Supreme Court of the United States

Gonzales v. Raich

June 6, 2005545 U.S. 1

Summary

The Supreme Court held that the Controlled Substances Act is a valid exercise of Congress's Commerce Clause authority, carried into execution through the Necessary and Proper Clause, even as applied to the intrastate, noncommercial cultivation and possession of marijuana for personal medical use authorized by California's Compassionate Use Act, because Congress had a rational basis for concluding that leaving home-consumed marijuana unregulated would leave a gaping hole in the comprehensive scheme regulating the interstate market in a fungible commodity. Following Wickard v. Filburn, the Court refused to excise individual applications from a concededly valid statutory scheme and vacated the Ninth Circuit's judgment ordering a preliminary injunction. Justice Scalia concurred in the judgment on a Necessary and Proper Clause rationale; Justice O'Connor, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Thomas as to all but Part III, and Justice Thomas, each filed dissents contending the application exceeded Congress's enumerated powers and encroached on traditional state police powers.

Holding

  • Whether the CSA exceeds Congress's Commerce Clause authority as applied to the intrastate, noncommercial cultivation and possession of marijuana for personal medical purposes authorized by California law.. No. The CSA is a valid exercise of federal power even as applied to respondents' troubling facts; Congress acted well within its authority to regulate the interstate market in a fungible commodity, and the judgment of the Court of Appeals was vacated.

Docket 03-1454

Cited authorities

  • 21 U.S.C. §§ 841
  • 21 U.S.C. §§ 841
  • 21 U.S.C. §§ 841
  • 21 U.S.C. §§ 801
  • 21 U.S.C. §§ 812
  • Alaska Stat. § 17.37.010-17.37.080
  • 21 U.S.C. §§ 801
  • 21 U.S.C. § 844(a)

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF