Digital Commons Network^™

Mental Disability And The Executive: A Comparative Analysis Of The Separation Of Powers, Zachary Nelson

Lewis & Clark Law Review

The doctrine of Separation of Powers is integral to the United States’ constitutional system. To prevent tyranny, governmental power must be separated to ensure that no government institution nor official gains too much power. The U.S. Constitution was drafted with this central concern in mind. To achieve successful separation of powers, constitutions must make clear—or at least discernible—the boundaries and scope of each power. One of the most significant areas in which this clarity is required is in the election, maintenance, and removal of the country’s executive leadership.

For over 175 years, the U.S. Constitution lacked a procedure for removing …

A Hybrid Approach To Marijuana Federalism, Susan F. Mandiberg

Lewis & Clark Law Review

With the evident indulgence of the United States Department of Justice, states are jumping on the bandwagon of legalizing medicinal and recreational marijuana even though marijuana use is criminalized under the Federal Controlled Substances Act. The possibility that the federal government will at some point decriminalize marijuana use poses a challenge for the construction of a regulatory framework. In short, how should the states and the federal government divide regulatory responsibilities?

There has been significant academic discussion about possible regulatory frameworks to address this issue. Drawing upon existing federalism schemes in the environmental and natural resource area, this Article reviews …

Beyond Cannabis: Psychedelic Decriminalization And Social Justice, Dustin Marlan

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Psychedelics are powerful psychoactive substances that alter consciousness and brain function. Like cannabis, psychedelics have long been considered prohibited Schedule I substances under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. However, via the powerful psychological experiences they induce, psychedelics are now being shown to be viable therapeutic alternatives in treating depression, substance use disorders, and other mental illnesses, and even to enhance the wellbeing of healthy individuals.

In May 2019, Denver, Colorado became the first city in the country to decriminalize psilocybin (the active compound in “magic mushrooms”)—a potential major shift in the War on Drugs. Ballot initiatives for the decriminalization …

Cannabis And Insurance, Francis J. Mootz Iii, Jason Horst

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Although many states have decriminalized or legalized cannabis, it remains a Schedule 1 drug under the federal Controlled Substances Act. The conflict between federal and state law presents many complicated issues, including problems relating to insurance coverage. Insurance law seeks to balance competing policy interests. On one hand, public policy supports reading insurance policies broadly to indemnify policyholders for their losses. On the other hand, public policy counsels against permitting insurance to indemnify (federally) illegal activity. In this Article, we explore some pressing issues arising from the conflict between these policy considerations and offer some analysis of the conflict in …

Reefer Madness In Federal Court: An Overview Of How Federal Courts Are Dealing With Cannabis Litigation And Why It Is Necessary To “Dig Into The Weeds”, Blake Marvis

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Litigation stemming from the state-legal cannabis industry has presented many unique questions for federal courts to grapple with. Can federal courts provide equitable relief to state-legal cannabis litigants, despite being in violation of federal law? Can workers in the state-legal cannabis industry sue their employers to recover required minimum wage under federal statutes? Is a contract that is made in a state-legal cannabis market automatically void? This Comment examines the precarious nature of state-legal cannabis litigation in federal courts through a dissection of how litigation has progressed. It also examines the framing of the arguments made in cannabis disputes. Although …

If It Looks Like A Duck: Equal Protection, Selective Prosecution, And Geographic Differences In The Federal Prosecution Of Marijuana Crimes Under The Controlled Substances Act, Zachary Nelson

Lewis & Clark Law Review

State legalization of marijuana for medical purposes has skyrocketed since California first authorized medical marijuana in 1996. Today, citizens in 33 states can use marijuana for medical purposes. While each state maintains distinct regulatory systems and eligibility requirements, the core result of these state medical marijuana programs is that citizens in 33 states can lawfully possess and use marijuana. Yet federal law makes any use of marijuana illegal under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Through the Supremacy Clause, this illegality is controlling and preemptive in every state; that is, even if a state makes marijuana legal for certain purposes, an …

Cannabis Law, The Constitution, And The Aba Model Rules, Hayley Hollis

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Though a growing number of states have legalized recreational or medical cannabis use, cannabis is still categorized as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act, and its use, possession, and cultivation are federal offenses. This conflict between state and federal law creates a unique challenge for the legal community. Unless states with legalized cannabis programs have amended their state rules of professional conduct or provided advisory opinions on the matter, local attorneys assume a great deal of risk when representing clients within the cannabis industry.

To further complicate matters, what happens when a lawyer, who is licensed to …