The Case: Gonzales v. Raich
Commerce Clause: Article I, Section 8, clause 4:
“The Congress shall have power . . . To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the
several states, and with the Indian tribes…”
The Facts:
California is one of the eleven states (most recently with Montana) currently that allows some
kind of medical marijuana by law.
 Federal law, through the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), does not recognize medical
marijuana.
 The federal government was so opposed to medical marijuana that they regularly sent
armed squads of federal agents into California to break up medical marijuana coops, and
seize their assets and medicine, claiming that federal law trumped state law.
 The federal government felt it important enough to divert resources that could have been
used to fight terrorism or go after violent traffickers, in order to arrest sick people.
 Angel Raich of Oakland, CA and Diane Monson of Oroville, CA along with two
anonymous caregivers sued the federal government on October 9, 2002 to prevent the
feds from interfering with their right to use medical marijuana.
 Three factors add particular interest to this case:
1. What the respondents are doing is completely legal under state and local law.
2. It is asserted by Angel Raich and her doctors that she would die without
marijuana, and that has not been disputed.
3. Their marijuana was grown as part of a cooperative of patients and no money
changed hands. Therefore it had no direct impact on interstate activity or
commerce.
Oyez.org
Facts of the Case:
In 1996 California voters passed the Compassionate Use Act, legalizing marijuana for medical
use. California's law conflicted with the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), which banned
possession of marijuana. After the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) seized doctorprescribed marijuana from a patient's home, a group of medical marijuana users sued the DEA
and U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft in federal district court.
The medical marijuana users argued the Controlled Substances Act - which Congress passed
using its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce - exceeded Congress' commerce
clause power. The district court ruled against the group. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
reversed and ruled the CSA unconstitutional as it applied to intrastate (within a state) medical
marijuana use. Relying on two U.S. Supreme Court decisions that narrowed Congress' commerce
clause power - U.S. v. Lopez (1995) and U.S. v. Morrison (2000) - the Ninth Circuit ruled using
medical marijuana did not "substantially affect" interstate commerce and therefore could not be
regulated by Congress.
Constitutional Question:
Does the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801) exceed Congress' power under the
commerce clause as applied to the intrastate cultivation and possession of marijuana for medical
use?