Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Gonzales v. Raich (previously Ashcroft v.Raich), 545 U.S. 1 (2005), was a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that, under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Congress may criminalize the production and use of homegrown cannabis even if state law allows its use for medicinal purposes.
The significance of the Commerce Clause is described in the Supreme Court's opinion in Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005): [7] [8] The Commerce Clause emerged as the Framers' response to the central problem giving rise to the Constitution itself: the absence of any federal commerce power under the Articles of Confederation.
The subsequent events section appeals to the pro-marijuana opinion. It continues the slant of the article of the politics of medical marijuana. The subsequent legal impact of the decision is relevant, but the political commentary is not. Holder did not issue his Justice Department statement in reference to Gonzales v. Raich.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Science & Tech. Shopping. Sports
A federal lawsuit argues that it is time to reassess the Commerce Clause rationale for banning intrastate marijuana production and distribution.
Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005) Congress may ban the use of marijuana even in states that have approved its use for medicinal purposes. Bond v. United States, 564 U.S. 211 (2011) An individual litigant has standing to challenge a federal statute on grounds of federalism. Arizona v.
Robert Raich is an American attorney. He served as legal counsel in the only two medical cannabis cases heard by the United States Supreme Court: United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative in 2001 and Gonzales v. Raich in 2004. [1]: 138 His spouse at the time, Angel Raich, was a party in the latter case.