Abstract
This paper discusses the Controlled Substance Act and how it should be modified to reflect the decriminalization of marijuana.

From the Paper
"Drug Abuse and Control: This statute identifies the penalties associated with possession of ... kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marijuana or or more marijuana plants regardless of weight. Revoking this law would have some significant effects among which reducing the stigmatization of marijuana users and distributers or growers eliminating..."

Tags:Controlled Substance Act, marijuana

Abstract
The paper describes the case where the defendant, Angel Raich, sued the Attorney General for declaratory and injunctive relief, on the belief that the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 was unconstitutional. The paper summarizes the facts of the case and the legal issues involved. The paper provides an argument that the defendant clearly violated the law, regardless of the necessity defense, and Constitutional rights were not breached or encroached upon when the Government was only doing its job of enforcing the law.

Outline:
Procedural History
Facts of Case
Summary of Argument
Argument
Conclusion

From the Paper
"Marijuana has been outlawed in the United States of America since 1970, with the passing of the Controlled Substances Act. Marijuana and all other types of controlled substances consumed by society were subject to classification, into 5 separate "schedules" with Schedule V containing the controlled substances less likely to be abused and the reverse for Schedule I, where marijuana is classified. Specifically, marijuana is deemed a Schedule I controlled substance because it is found to 1) "have a high potential for abuse"; 2) that the substance "has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States"; and 3) "there is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision." What should be focused on in this provision is, again, that there is NO currently accepted medical use in the United States. While Ms. Raich will argue that this practice of using marijuana was suggested by her own physician, we must not confuse one doctor's firm belief for the otherwise contradictory beliefs of other doctors, who have not pushed to make medical marijuana approved as a reliable medicinal option. She is therefore, breaking the law, a federal law at that."

Tags:necessity, defense, marijuana, Drug, Enforcement, Agency

Abstract
This paper describes many of the laws enacted by the U.S. Congress for the preservation and protection of marine life. The paper explains which federal body has the authority to enforce the laws, the penalty for violating the laws, and takes a look at some of the laws passed in direct response to the accidental wreck of the Exxon Valdez in 1989. The paper also discusses some of the recycling efforts currently underway and how these efforts are helping to protect the environment.

From the Paper
"The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships signed a Protocol, called the MARPOL Protocol, on February 17, 1978 to control and prevent marine pollution from ships, oil tankers in particular (US Congress). It forbids the disposing of any kind of plastic materials, including synthetic ropes and fishing nets, garbage bags, floatable lining and packing materials and other garbage, into the sea.
The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS) was signed (US Congress) on October 21, 1980 and amended in 1987, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1993 and 1996. Renamed into the Marine Pollution and Research Control Act of 1987 when amended, it requires ships in US waters to comply with the Protocol of the Convention and the Annex IV of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996 (US Congress)."

Tags:environment, ecosystems, nature, reserve, prohibts, noxious, substances, wastes, sea

Abstract
The paper describes the case where Monson and Raich filed suit against Attorney General John Ashcroft for a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The paper outlines the background and facts of the case and explains the four grounds that provides a defense for the appellee. The paper focuses on two issues; the fact that the CSA mangles the interstate commerce clause, and that enforcement of the CSA encroaches on powers delegated to the states alone. The paper details the argument and reaches the conclusion that it would be against the spirit of experiment and against the constitutional freedom of the state to attempt to violate or supersede California's marijuana legislation.

Outline:
Procedural History
Facts of Case
Summary of Argument
Argument
Conclusion

From the Paper
"In article I section VIII, Clause III of the constitution we find the Commerce Clause, which states that congress is empowered "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes" (2). Precedence is readily available supporting the contention that the CSA cannot be used to regulate the intra-state and non-commercial activity of California's medical marijuana users without distorting aforementioned Clause. For instance, in Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, the court ruled that a small harvest for personal use did not fall under the powers provided by the Commerce Clause. Let's consider why this is the case. First, the word "commerce" implies commercial activity. This is pretty much self-evident--one need not be a linguist to see the immediate etymological kinship. Not only is the marijuana in question not being sold, bought, or used as a monetary placeholder--in other words not only is this marijuana wholly non-commercial in nature--it isn't in any sense interstate. "Among the states" makes clear the intention of our founders to delimit federal power specifically to the regulation of commercial activity BETWEEN states--where indeed only a federal government could ably act as a mediatory force. However in the case before us there is no indication whatever that Raich and Monson, in seeking to treat their personal medical ailments within their own Californian domiciles, were engaged in anything, directly or indirectly, of an interstate nature."

Tags:Controlled, Substances, Act, interstate, commerce, clause, California

Abstract
The ban on marijuana in the United States began in 1937 with the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act and continued under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. The latter delivered a huge blow to the medical field as marijuana was prohibited for medical usage. This paper argues that the legalization and decriminalization of marijuana will help the United States financially and medically, as well as help provide a cleaner environment and more efficient products.

From the Paper
"Marijuana helps relieve nausea, vomiting and stimulate appetites for patients dealing with AIDS and cancer. A research at the Medical School at Harvard published research in the New England Journal of Medicine that cannabis is the most efficient anti-nausea medicine available (ctd. in Goddard). Marijuana has also been shown to help control both the spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis and spinal cord injuries, as well as seizures from seizure disorders."

Tags:Controlled, Substance, cannabis, hemp

Abstract
This paper reviews the case of Gonzales v. Oregon in which the question is posed whether the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq., and its implementing regulations authorize Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to prohibit the distribution of federally controlled substances for the purpose of facilitating an individual's suicide, regardless of state law allowing such distribution.

Outline:
Title of Case
Case Number
Citations
Question
Holding
Facts
Majority Reasoning
Dissenting Opinion
Critique

From the Paper
"The majority decision seems to be more of a "political rebuke" to the Bush administration's aggressive use of the executive power rather than being based on strictly legal consideration. As pointed out by Justice Thomas in his dissenting opinion, the Court has disregarded its own precedent of "Gonzales v. Raich" in which the Supreme Court ruled by 6-3 that the federal government is entitled to enforce the CSA's ban of the use of marijuana, even though the state of California permits the drug to be possessed legally for medicinal purposes, and the marijuana use in question was for medical use (Smith) Moreover, the majority opinion in "Raich" also cited the Constitution's Supremacy Clause as "unambiguously" providing "that if there is any conflict between federal and state law, federal law shall prevail." (Quoted by Smith) This principle of the US Constitution was also surprisingly disregarded in "Oregon." The decision in "Gonzales v Oregon" in favor of physician-assisted suicide could also prove to be the start of the slide down the "slippery slope" and gradually extend the scope of physician-assisted suicides beyond just the terminally ill to others such as the disabled. (Grossman and Nicholls) The Court does not seem to have considered the moral dimensions of the issue in its decision."

Tags:medical, practice, physicians, Constitution, assisted, suicide

Abstract
Deviance is created by moral entrepreneurs through the act of labeling. Groups that target those who use or deal in drugs have made scapegoats of this population as responsible for a number of social ills. This keeps some groups oppressed and their actions begin to be defined as deviant. Moral entrepreneurs have traditionally been middle-class, non-urban dwellers who feel threatened by the working class or the group that is involved more frequently in what is labeled deviant behavior. This labeling and oppression allows moral entrepreneurs to gain and maintain power (Reinarman 140). For instance, this was evident in the war on drugs, which began over a century ago in 1875. Chinese immigrants in San Francisco used opium and maintained opium dens. The use of the substance was considered a "Mongolian vice" and labeled deviant by the Caucasian majority (141). This has also been seen in the effort to outlaw certain video games that some claim cause violence (Sternheimer 13). This developed due to the moral entrepreneur's fear of youth, new computer technology, and the increasing inability to control young people.

From the Paper
Yelip Kwon Name of Professor Name of Course March 11, 2009 Sociology Question 1: Deviance is created by moral entrepreneurs through the act of labeling. Groups that target those who use or deal in drugs have made scapegoats of this population as responsible for a number of social ills. This keeps some groups oppressed and their actions begin to be defined as deviant. Moral entrepreneurs have traditionally been middle-class,

Tags:sociology, deviance, culture

Abstract
The analysis uses the moral principles of beneficence, autonomy, and justice to argue that rehabilitation is a more ethical and moral approach to resolving addiction in society than harsh criminal sanctions as a means of control.

From the Paper
'The creation of a national approach to drug policy has become as much of a controversy as drugs themselves. There is no doubt that the illicit use of controlled substances in the United States represents a significant problem and cause for concern. Drug abuse permeates all layers of American society, cutting across income, age, gender, educational, racial and class barriers. (Nicholson) Because of significant increases in the sale, possession and use of drugs in the U.S., a wave of harsher punishment through legislation..."

Tags:alcohol, drugs, Hughes Act, crime, prison, treatment, substance abuse, prohibition, decriminalization, neurons, relapse

Abstract
A written analysis of the case of "Gonzales vs. Oregon", which is currently being debated at the Supreme Court level. This case stems from the 1994 passage of the Death with Dignity Act, which allows terminally ill and mentally competent individuals to obtain drugs that could be utilized in the state of Oregon. The current debate questions administrative law and whether the former Attorney General John Ashcroft's interpretation of the Federal Control Substance Act to outlaw these drugs is valid and if the Justice Department is overstepping its boundaries.

From the Paper
"Oregon voters approved the legalization of physician assisted suicide (PAS) in November, 1994. After being legally challenged the Oregon PAS law became effective in the latter part of 1987. Since 1998 and through 2004 there have been a total of 208 PAS deaths in the State of Oregon. There are existing concerns with the legalization of physician-assisted suicide and there has been a great debate about the legality and morality of this practice. All levels of American society look harshly upon the thought of the use of drugs or other means to hasten the death of someone even though they may be in excruciating terminal pain however, healthcare modernization has changed the very "character of death and dying." (Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, 2005) The case of Gonzales v. Oregon has arisen out of the debate which is one that is morally charged in nature as well as being the focus of lawsuits in relation to end-of-life decisions. However, this case has been subject to technical legalities and statutory interpretation."

Tags:u.s., supreme, court, assisted, suicide, immunity, controlled, substances, act, death, with, dignity, act, reno, thomas, constantine, ashcroft, directive

Abstract
This paper traces the 73 year long war against the legalization of marijuana in the U.S.A and proposes that the legalization and taxation of marijuana will make a profound contribution to the betterment of the country.

Table of Contents:
Introduction
Marijuana Tax Act of 1937
Controlled Substance Act
Crime Reduction
Prohibition Costs
Tax Revenue
Waste of Criminal Justice Resources
Comparison with Amsterdam's Drug laws
Conclusion
Works Cited

From the Paper
"In 1937, the U.S. Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act, which made the possession or transfer of marijuana illegal in the United States. According to FindLaw, a resource for legal research, marijuana used for medical and industrial purposes were exempt from this statute. But, if medical doctors and industrialists wanted to use marijuana for their business, they would have to pay a heavy tax on marijuana. FindLaw went on to state that in 1969, Timothy Leary, an activist and professor took the United States to court on the basis that the Marijuana Tax Act violated the 5th amendment's clause of self incrimination. The Supreme Court unanimously agreed with Leary and declared the Marijuana Tax to be unconstitutional. A short time later, Congress passed the Controlled Substance Act. The Controlled Substance Act, a component of Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 was a federal statute that banned the possession, importation, use and distribution of drug substances. According to the Drug Enforcement Agency, "The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) places all substances which were in some manner regulated under existing federal law into one of five schedules. This placement is based upon the substance's medical use, potential for abuse, and safety or dependence liability." The level of severity is based on numerical order, starting with schedule one being the most detrimental to society."

Tags:tax, taxpayers, legalized, illegal, drug, laws, american