Cato on Facebook
Cato on Twitter
Cato on YouTube
Cato RSS1000 Massachusetts Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20001-5403
Phone (202) 842 0200
Fax (202) 842 3490
Contact Us
October 13, 2004
Legal Briefs
Ashcroft v. Raich
by Tim Lynch and Mark Moller
PRINT PAGE
CITE THIS
Share with your friends:
In 1996, California voters passed Proposition 215, legalizing the medical use of marijuana. This law directly violated the federal Controlled Substances Act and, consequently, state and federal DEA officials raided several homes, confiscating and destroying medical marijuana plants. Angel Raich and others sued, claiming this enforcement of the CSA violated the Commerce and Due Process clauses as well as the Tenth Amendment and the doctrine of medical necessity. Cato's brief supporting Raich asserts that healthcare issues have traditionally been the territory of state regulation and that the "Compassionate Use Act" legalizing medical marijuana falls within that purview. Additionally, the cultivation of marijuana plants at home for personal consumption does not constitute commerce and thus federal intervention is unconstitutional.
Download the PDF (974 KB)
Get Adobe Reader
Share with your friends:
Full text
© 2010 The Cato Institute
Please send comments to webmaster
Leading judges and legal scholars explore the state of criminal law today and offer compelling examinations of key issues, including suicide terrorism, drug legalization, and the vast reach of federal criminal liability.
Feeds for Cato events: 