Honors Constitutional Government (1)

.pdf

School

Florida International University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

MISC

Subject

Political Science

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

Uploaded by CaptainGuanaco3781

Honors Constitutional Government Analyzing Federalism and the U.S. Supreme Court Your Name Isabel Panczyszyn 1. Choose one U.S. Supreme Court case from the list in the lesson. Your Case Gonzales v Raich 2. Find at least three credible sources on your chosen case. Be sure to save the author, title, publisher, date, and URL address of each source. You will cite them in MLA style at the end of your essay. Citation Format: Author last name, First name. “Title of Article.” Website name, Day, Month, Year, URL address. Citations for your Essay: Source #1 Gonzales VS. Raich / Oyez https://www.oyez.org/cases/2004/03-1454 Source #2 The Controlled Substances Act Dea.gov Source #3 Gonzales V. Raich Case- https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-1454.ZS.html 3. Analyze the information in the sources. Read carefully and identify how the Supreme Court case relates to federalism. How is federalism reflected in your chosen case? Gonzales v. Raich is a classic example of federalism in action. The state of California had its own law permitting the use of medical marijuana. However, the federal government did not agree with that because of the Controlled Substances Act. Angel Raich argued that as a medical marijuana user, her use was personal and local; therefore, the government should not interfere. The Supreme Court sided with the federal government. It stated that the Commerce Clause in the Consitution allows the federal government to regulate local activities if they affect a more significant

economic market. This case shows how federal law can override state law, even in areas that seem like they should be under state control. 4. Compose your own well-written essay, including an introduction and a conclusion. In the body of the essay, answer the following questions in complete paragraphs: ● What law, policy, or government action was the Supreme Court evaluating, and why was it being challenged? Provide at least two facts from your sources to support your response. ● What was the Court's opinion, and what source(s) did the justices use to justify their answer (previous laws, precedent, the Constitution)? Provide at least two pieces of evidence from your sources to support your response. ● How does the case relate to and affect U.S. federalism? Provide at least two pieces of evidence from your sources to support your claim. Gonzales v. Raich is a landmark Supreme Court case that took place in 2005. It’s all about federalism and the tug-of-war between federal and state powers. The case centered around the use of medical marijuana. Angel Raich, who was a California resident, was using homegrown marijuana but specifically for medical purposes. This was completely legal under California law. However, the federal government took a different approach due to the Controlled Substances Act. The case sprouted from a larger conversation about the balance between national powers and what states can and cannot do. In regards to the Gonzales v. Raich case of 2005, the Supreme Court was pondering how the CSA ( Controlled Substances Act) related to states in which medical marijuana was legal. The big question was about the commerce clause in the U.S. Constitution and whether the federal government still could ban medical marijuana, even in states that gave it the green light. The article “The Controlled Substances Act” states, “the CSA classifies marijuana as a schedule drug,” which means the federal government sees it as having no accepted medical use and more of a potential for abuse. The government argued that even if marijuana is grown and used within a single state, it could still affect the larger interstate market, so they could regulate it. In the Gonzales v. Raich case was in clear favor of the federal government’s authority in order to enforce the CSA. The judges used previous cases, such as Wickard v. Filburn, as precedents, where the court decided that growing wheat for personal use could still impact interstate commerce. The court also based its decision on the interpretation of the Constitution and the commerce clause jurisprudence. They applied the same logic to marijuana, saying that even local growth could affect the local market. The government, therefore, has the right to regulate it. In summary, the Gonzales v. Raich supreme court case is a key event in the continuous dialogue between personal freedoms and federal authority, particularly in the context of drug control. This ruling reaffirmed the idea that the federal government could step in and regulate activities that were traditionally seen as within the state’s purview. This case also raised questions about the rights of patients in states where medical marijuana is legal. Patients could still face federal consequences despite their state’s stance.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help