Gonzales v. Raich Citation: 545 U.S. 1 Facts: California passed the “Compassionate Use Act‚” which allowed for the use of medical marijuana. Respondents Raich and Monson are California residents who both use doctor-recommended marijuana for serious medical conditions. After federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents seized and destroyed all six of Monson’s cannabis plants‚ respondents brought this action seeking injunctive and declaratory relief prohibiting the enforcement of the federal
Premium United States Constitution United States Congress Commerce Clause
A. Traditional theories of the judicial review hold that neutral or principled grounds are the only legitimate bases for judicial decisions and reject political moves in judicial decisions-making. Do you believe this is true? Do you see principled vs. political motives in important U.S. Supreme court constitutional decisions in which overturn laws passed by legislatures(such as restrictions on gun ownership or marijuana use? I do believe this is true. Judicial decisions reject political motives
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Law United States
may destroy the life of a person‚ therefore while fighting with drug dealers and buyers cooperatives no other interest rather than removing this “elements” from the society should be taken into account. The case‚ which is known as “United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers’ Cooperative” did more than just catch the attention of people. Million of people followed the case from its very beginning and did have certain expectations concerning the outcome of the case. The specifics of the case made
Premium United States Drug addiction Crime
To: Executive Management From: Team A Re: United States v. Morrison 529 U.S. 598 (U.S. Sup. Ct. 2002) I. Facts: Petitioner Christy Brzonkala‚ a student at Virginia Polytechnic Institute files a suit against two students of the same school‚ Respondents Antonio Morrison and James Crawford‚ for rape and emotional distress. Petitioner claims the sexual assault violates 42 U.S.C. §13981‚ “which provides a federal civil remedy for the victims of gender-motivated violence” (FindLaw
Premium United States Constitution Commerce Clause United States Congress
for the Court to step in. Without a clear definition of what commerce was‚ as well as what it meant by inter and intra state commerce‚ neither side of the controversy would never be settled. The first test of a definition came in the case of Gibbons v. Ogden. Chief Justice Marshall defined commerce not only as traffic‚ but also as intercourse. After that he said that the
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Congress United States Constitution
Julian DiNoia Mr. Boogaard APGOV 20 September 2013 The Rehnquist court’s decisions in the past couple of years haven’t been as significant as the people may think they are in increasing the autonomy of the states. The court case of medical marijuana under Chief Justice Rehnquist did not end what they called the “federalist revolution”‚ because there was none. This court case was a case that obviously had significance throughout the country as it has been a highly spoke about topic. I believe
Premium Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court of the United States United States Congress
GONZALES v. OREGON Oral Argument: 05 -’06 Term Subject: Physician-assisted suicide‚ Ashcroft directive‚ Controlled Substances Act‚ Oregon Death with Dignity Act A group of Oregon residents‚ including a doctor‚ a pharmacist‚ and several terminally ill patients‚ sued the United States Attorney General to challenge an interpretive ruling of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The rule‚ referred to as the "Ashcroft Directive‚" declared that the use of federally controlled substances to assist
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States United States Congress
As a reflection‚ the Gonzales v. Carhart case in 2007 had a significant impact on the way abortions were performed. It established the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act which prevented D&E procedures‚ the dilation of a woman’s cervix followed by the extraction of the unborn child
Premium Human rights Pregnancy Abortion
DOCTRINE: Press freedom may be identified with the liberty to discuss publicly and truthfully any matter of public concern without censorship or punishment. The general principle is that freedom of expression is the rule and restrictions the exemption. The power to exercise prior restraint is not to be presumed‚ rather the presumption is against its validity. FACTS: * The principal petitioner is Jose Antonio U. Gonzalez‚ President of the Malaya Films. * The respondent is the Board
Premium Freedom of speech Censorship
Sef Gonzales‚ aged 20‚ was convicted and sentenced in the Supreme Court of New South Wales to life imprisonment for the murder of his father Teddy Gonzales‚ 46‚ mother Mary Loiva Josephine‚ 43‚ and sister Clodine‚ 18. On July 10th 2001‚ at about 4.30pm Gonzales entered his sister Clodine’s bedroom‚ where she was studying. He was armed with a baseball bat and two large knives he had retrieved from the kitchen. It was found that he compressed Clodine’s neck trying to strangle her‚ struck her at least
Premium Murder Crime Capital punishment