This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on ISI (4)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letters  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Health Policy  • Law and Medicine  • Pain  • End-of-life Care/ Palliative Medicine  • Alert me on articles by topic

Lawrence O. Gostin, JD, LLD (Hon)

JAMA. 2005;294:842-844.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In Gonzalez v Raich, the US Supreme Court held that federal law enforcement authorities could criminally prosecute patients for possessing marijuana prescribed by a physician in accordance with state law.¹ The Court did not overturn state medical marijuana laws but did open the door to criminal prosecution under federal drug statutes. The Court also did not foreclose future challenges to federal enforcement on other constitutional grounds (eg, an unwarranted invasion of patient-physician privacy).

Explaining the significance of Raich requires examination of 2 issues. The first concerns American federalism and raises an important constitutional principle about the appropriate scope of federal public health powers. The second issue concerns the use of marijuana as a medical treatment and raises intriguing questions about the practice of medicine and the patient-physician relationship. In Raich, the Supreme Court pointedly questioned the wisdom of prosecuting patients: "The case . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Gonzalez v Raich

Author Affiliation: Georgetown Law Center, Washington, DC.

RELATED LETTERS

Regulation of Medical Marijuana
Rajiv Das
JAMA. 2005;294(24):3091.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Regulation of Medical Marijuana—Reply
Lawrence O. Gostin
JAMA. 2005;294(24):3091-3092.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT