In the days immediately following September 11, 2001, as the world was riveted by the issue of terrorism, the federal Drug Enforcement Administration turned its sights on a nonviolent group of seriously ill Americans, as it stepped up the level of time, money, and Federal law enforcement personnel used to attack medical cannabis patients.  Multiple raids on the homes and gardens of California’s medical cannabis caregivers and patients soon followed.  The DEA raids became ever more outrageous and more harmful to patients. Angel Wings Patient OutReach, Inc. worked hard to develop a sound legal strategy to help ensure patients’ and caregivers’ safety and to create new public policies on the federal level.  Our legal team felt we had to do everything we could to stop the federal government's dangerous actions.

Angel Wings Patient OutReach, Inc. retained attorneys Randy Barnett and Joshua Greenberg who agreed to bring forth the historic lawsuit of first impression, Raich, et al. v. Ashcroft, et al.  The lawsuit was filed on October 9, 2002, by patient-activist Angel McClary Raich and Angel's two anonymous caregiver growers.  It charged then-Attorney General John Ashcroft and DEA Administrator Karen Tandy with violating constitutional rights under the Commerce Clause, the Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments, and medical necessity.   Angel Raich, a medical necessity patient with life-threatening illnesses, is asserting her right to fight for her own life.

The plaintiffs asked Judge Martin J. Jenkins to issue a Preliminary Injunction during the pendency of the action, enjoining the defendants from arresting or prosecuting the plaintiffs, seizing their medical cannabis, forfeiting their property, or seeking civil or administrative sanctions against them for their activities with respect to any of the following: (1) the possession of medical cannabis by plaintiff Angel McClary Raich for her personal medical use; (2) the ability of Angel Raich to obtain medical cannabis from her caregivers, John Doe Numbers One and Two, for her personal medical use; (3) the ability of John Doe Numbers One and Two to cultivate and provide medical cannabis to Angel Raich for her personal medical use; and (4) the processing of medical cannabis by Angel Raich for her personal medical use.  

According to the Complaint, the federal Justice Department and the DEA were unconstitutionally exceeding their authority by embarking on a campaign of seizing and forfeiting privately-grown intrastate medical cannabis from California patients and caregivers, arresting or prosecuting them, mounting paramilitary raids against them, harassing them, and taking other civil or administrative actions against them.   

On March 5, 2003, the District Court denied the preliminary injunction, despite finding that "the equitable factors tip in plaintiffs’ favor."  The plaintiffs appealed the denial of their motion for preliminary injunction. 

In the first proceeding in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, amicus curiae briefs were filed by the following amici: The State of California along with Alameda County, the City of Oakland, and Butte County; the California Medical Association along with the California Nurses Association; and Marijuana Policy Project along with Rick Doblin, Ph.D. and Ethan Russo, M.D. 

On December 16, 2003, the Court of Appeals reversed the District Court, holding that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their Commerce Clause argument, and thus determining that it was unnecessary to address the remaining arguments.  

On April 20, 2004, the Attorney General  and DEA Administrator filed a Petition for Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court.  Once the federal government filed its Petition for Certiorari the name of the case was changed from Raich v. Ashcroft to Ashcroft v. Raich.  Ashcroft became the Petitioner and Raich became the Respondent.  The Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari on June 28, 2004.  Briefing and oral argument followed. 

On June 6, 2005, in a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court reversed, holding that the “CSA is a valid exercise of federal power, even as applied to the troubling facts of this case,” and remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for disposition of the numerous other issues raised by the plaintiffs.  The name of the case changed to Gonzales v. Raich to reflect the appointment of a new attorney general. 

In the Court of Appeals, on remand from the Supreme Court, briefs have been filed by the parties and by several amici curiae.  Oral arguments are scheduled for March 27, 2006.  

We remain optimistic of ultimate victory in this case.  Our immediate goal is to win again in the Court of Appeals.  If necessary, we will again defend that ruling in the Supreme Court.  This case could signal a dawning of a new day for rational and compassionate policy making. 

We are facing a monumental court battle of national significance.  This is a landmark, precedent-setting case, so it is important that the precedents it creates be positive for the medical cannabis movement. 

Raich v. Gonzales is funded in part by Angel Wings Patient Outreach, Inc.,a nonprofit organization that is an advocate for the civil rights, human rights, and disability rights of medical patients, their caregivers, and their physicians. 

If you would like to make a donation to help combat the unfair persecution of medical cannabis patients, please mail your tax-deductible contribution to: Angel Wings Patient OutReach, Inc. 4100 Redwood Road, #365, Oakland, California  94619-2363. 

Contact the Angel Raich and

    her attorneys: