U.S. Court of Appeals Rejects Legal Challenge Claiming Cannabis Prohibition is Unconstitutional

The U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday rejected a challenge by
Massachusetts cannabis businesses that argued cannabis prohibition could no
longer be considered constitutional, as ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court in
2005, Reuters reports. Lawyers for the businesses contended that Congress
had abandoned its goal of controlling all cannabis in interstate commerce,
which was a predicate of the Supreme Court ruling.

In the 2005 case, Gonzales v. Raich, the Supreme Court found that the
Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the authority to
criminalize cannabis possession and use even in states that allow medical
cannabis use, and Congress used that power for the Controlled Substances
Act (CSA).

During arguments before the appeals court, attorney David Boies noted that
Congress, in 2010, permitted Washington, D.C. to move forward with medical
cannabis legalization through a rider in an appropriations bill; however,
Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, writing for a three-judge panel,
said that the rider was of “limited scope” and did not apply to the
cultivation and distribution of cannabis for non-medical purposes.

“After all, notwithstanding those appropriation riders, the CSA remains
fully intact as to the regulation of the commercial activity involving
marijuana for non-medical purposes, which is the activity in which the
appellants, by their own account, are engaged.” — Barron, in the ruling,
via Reuters

Barron said that ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would result in a
nationwide exemption of the CSA’s drug schedule, which would be broader
than what the Supreme Court rejected in 2005, which concerned only medical
cannabis.

U.S. District Judge Mark Mastroianni last year rejected similar arguments
made by the Massachusetts businesses, ruling that only the Supreme Court
could overturn the 2005 ruling upholding the law.