United States v. Rojas

Roberth Rojas and other individuals (smugglers) (defendants) were involved in two attempts to smuggle cocaine into the United States. Law enforcement intercepted the shipments, and no drugs physically entered the country. The smugglers were convicted in federal district court of several different crimes, including violations of 21 U.S.C. §§ 959 and 963. Under § 959, the government (plaintiff) had to prove that the smugglers each manufactured or distributed cocaine, intending or knowing it would be illegally imported into the country, or that the smugglers participated in the venture and tried to help it succeed. Under § 963, the government had to show that a conspiracy to break narcotics laws existed, that each smuggler knew of the conspiracy and intended to join it, and that each smuggler voluntarily participated in the conspiracy. The smugglers appealed their convictions to the Fifth Circuit, asserting, among other arguments, that §§ 959 and 963 were unconstitutional and that the laws were not applicable because none of the smugglers’ actions occurred inside the United States and no drugs crossed the border. The appellate court addressed and dismissed the smugglers’ other arguments and found that §§ 959 and 963 were constitutional under Congress’s Commerce Clause power and international-treaty terms. The court then addressed whether §§ 959 and 963 could be applied extraterritorially.