No. 20-148

Marvin Washington, et al. v. William P. Barr, Attorney General, et al.

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2020-08-13
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Amici (9)Response Waived
Tags: 5th-amendment administrative-review controlled-substances-act due-process federal-patents medical-cannabis
Key Terms:
DueProcess Patent
Latest Conference: 2020-10-09
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can Congress criminalize medical cannabis without exception?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Three of the Petitioners require daily administration of medical cannabis to live. Despite classifying it a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”), the federal government, which owns domestic and international medical cannabis patents (“Federal Cannabis Patents”), has, for decades, repeatedly acknowledged that cannabis has safe and effective medical applications in the United States. THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED ARE: 1. Can Congress, consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, criminalize medical cannabis without exception, even for patients who require its daily administration to live? 2. Given the three requirements for designation as a Schedule I drug under the CSA (21 U.S.C. § 812(b)(1)), is the classification of cannabis so irrational that it violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? 3. Can Congress, consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, require persons aggrieved by the classification of a substance under the CSA to submit to an administrative review process that cannot, as a matter of law, provide the relief they seek?

Docket Entries

2020-10-13
Petition DENIED.
2020-09-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-09-14
Waiver of right of respondent Barr, William, et al. to respond filed.
2020-09-14
Brief amici curiae of The National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) And The Arcview Group filed. (Distributed)
2020-09-14
Brief amici curiae of Athletes for Care, After The Impact Fund, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2020-09-14
Brief amici curiae of US Representatives filed. (Distributed)
2020-09-14
Brief amici curiae of National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) et al. filed. (Distributed)
2020-09-14
Brief amicus curiae of International Cannabis Bar Association filed. (Distributed)
2020-09-14
Brief amici curiae of Credo Science; et al. filed. (Distributed)
2020-09-11
Brief amicus curiae of The Last Prisoner Project filed.
2020-09-04
Brief amici curiae of The Minority Cannabis Business Association and Minorities for Medical Marijuana, Inc. filed.
2020-09-04
Brief amicus curiae of Americans for Safe Access filed.
2020-07-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 14, 2020)

Attorneys

Americans for Safe Access
Brett M. SchumanGoodwin Procter LLP, Amicus
Athletes for Care, After The Impact Fund, Canna Research Foundation, NFL Sisters In Service, Inc., and Isiah International, LLC
Anthony J. Mellaci Jr.ANSELL GRIMM & AARON, P.C., Amicus
Barr, William, et al.
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Credo Science; American Journal of Endocannabinoid Medicine; Ethan Russo M.D.; Jahan Marcu Ph.d
David Corey KotlerHoban Law Group, Amicus
International Cannabis Bar Association
Robert M. PalumbosDuane Morris LLP, Amicus
Marvin Washington, et al.
Michael Steven HillerHiller, PC, Petitioner
National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) et al
David Clifford HollandLaw Office of David Clifford Holland, P.C., Amicus
The Last Prisoner Project
Gary P. WeinsteinGary Weinstein, Amicus
The Minority Cannabis Business Association and Minorities for Medical Marijuana, Inc.
Joseph Edward CollinsFox Rothschild LLP, Amicus
The National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) And The Arcview Group
Melissa Aniela Murphy-PetrosWilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman and Dicker, Amicus
US Representatives
Michael B. de LeeuwCozen O'Connor, Amicus