1、Congressional Research Service The Library of CongressCRS Report for CongressReceived through the CRS WebOrder Code RS20998Updated June 14, 2005Marijuana for Medical Purposes: A Glimpse ofthe Supreme Courts Decision in UnitedStates v. Oakland Cannabis BuyersCooperative and Related Legal Issuesname r
2、edactedSenior SpecialistAmerican Law DivisionSummaryThere is no medical necessity defense against prosecution for the federal crimes ofcultivating or distributing marijuana, even in places where state law recognizes such adefense. So said the Supreme Court in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers
3、Cooperative, 532 U.S. 483, 486 (2001). Although there may be some question as totheir vitality, the Court left undecided issues involving a necessity defense forpossession and possible commerce clause, enactment clause, and due process clausechallenges. In Gonzales v. Raich, 125 S.Ct. 2195 (2005), t
4、he Court held thatCongresss power under the commerce clause enabled it to enact a regulatory schemethat extended to the purely local cultivation and possession of marijuana for medicalpurposes. There are proposals in this Congress to reverse the impact of the Courtsdecisions. This is an abbreviated
升级VIP 