Angel McClary Raich, et al. v. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General, et al

Cato's Amicus Brief joined by the Reason Foundation,

more+
less-

In 2005, the Supreme Court decided Gonzales v. Raich, a case that pitted two sick women, who use medical cannabis, against the U.S. Department of Justice. The Justice Department asserted that the Commerce Clause gives federal prosecutors and drug police the power to throw these women in jail, even though their medical choices have nothing to do with interstate commerce. In a defeat for federalism, the Supreme Court's liberal wing, joined by Justices Kennedy and Scalia, agreed with the feds. Now, the Raich case is back before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, ably litigated once again by Cato senior fellow Randy Barnett. Randy argues that the federal government is intruding on these women's fundamental right to control their own medical decisions, a right protected by the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments. Cato's friend-of-the-court brief, filed in support of Randy's clients and joined by the Reason Foundation, shows that the history surrounding the adoption of the Bill of Rights strongly supports Randy's arguments.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: Civil Rights Updates, Constitutional Law Updates, Criminal Law Updates, Health Updates

Reference Info:Appellate Brief | Federal, 9th Circuit | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Cato Institute | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »