Local Farming and Utilization of Marijuana in California - Essay Prowess

Local Farming and Utilization of Marijuana in California


Kindly ADD to CART and Purchase an Editable Word Document at $5.99 ONLY

Local Farming and Utilization of Marijuana in Conformity to California Law

The American Constitution allows for a scenario where one territory is administered over by two varieties of government. Federal government is concerned with matters impacting the entire nation while state governments act within state boundaries. This paper seeks to discuss the issue of federalism relative to Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005).

Instigation of the court procedure

Medical marijuana is legal within the state of California as provided for in the Compassionate Use Act. The respondents in Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005) were California residents reliant on marijuana for medical purposes. In 2002, federal agents raided their premises, confiscated, and destroyed marijuana cultivated in the defendant’s premises. California legislation deemed such cultivation lawful through federal law under the Commerce Clause. It is imperative to note that Raich and Monson had the right to use medicinal marijuana under the Compassionate Use Act. As such, the respondents instigated a case against the nation’s Attorney General because Congress overstepped its authority concerning the Commerce Clause thus limiting their ability to cultivate and utilize the drug at home. Furthermore, the defendants felt that the seizure of the marijuana plants violated their privileges for medical purposes.

The Issue

The facts of the particular case revolve about the issue of if Congress has the power to control the domestic cultivation of medical marijuana under the inter-state Commerce Clause. Furthermore, it is significant to understand whether the actions taken by law enforcers to confiscate marijuana were within law and reason. The respondents provided that cultivation of marijuana for medicinal purposes was a predominantly intra-state affair, lawful and by extension non-commercial. Under the laws of California, it is justifiable for a person to consume or be in possession of definite amounts of marijuana. Congress therefore had no jurisdiction over such affairs.

Court’s answer to the issue

The 9th Circuit of the Court of Appeals provided that marijuana qualified for categories of activities impacting on the federal marijuana market. As such, local consumption influenced demand and supply within the federal market thus imploring Congress to influence intra-state cultivation in an attempt to regulate the national market. In an effort to limit cross border trade of marijuana, Congress had the mandate to cap attempts on cultivation of the substance within states.

Reason behind the court’s decision

National government could not therefore comprehensively differentiate marijuana cultivated within one’s premises from that purchased within inter-state trade. In tandem with the country’s continuing war against trafficking of drugs, the court made the decision to support Congress in availing regulations limiting interstate trade of the said drug. The court deemed it fit towards ensuring illegal avenues are not exploited by cartels and opted to further support law enforcement bodies to this effect.


Gonzales v. Raich, No. 03-1454, 545 U.S. 1 (352 F.3d 1222, 2005), http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-1454.ZO.html