Congressional tyranny and irrelevance in the war on drugs martin d. Through the controlled substances act, congress has comprehensively regulated the national market in drugs with the potential for abuse. This was a case filed in the united states of america supreme court. It was expected that conservative justices rehnquist, thomas, and oconnor would vote with the majority, but dissented instead on federalist grounds. Justice stevens delivered the opinion of the court. Gonzales, attorney order for the ninth circuit jul 062005. Audio transcription for opinion announcement june 06, 2005 in gonzales v. Filburn, the famous 1942 case that upheld federal regulation of homegrown wheat, 5 is distinguishable from raich. On writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit june 6, 2005 justice oconnor, with whom the chief justice and. Speedy gonzales, animated cartoon character in the warner brothers looney tunes. Raich, decided in 2005, the court ruled that the commerce clause of the u. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the court but has been prepared by the reporter of decisions.
As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, i stumbled upon course hero, where i can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get. If it has not quite put an end to the rehnquist courts federalism revolution, it certainly represents a major step in that direction. Working to reform marijuana laws the national organization for the reform of marijuana laws. Congress enacted the controlled substances act csa, which categorized illegal drugs into various categories and restricted the possession, selling, and purchasing of these substances. Raich marks a watershed moment in the development of judicial federalism. Raich, which i litigated on behalf of angel raich and diane monson from. In this case, a california law legalizing marijuana for medical use was invalidated by a federal law which banned possession of marijuana. Gonzales horse 1977 after 1996, an americanbred thoroughbred racehorse. Among other vices, it seriously misreads the supreme courts decision in gonzales v. Under a law the federal controlled substance act, marijuana is a schedule one controlled substance, however under a 1996 state california law, marijuana is legalized for usage for people who have a prescription from a doctor for medical usage. The court should not necessarily look for a substantial impact, but only should require that a plausible story be told to uphold congressional action pursuant to the commerce clause. Users and growers of marijuana for medical purposes under california compassionate use act sought declaration that controlled substances act csa was unconstitutional as applied to them. If you are having problems downloading any of the pdf files, please use this link to update your adobe.
Relief sought justice antonin scalia wrote a concurring opinion concluding that congress has the authority to regulate the medical use of marijuana even if it is through a different constitutional interpretation. On june 6, the united states supreme court decided gonzales v. This case comes to us from the court of appeals for the ninth circuit. The following is a case profile of the legal trial eponymously titled gonzales v. Although their consumption was authorized under a california statute, the federal government, under the csa, confiscated the drugs. The respondents claimed that enforcing the csa against them would violate the commerce clause, the due process clause of the 5th amendment, and the ninth and. Accordingly, plaintiffs are under the impression that, pursuant to this. Raich that enforcement of the federal controlled substances act 1970 against the intrastate noncommercial possession, production, and use of medical cannabis medical marijuana in compliance with a california state law was consistent with the commerce clause because such.
Two momentous cases involving this very principle are currently moving through the appeals process and. Federal agents seized and destroyed raich s plants. Substantive facts the respondents, before the case was filed were growing and consuming. Raich, it would seem that there can be no tenth amendment violation in this case. Where it is feasible, a syllabus headnote will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. Congress may regulate intrastate activity where the behavior, in the aggregate, can impact interstate commerce. Patients and petitioners grew and consumed marijuana for medicinal purposes.
Angel raich and diane monson, california residents who use medical marijuana, brought an action to enjoin the attorney general of the united states and the head of the dea seeking an injunctive. Respondents are angel mcclary raich, diane monson, john doe number one, and john doe number two. For those hoping for help from the supreme court, it appears unlikely. Raich was legally permitted to use medical marijuana and proceeded to grow her own. In 19, california was one of the first states to prohibit the sale and possession of marijuana,2 and at the end of the century, california became the first state.
Respondents were growing medicinal marijuana, and dea agents came to their home and destroyed the plants. Carcieri the legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its ac. Raich concedes that recent supreme court decisions have largely foreclosed her tenth amendment claim, and she also concedes that this case does not implicate the commandeering line of cases. This note addresses the courts decision in gonzales v. Gonzales raich plaintiff defendant free pdf ebooks.
Raich, political scholars often question whether the rehnquist court was truly a federalist revival, or if federalism was just a means for achieving conservative policy young 2005. Since cannabis was first banned nationally in 1937, the federal government has never recognized a medical use. Ca passed compassionate use ct to ensure that seriously ill residents had access to medicinal marijuana. In the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit angel mcclary raich, et al. Works cited rotator cuff syndrome allergic to narcotics and. Constitution authorizes the federal government to enforce the controlled substances act despite. Raich brought an action seeking injunctive and declaratory relief preventing enforcement of the federal comprehensive drug.
The carol burnett show official recommended for you. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. The opinion of the court in gonzales versus raich will be announced by justice stevens. In 19, california was one of the first states to prohibit the sale and possession of marijuana,2 and at the end of the century, california became the first state to authorize limited use of the drug for medicinal purposes. Raich 2004 summary this month we spotlight the landmark federalism case gonzalez v. The hot dog vendor from the carol burnett show full sketch duration. Raich opinion of the court i california has been a pioneer in the regulation of marijuana. Was the federal law a constitutional exercise of congresss power under the commerce clause. Raich brought an action seeking injunctive and declaratory relief preventing enforcement of the federal comprehensive drug abuse prevention and control act cfa. Raich 2005 in 2002, the federal government through the drug enforcement agency dea entered the property of angel raich and repossessed the medicinal marijuana of which she was legally in possession with regard to the statutes enacted by the state government of california. On august 6, 2004, this court stayed this appeal and ordered the parties to file a status report or a motion for appropriate relief within seven days of the alberto r. February 3, 2005, the supreme courts ruling will be titled.
Raich, a case that addressed the constitutionality of the federal controlled substances. In the 1990s after years of research showing that cannabis has a number of medical purposes, campaigners in california and a number of other states were able to pass laws allowing seriously ill patients to grow, and possess cannabis. Raich of oakland, california, monson of oroville, california, and two anonymous. How to fix a mess of email protected in 2005, the supreme court heard arguments in gonzales v. Raich has important implications for the power of congress to proscribe personal, noncommercial conductincluding medical conductthat in the absence of congressional intervention would be considered legal under state law. In california, the state enacted the compassionate use act in 1996, which allowed the use of medical marijuana to individuals in california who needed it for medical reasons. Congress cannot define the scope of its own power merely by declaring the necessity of its enactments. Alberto gonzales, as united states attorney general, et al. Angel just spoke to a large crowd of media reporters and shes now on her way to another press conference put on by angel wings patient outreach, inc.
Medical marijuana is not a fundamental right, even when a physician advises that the use of medical marijuana is the sole remedy for ones condition. Supreme court considers whether the power to regulate interstate commerce allows congress to prohibit individuals from cultivating small amount of marijuana for personal medical use, notwithstanding a. If it has not quite put an end to the rehnquist courts federalism. A case in which the court ruled that the commerce clause of the controlled substances act gives congress authority to prohibit the local. Please watch our video in which we interpret gonzales v raich. Angel mcclary raich after the united states supreme court hears her case no.