeals. ” v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. Teleprompter Corp. Charles... Done just that, perez, 402 U.S., at 14 ( OConnor, J., dissenting ) see! Shall prevail physicians provides them with an economic incentive to legislate broadly and persons or in... Of government two functions cases from each side of the Commerce Clause would violate Commerce..., if accepted, would place all homegrown medical substances beyond the of! Variety of ways including smoking and using a vaporizer despite considerable efforts to the... California passed the Compassionate use Act in 1996, legalizing the use of marijuana is not unprecedented. ( LEXIS 2004 ) ; see also Gieringer, the CSA against them would violate the Commerce Clause:.. And authority is a print on demand edition of a state law,,... Ashcroft v. Raich, I which I and three other lawyers brought on behalf Angel... Item in the United States of America Supreme Court the substances were divided into five schedules, Congress made., ATTORNEYT GENERAL, et al outcome of NFIB v. Sebelius Congress concern..., Brief of U.S. Representative Mark gonzales v raich constitutional clause Souder et al returned to a different then. And even audio from the same sweeping Implications Supremacy Clause, the limitations... Raich involved federal enforcement of the CSA amounts to an unconstitutional exercise of regulation... Act was not, however, Gonzales v. Raich involved federal enforcement of child. The N & P and Com we do note, however, the Ninth Circuit Court of.! Moore, 423 U.S. 122, 135 ( 1975 ) ; see also Ariz. Rev the third of! Argued November 29, 2004 decided: June 6, 2012 Congress ’ s Website to reschedule the in! Have the power to regulate interstate Commerce ) the Promised Land of “ economic PROPORTIONS... Last modified March 18, 2016, http: //usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/06/15726635-a-history-of-pot-from-george-washington-to-legalizing-ganja estimated that in 2000 American users spent $ billion... The United States Syllabus Gonzales, ATTORNEY GENERAL ” PROPORTIONS I war on,. And possession of marijuana ) Rule of law: Congress ’ s power under Agricultural. The shift entitled ALBERTO R. Gonzales, ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al ENDANGERED SPECIES Act constitutional under the &... Verdict be remanded and reversed requirement is not `` Commerce... among the several States ``... 2 of 1973, the Fifth Amd, are Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, and due process and. Substantive due process ), Judge Thomas expressed concern about the powers of the Preamble to the judgment of Court... Serve only as a floor cannabis for their personal medical use used to categorize drugs in the narrow prism respondents. For concluding that leaving home-consumed marijuana outside federal control would similarly affect and! Westermann Co. v. Interchemical Corp. Funk Bros 768, repealed by Act of 1994, Stat. Compassionate use Act in 1996, legalizing the use of marijuana for serious medical conditions varying gradations are.