First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
 
Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (doc. #: 04-1084)  [Findlaw]

Secondary Link Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal
Argument Date 11/01/2005
Decided 2/21/2006
Supreme Court Vote 8-0
Supreme Court Ruling Religious claim sustained under Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
 
IssueWhether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 requires the government to permit the importation, distribution, possession, and use of a Schedule I hallucinogenic controlled substance, where Congress has found that the substance has a high potential for abuse, it is unsafe for use even under medical supervision, and its importation and distribution would violate an international treaty.
 
Case Summary & Additional Resources
Majority Opinion Roberts, C.J.
Certiorari Granted 04/18/2005
Lower Court 10th Circuit
Lower Court Ruling Religious claim sustained under Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Lawyers
For Petitioner
Paul Clement (Solicitor General)

For Respondent
Nancy Hollander

Briefs
For Petitioner
Appendix

Paul D. Clement, Certiorari Petition (Solicitor General)

Paul D. Clement, Reply Brief (Solicitor General)

For Respondent
Brief for Respondents

Brief in opposition to granting Certiorari

Motion to Strike Improper Portions of the Government's Brief

Reply brief in support of its motion to strike

For Amicus
Anthony R. Picarello on behalf of Becket Fund for Religious Liberty (supporting Respondents)

David T. Goldberg on behalf of Council on Spiritual Practices, et al (supporting Respondents)

Douglas Laycock (supporting Respondents)

Gene C. Schaerr, on behlaf of Baptist Joint Committee, The National Association of Evangelicals, et al (supporting Respondents)

Kelly Shackelford on behalf of the Liberty Legal Institute (supporting Respondents)

Lee Boothby on behalf of International Academy for Freedom of Religion & Belief (supporting Respondents)

Mark Chopko on behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (supporting Respondents)

Peter D. Kennedy on behalf of Robert Gable, Ph.D., et al (supporting Respondents)

Roy S. Haber on behalf of John H. Halpern, et al (supporting Respondents)

Tony Mauro Analysis
"Religious liberty gets boost in hallucinogenic tea case" (2/22/06)

"Justices take issue with ban of religious tea" (11-02-05)

Opinion - Lower Court
For Petitioner
O Centro Espirita v. Ashcroft (10th Cir., 2004, en banc)

News
AP, "High court backs church in dispute over hallucinogenic tea" (2/21/06)

AP, "Justices to consider church's use of hallucinogenic tea" (04-18-2005)

Lucas, Marya "High Court Asked to End Religious Teatime," Legal Times, April 14, 2005

 SEARCH MORE
About this site
About the First Amendment
About the First Amendment Center
Video/RSS/podcasts
First Amendment programs
State of the First Amendment
reports

First Reports
Supreme Court
Experts
Columnists
First Amendment publications
First Amendment Center history
Glossary
Freedom Sings™
Events
First Amendment
Schools

Congressional Research Service reports
Guest editorials
FOI material
The First Amendment
Library

Lesson plans
freedomforum.org
Newseum
Contact us
Privacy statement
Related links

 

 

 

 

 


This is from Cache data array: 20:25:40