Conant v. Walters
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
309 F.3d 629 (2002)
- Written by Philip Glass, JD
Facts
The state legislatures of Arizona and California decriminalized medical marijuana. In response, in 1996 the federal government (defendant) prohibited recommendation and prescription of Schedule I controlled substances by physicians. Any physician’s violation of this policy would result in the revocation of the offending physician’s Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) prescription authority. The district court heard a dispute concerning the constitutionality of the federal government’s revocation of the prescription authority of any physician for discussing the advantages of marijuana treatment with a patient. The district court ruled that such a policy would suppress speech rights protected by the First Amendment and therefore enjoined implementation of the policy. The federal government appealed this ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Schroeder, C.J.)
Concurrence (Kozinski, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
