Certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. The court found the federal law valid, although the marijuana in question had been grown and consumed within a single state, and had never entered interstate commerce. Indeed, raichs physician believes that forgoing cannabis treatments would certainly. Raich was legally permitted to use medical marijuana and proceeded to grow her own. The carol burnett show official recommended for you. 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. 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. In the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit angel mcclary raich, et al. California voters passed proposition 215 in 1996, legalizing the use of. Raich, the supreme court made a judgment that affected the california users of medical marijuana. Californias compassionate use act allows seriously ill persons to use marijuana for.
The federal government claimed that drug administration followed congresss law when they destroyed the plants, aka federal law trumps state. Congress may regulate intrastate activity where the behavior, in the aggregate, can impact interstate commerce. Please watch our video in which we interpret gonzales v raich. Raich, 1 a case that addressed the constitutionality of the federal controlled substances act csa as applied to individuals who grow marijuana for personal and medical use under californias compassionate use act cua. For those hoping for help from the supreme court, it appears unlikely. Raich, which i litigated on behalf of angel raich and diane monson from the filing of the complaint to the. On june 6, 2005, the supreme court vacated our opinion and held that congresss commerce clause authority includes the power to prohibit purely intrastate cultivation and use of marijuana. 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. Angel raich and diane monson are californian residents who suffer from medical conditions that require them to use medical marijuana. Angel mcclary raich after the united states supreme court hears her case no.
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. Since cannabis was first banned nationally in 1937, the federal government has never recognized a medical use. Aliitasi ohi busad2186562 chapter 3 case brief 11 september 2016 gonzalez v. California is one of at least nine states that authorize the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Ca passed compassionate use ct to ensure that seriously ill residents had access to medicinal marijuana. A selection of briefs filed for the supreme court case these are all pdf files from the angel justice site. N the united states court of appeals cato institute. Works cited rotator cuff syndrome allergic to narcotics and. On june 6, 2005, the united states supreme court decided gonzales v. Raich 2005in 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. Raich most likely will come down around february 2005 or march 2005, about three to four months after.
Justice stevens delivered the opinion of the court. 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. 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 authority. Audio transcription for opinion announcement june 06, 2005 in gonzales v. Death with dignity act to file a copy of the dispensing record with the. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the court but has been prepared by the reporter of decisions. Californias law conflicted with the federal controlled substances act csa, which banned.
Constitution authorizes the federal government to enforce the controlled substances act despite state laws legalizing medical marijuana use. Raich, united states supreme court, 2005 case summary of gonzales v. There is simply no evidence that homegrown medicinal marijuana users constitute, in the aggregate, a sizable enough class to have a discernable, let alone substantial, impact on the national illicit drug marketor otherwise to threaten the csa regime. 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. The defendants in the case argued that since the plants were grown for personal use, for a person with a prescription was completely legal under california law. Although the court found that the federal enforcement interests waned when compared to the harm that california residents would suffer if denied access to medically necessary marijuana, it concluded that respondents could not demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of. Respondents are angel mcclary raich, diane monson, john doe number one, and john doe number two. Raich, a case that addressed the constitutionality of the federal controlled substances. Respondents were growing medicinal marijuana, and dea agents came to their home and destroyed the plants. Is the endangered species act constitutional under the commerce clause. Federal agents seized and destroyed raich s plants. It has been accepted for inclusion in this collection by an authorized administrator. Raich, a case that pitted two sick women, who use medical cannabis, against the u. 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.
Raich 2005, justices scalia and kennedy departed from their previous positions as parts of the lopez and morrison majorities to uphold a federal law regarding marijuana. Justice oconnor, joined by justices rehnquist and thomas. Alberto gonzales, as united states attorney general, et al. 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. The question presented in this case is whether the power vested in congress by. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools.
If you are having problems downloading any of the pdf files, please use this link to update your adobe. The opinion of the court in gonzales versus raich will be announced by justice stevens. If that is generally true of individuals who grow and use marijuana for medical purposes under state law, then even assuming congress has obvious and plain reasons why regulating intrastate cultivation and possession is necessary to regulating the interstate drug trade, none of those. Among other vices, it seriously misreads the supreme courts decision in gonzales v. Raich opinion of the court i california has been a pioneer in the regulation of marijuana. On june 6, the united states supreme court decided gonzales v. In this case, a california law legalizing marijuana for medical use was invalidated by a federal law which banned possession of marijuana. Raich, decided in 2005, the court ruled that the commerce clause of the u. Raich 2004 summary this month we spotlight the landmark federalism case gonzalez v. 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. In 1996 california voters passed the compassionate use act, legalizing marijuana for medical use. Was the federal law a constitutional exercise of congresss power under the commerce clause. If it has not quite put an end to the rehnquist courts federalism revolution, it certainly represents a major step in that direction.
The history of medical marijuana and the commerce clause rory s. 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. The hot dog vendor from the carol burnett show full sketch duration. Congress may preempt state medical use marijuana laws. The use of medical marijuana had been prescribed to them by their licensed, boardcertified, family practitioners because it is the only drug that provides effective treatment. 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 case was heard before the united states supreme court on november 29, 2004 at 10. Using the url or doi link below will ensure access to this page indefinitely. Raich legal information institute cornell university.