Term
| Who are Raich and Monson? |
|
Definition
| CA residents who both use doctor-recommended marijuana for serious medical conditions |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| seized and destroyed all six of Monson's cannabis plants |
|
|
Term
| 3. What federal law is in dispute in this case? |
|
Definition
| Commerce clause and other constitutional provisions |
|
|
Term
| 4. What did Raich and Monson seek a federal court to do? |
|
Definition
| to stop interference by law enforcement for their growing |
|
|
Term
| 5. What did the U.S. District Court rule concerning Raich and Monson’s request? |
|
Definition
| the respondents couldn't demonstrate a likelihood of success about their clames |
|
|
Term
| 6. What did the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rule concerning Raich and Monson’s request? |
|
Definition
| reversed District Court and ordered a preliminary injunction |
|
|
Term
| 7. Who delivered the opinion of the United States Supreme Court? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| 8. What two judges filed dissenting opinions? |
|
Definition
| Justice O'Connor and Justice Thomax |
|
|
Term
| 9. What is the question presented in this case? |
|
Definition
| whether the power vested in Congress includes the power to prohibit the loval cultivation and usse of marijuana in compliance with CA law |
|
|
Term
| 10. How did this become a legal dispute? |
|
Definition
| Raich and Monson are CA residents who suffer from a variety of serious medical conditions and have been treated by doctors that have said that they needed weed. The DEA came and raided their homes throwing away the home grown weed |
|
|
Term
| 11. The Supreme Court says “the question before us, however, is not whether it is wise to enforce the statute in these circumstances; rather, it is…” what? |
|
Definition
| , 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 |
|
|
Term
| 12. What is the respondent’s challenge? |
|
Definition
| they argue that the CSA's categorical prohibition of the manufacture and possession of marijuana as applied to the intrastate manufacture and possession of marijuana for medical purposes pursuant to California law exceeds Congress' authority under the Commerce Clause. |
|
|
Term
| 13. The commerce clause emerged as what? |
|
Definition
| the Framers' response to the central problem giving rise to the Constitution itself: the absence of any federal or national commerce power under the Articles of Confederation |
|
|
Term
| 14. Cases decided under the “new era” have identified three general categories of regulation in which Congress is authorized to engage [legislate] under its commerce power. Please identify what these three categories are? |
|
Definition
| First, Congress can regulate the channels of interstate commerce. Perez v. United States (1971). Second, Congress has authority to regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, and persons or things in interstate commerce. Ibid. Third, Congress has the power to regulate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce |
|
|
Term
| 15. The ruling says “our case law firmly establishes Congress' power to regulate purely local activities…” when what? |
|
Definition
| are part of an economic "class of activities" that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce |
|
|
Term
| 16. What did the U.S. Supreme Court conclude in the case of Wickard? |
|
Definition
| "even if appellee's activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached or regulated by Congress if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce. |
|
|
Term
| 17. Why did the U.S. Supreme Court rule that Wickard was not exempt from federal regulations per the 1938 Agricultural Adjustment Act? P.6-7. |
|
Definition
| we upheld the application of regulations promulgated under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, 52 Stat. 31, which were designed to control the volume of wheat moving in interstate and foreign commerce in order to avoid surpluses and consequent abnormally low price |
|
|
Term
| 18. On what basis does the ruling announce the similarities of this case with Wickard are “striking?” |
|
Definition
| Like the farmer in Wickard, respondents are cultivating, for home consumption, a fungible commodity for which there is an established, albeit illegal, interstate market. Just as the Agricultural Adjustment Act was designed "to control the volume [of wheat] moving in interstate and foreign commerce in order to avoid surpluses ..." and consequently control the market price, a primary purpose of the CSA is to control the supply and demand of controlled substances in both lawful and unlawful drug markets. |
|
|
Term
| 19. What concern does the U.S. Supreme Court identify as “appropriate to include marijuana grown for home consumption in the CSA?” |
|
Definition
| is the likelihood that the high demand in the interstate market will draw such marijuana into that market |
|
|
Term
| 20. Why does the court say that Congress may regulate the production of cannabis home consumption of marijuana? |
|
Definition
| 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 |
|
|
Term
| 21. What was the case of U.S. v. Lopez (1995) about? |
|
Definition
| the validity of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 |
|
|
Term
| 22. Why did the U.S. Supreme Court rule in U.S. v. Lopez that Section 922q of the Gun Free School Zone Act (1990) was unconstitutional? P.7-8. |
|
Definition
| not an essential part of a larger regulation of economic activity, in which the regulatory scheme could be undercut unless the intrastate activity were regulated. It cannot, therefore, be sustained under our cases upholding regulations of activities that arise out of or are connected with a commercial transaction, which viewed in the aggregate, substantially affects interstate commerce |
|
|
Term
| 23. What was the case of U.S. v. Morrison (2000) about? P.8. |
|
Definition
| The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 |
|
|
Term
| 24. Why did the U.S. Supreme Court rule that the federal civil remedy of the Violence Against Womens Act (1994) was unconstitutional? P.8. |
|
Definition
| like the statute in Lopez, it did not regulate economic activity |
|
|
Term
| 25. Why does the U.S. Supreme Court argue that the rulings in Lopez and Morrison do not apply in this case? P.8. |
|
Definition
| Unlike those at issue in Lopez and Morrison, the activities regulated by the CSA are quintessentially economic. |
|
|
Term
| 26. Why did the U.S. Supreme Court rule “limiting the activity to marijuana possession and cultivation "in accordance with state law" cannot serve to place respondents' activities beyond congressional reach [power]?” P.8. |
|
Definition
| The Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution unambiguously provides that if there is any conflict between federal and state law, federal law shall prevail. It is beyond peradventure that federal power over commerce is " 'superior to that of the States to provide for the welfare or necessities of their inhabitants,' " |
|
|
Term
| 27. Why do the respondents argue that the CSA should not apply to them, and their production and consumption of home grown cannabis removes them from the market for illegal drugs? P.9. |
|
Definition
| they had been "isolated by the State of California, and [are] policed by the State of California," and thus remain "entirely separated from the market," |
|
|
Term
| 28. What concerns does the U.S. Supreme Court raise with California exempting the personal medical use of cannabis from prosecution? |
|
Definition
| The exemption for physicians provides them with an economic incentive to grant their patients permission to use the drug. In contrast to most prescriptions for legal drugs, which limit the dosage and duration of the usage, under California law the doctor's permission to recommend marijuana use is open-ended. |
|
|
Term
| 29. What does Justice O’Connor’s dissent say is one of federalism chief virtues? P.10. |
|
Definition
| 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." |
|
|
Term
| 30. Why does O’Connor disagree with the application of the CSA to the personal cultivation, possession, and use of cannabis? |
|
Definition
| Today the Court sanctions an application of the federal Controlled Substances Act that extinguishes that experiment, without any proof that the personal cultivation, possession, and use of marijuana for medicinal purposes, if economic activity in the first place, has a substantial effect on interstate commerce and is therefore an appropriate subject of federal regulation. |
|
|
Term
| 31. How does O’Connor see the relationship between U.S. v. Lopez, and U.S. Morrison, on the one hand, and this case, on the other hand? P.10-11. |
|
Definition
| They had substantial effects on the economy |
|
|
Term
| 32. On what basis does O’Connor argue that the conduct (the personal cultivation and use of cannabis) is not an economic activity? P.11-12. |
|
Definition
| It will not do to say that Congress may regulate noncommercial activity simply because it may have an effect on the demand for commercial goods, or because the noncommercial endeavor can, in some sense, substitute for commercial activity |
|
|
Term
| 33. What does O’Connor find breathtaking about the Court’s definition of economic activity? P.11. |
|
Definition
| the Court's definition of economic activity for purposes of Commerce Clause jurisprudence threatens to sweep all of productive human activity into federal regulatory reach. |
|
|
Term
| 34. Why does O’Connor argue that “the homegrown cultivation and personal possession and use of marijuana for medicinal purposes has no apparent commercial character” and thus cannot be regulated by Congress under the CSA? P.12. |
|
Definition
| Everyone agrees that the marijuana at issue in this case was never in the stream of commerce, and neither were the supplies for growing it. |
|
|
Term
| 35. Even assuming economic activity is occurring in this case, what does O’Connor argue? P.12. |
|
Definition
| the Government has made no showing in fact that the possession and use of homegrown marijuana for medical purposes, in California or elsewhere, has a substantial effect on interstate commerce. |
|
|
Term
| 36. On what basis does O’Connor deny that possession and use of homegrown for medical purposes of cannabis has a substantial effect of interstate commerce? P.12-3. |
|
Definition
| the effect of those activities on interstate drug traffic is not self-evidently substantial |
|
|
Term
| 37. In Part III of O’Connor’s dissent, what concern does she raise for the Court’s ruling for federalism? P.13. |
|
Definition
| federalism principles that have driven our Commerce Clause cases require that room for experiment be protected in this case |
|
|
Term
| 38. What concern does Justice Thomas express for Congress regulating “this” under the commerce clause? P.14. |
|
Definition
| the Court abandons any attempt to enforce the Constitution's limits on federal power |
|
|
Term
| 39. How does Thomas understand the commerce clause? |
|
Definition
| the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to regulate the buying and selling of goods and services trafficked across state lines |
|
|
Term
| 40. Why does Thomas deny the necessary and proper clause authorizes Congress to enact or pass, much less enforce, the CSA? P.15. |
|
Definition
| The Necessary and Proper Clause is not a warrant to Congress to enact any law that bears some conceivable connection to the exercise of an enumerated power. Nor is it, however, a command to Congress to enact only laws that are absolutely indispensable to the exercise of an enumerated power. |
|
|
Term
| 41. What does Thomas say the question is thus about what in this case? P.16. |
|
Definition
| The question is thus whether the intrastate ban is "necessary and proper" as applied to medical marijuana users like respondents. |
|
|
Term
| 42. Why does Thomas argue California’s Compassionate Use Act sets Raich and Monson’s character apart or exempt from federal drug laws? P.16. |
|
Definition
| a qualified patient could avoid arrest or prosecution by presenting his identification card to law enforcement officers. In the event that a qualified patient is arrested for possession or his cannabis is seized, he could seek to prove as an affirmative defense that, in conformity with state law, he possessed or cultivated small quantities of marijuana intrastate solely for personal medical use. |
|
|
Term
| 43. Why does Thomas deny that exempting the possession and use of homegrown for medical purposes would not undermine the CSA? P.16-. |
|
Definition
| under the CSA, certain drugs that present a high risk of abuse and addiction but that nevertheless have an accepted medical use--drugs like morphine and amphetamines--are available by prescription. 21 U. S. C. §§812(b)(2)(A)-(B); 21 CFR §1308.12 (2004). No one argues that permitting use of these drugs under medical supervision has undermined the CSA's restrictions. |
|
|
Term
| 44. Why does Thomas deny that California’s state law does not disrupt federal law enforcement? P.17. |
|
Definition
| Congress declared that state policy would disrupt federal law enforcement. It believed the across-the-board ban essential to policing interstate drug trafficking |
|
|
Term
| 45. What do you think of this ruling, and also the dissenting opinions? |
|
Definition
| I think weed should be legalized. Save the Economy. :) I think it's dumb to say that somebody can legally smoke Marijuana but cannot legally grow it. |
|
|
