BOSTON, May 27 (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday rejected arguments by several Massachusetts cannabis businesses that the federal prohibition on marijuana could no longer be deemed constitutional, as the U.S. Supreme Court held two decades ago.
The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, opens new tab that changes in how marijuana is regulated and sold in the decades since the Supreme Court upheld the law in 2005 did not mean the federal ban was no longer constitutional
Lawyers for the cannabis businesses including prominent litigator David Boies had argued that Congress has abandoned its goal of controlling all marijuana in interstate commerce, which they said was a key predicate of the Supreme Court’s holding.
In that case, Gonzales v. Raich, the high court held that under the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause, Congress had the authority to criminalize the possession and use of marijuana even in states that permit its use for medical purposes as it did in the Controlled Substances Act.
Today, 38 states, including Massachusetts, have legalized marijuana for medical or recreational use, and under the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendments that have been included in annual appropriation bills since 2014, the Justice Department may not spend funds to interfere with state medical marijuana laws.
Boies during arguments in December also pointed to Congress’ decision in 2010 to permit medical marijuana in the District of Columbia.
But Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, writing for a three-judge panel, said that the so-called appropriations rider was of “limited scope” and did not apply to the cultivation and distribution of marijuana for non-medical purposes.
Read More
