Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União do Vegetal
Encyclopedia
Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418
(2006), is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court
involving the Federal Government's seizure of a sacramental tea, containing a Schedule I
substance, from a New Mexican
branch of the Brazilian church União do Vegetal
(UDV). The church sued, claiming the seizure was illegal, and sought to ensure future importation of the tea for religious use. The United States District Court
for New Mexico
agreed and issued a preliminary injunction under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
(RFRA), . The Government appealed to the Appeals Court for the Tenth Circuit
which upheld the previous ruling, which was then appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments November 1, 2005, and issued its opinion February 21, 2006, finding that the Government failed to meet its burden under RFRA that barring the substance served a compelling government interest. The court also disagreed with the government's central argument that the uniform application of the Controlled Substances Act
(CSA) does not allow for exceptions for the substance in this case, as Native Americans
are given exceptions to use peyote
, another Schedule I substance.
agents seized over 30 gallons of hoasca (ayahuasca
) tea which was shipped to the Santa Fe, New Mexico
branch of the Brazil
-based UDV; ayahuasca contains dimethyltryptamine
, a Schedule I substance. While no charges were filed, the United States chapter, led by Seagram
heir Jeffrey Bronfman, filed suit claiming that the seizure was an illegal violation of the church members' rights; they claimed their usage was permitted under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law passed by Congress in direct response to the Employment Division v. Smith
(1990) ruling, in which the Court ruled that unemployment benefits could be denied to two Native Americans fired for using Peyote
.
In filing suit, the UDV sought a preliminary injunction
preventing the federal government from barring their usage of hoasca; the New Mexico
district court ruled in favor of the UDV; on appeal by the government, the Tenth Circuit Appeals Court
upheld the previous ruling, which was then appealed to the Supreme Court.
As it worked its way through the appellate courts, the Supreme Court lifted a stay in December 2004 thereby permitting the church to use hoasca for their Christmas services.
took no part in the consideration or decision of the case as he was not on the Court when the case was argued. The Court found that the government was unable to detail the State's compelling interest in barring religious usage of Hoasca under the strict scrutiny
that the RFRA demands of such regulations.
Disagreeing with the District Court, the Supreme Court found that Hoasca is covered under the 1971 United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances
, which is implemented by the Controlled Substance Act. However, because the government had failed to submit any evidence on the international consequences of granting an exemption to CSA enforcement allowing UDV to practice its religion, the Court ruled that it had failed to meet its burden on this point. The Supreme Court ruled that the government failed to demonstrate a compelling interest in applying the Controlled Substances Act to the UDV’s sacramental use of the tea.
The ruling upheld a preliminary injunction allowing the church to use the tea pending a lower court trial on a permanent injunction, during which the government will have the opportunity to present further evidence consistent with the Supreme Court's ruling.
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
(2006), is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
involving the Federal Government's seizure of a sacramental tea, containing a Schedule I
Controlled Substances Act
The Controlled Substances Act was enacted into law by the Congress of the United States as Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. The CSA is the federal U.S. drug policy under which the manufacture, importation, possession, use and distribution of certain...
substance, from a New Mexican
New Mexico
New Mexico is a state located in the southwest and western regions of the United States. New Mexico is also usually considered one of the Mountain States. With a population density of 16 per square mile, New Mexico is the sixth-most sparsely inhabited U.S...
branch of the Brazilian church União do Vegetal
União do Vegetal
União do Vegetal is a Christian religion based on the use of Hoasca in a program of spiritual evolution based on mental concentration and the search for self-knowledge...
(UDV). The church sued, claiming the seizure was illegal, and sought to ensure future importation of the tea for religious use. The United States District Court
United States district court
The United States district courts are the general trial courts of the United States federal court system. Both civil and criminal cases are filed in the district court, which is a court of law, equity, and admiralty. There is a United States bankruptcy court associated with each United States...
for New Mexico
New Mexico
New Mexico is a state located in the southwest and western regions of the United States. New Mexico is also usually considered one of the Mountain States. With a population density of 16 per square mile, New Mexico is the sixth-most sparsely inhabited U.S...
agreed and issued a preliminary injunction under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-141, 107 Stat. 1488 , codified at through , is a 1993 United States federal law aimed at preventing laws that substantially burden a person's free exercise of their religion. The bill was introduced by Howard McKeon of California and...
(RFRA), . The Government appealed to the Appeals Court for the Tenth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:* District of Colorado* District of Kansas...
which upheld the previous ruling, which was then appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments November 1, 2005, and issued its opinion February 21, 2006, finding that the Government failed to meet its burden under RFRA that barring the substance served a compelling government interest. The court also disagreed with the government's central argument that the uniform application of the Controlled Substances Act
Controlled Substances Act
The Controlled Substances Act was enacted into law by the Congress of the United States as Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. The CSA is the federal U.S. drug policy under which the manufacture, importation, possession, use and distribution of certain...
(CSA) does not allow for exceptions for the substance in this case, as Native Americans
Native Americans in the United States
Native Americans in the United States are the indigenous peoples in North America within the boundaries of the present-day continental United States, parts of Alaska, and the island state of Hawaii. They are composed of numerous, distinct tribes, states, and ethnic groups, many of which survive as...
are given exceptions to use peyote
Peyote
Lophophora williamsii , better known by its common name Peyote , is a small, spineless cactus with psychoactive alkaloids, particularly mescaline.It is native to southwestern Texas and Mexico...
, another Schedule I substance.
Background of the case
In 1999, U. S. CustomsUnited States Customs Service
Until March 2003, the United States Customs Service was an agency of the U.S. federal government that collected import tariffs and performed other selected border security duties.Before it was rolled into form part of the U.S...
agents seized over 30 gallons of hoasca (ayahuasca
Ayahuasca
Ayahuasca is any of various psychoactive infusions or decoctions prepared from the Banisteriopsis spp. vine, usually mixed with the leaves of dimethyltryptamine-containing species of shrubs from the Psychotria genus...
) tea which was shipped to the Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe is the capital of the U.S. state of New Mexico. It is the fourth-largest city in the state and is the seat of . Santa Fe had a population of 67,947 in the 2010 census...
branch of the Brazil
Brazil
Brazil , officially the Federative Republic of Brazil , is the largest country in South America. It is the world's fifth largest country, both by geographical area and by population with over 192 million people...
-based UDV; ayahuasca contains dimethyltryptamine
Dimethyltryptamine
N,N-Dimethyltryptamine is a naturally occurring psychedelic compound of the tryptamine family. DMT is found in several plants, and also in trace amounts in humans and other mammals, where it is originally derived from the essential amino acid tryptophan, and ultimately produced by the enzyme INMT...
, a Schedule I substance. While no charges were filed, the United States chapter, led by Seagram
Seagram
The Seagram Company Ltd. was a large corporation headquartered in Montreal, Quebec, Canada that was the largest distiller of alcoholic beverages in the world. Toward the end of its independent existence it also controlled various entertainment and other business ventures...
heir Jeffrey Bronfman, filed suit claiming that the seizure was an illegal violation of the church members' rights; they claimed their usage was permitted under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law passed by Congress in direct response to the Employment Division v. Smith
Employment Division v. Smith
Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 , is a United States Supreme Court case that determined that the state could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote, even though the use of the drug was...
(1990) ruling, in which the Court ruled that unemployment benefits could be denied to two Native Americans fired for using Peyote
Peyote
Lophophora williamsii , better known by its common name Peyote , is a small, spineless cactus with psychoactive alkaloids, particularly mescaline.It is native to southwestern Texas and Mexico...
.
In filing suit, the UDV sought a preliminary injunction
Preliminary injunction
A preliminary injunction, in equity, is an injunction entered by a court prior to a final determination of the merits of a legal case, in order to restrain a party from going forward with a course of conduct or compelling a party to continue with a course of conduct until the case has been decided...
preventing the federal government from barring their usage of hoasca; the New Mexico
New Mexico
New Mexico is a state located in the southwest and western regions of the United States. New Mexico is also usually considered one of the Mountain States. With a population density of 16 per square mile, New Mexico is the sixth-most sparsely inhabited U.S...
district court ruled in favor of the UDV; on appeal by the government, the Tenth Circuit Appeals Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:* District of Colorado* District of Kansas...
upheld the previous ruling, which was then appealed to the Supreme Court.
As it worked its way through the appellate courts, the Supreme Court lifted a stay in December 2004 thereby permitting the church to use hoasca for their Christmas services.
The court's decision
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for a unanimous Court of eight justices. Newly confirmed Justice Samuel AlitoSamuel Alito
Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. is an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He was nominated by President George W. Bush and has served on the court since January 31, 2006....
took no part in the consideration or decision of the case as he was not on the Court when the case was argued. The Court found that the government was unable to detail the State's compelling interest in barring religious usage of Hoasca under the strict scrutiny
Strict scrutiny
Strict scrutiny is the most stringent standard of judicial review used by United States courts. It is part of the hierarchy of standards that courts use to weigh the government's interest against a constitutional right or principle. The lesser standards are rational basis review and exacting or...
that the RFRA demands of such regulations.
Disagreeing with the District Court, the Supreme Court found that Hoasca is covered under the 1971 United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances
Convention on Psychotropic Substances
The Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971 is a United Nations treaty designed to control psychoactive drugs such as amphetamines, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, and psychedelics signed at Vienna on February 21, 1971...
, which is implemented by the Controlled Substance Act. However, because the government had failed to submit any evidence on the international consequences of granting an exemption to CSA enforcement allowing UDV to practice its religion, the Court ruled that it had failed to meet its burden on this point. The Supreme Court ruled that the government failed to demonstrate a compelling interest in applying the Controlled Substances Act to the UDV’s sacramental use of the tea.
The ruling upheld a preliminary injunction allowing the church to use the tea pending a lower court trial on a permanent injunction, during which the government will have the opportunity to present further evidence consistent with the Supreme Court's ruling.
Impact on states
The ruling is not binding on states. The Act was amended in 2003 to only include the federal government and its entities, such as Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. A number of states have passed so-called mini-RFRAs, applying the rule to the laws of their own state, but the Smith case remains the authority in these matters in many states.See also
External links
- Text of case from FindLaw http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=04-1084
Court documents
- District Court memorandum opinion and order (February 2002)
- District Court memorandum opinion and order (November 2002)
- 10th Circuit opinion (2002) – Emergency motion for stay pending appeal
- 10th Circuit opinion (2003) – Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico
- 10th Circuit opinion (2004) – On rehearing en banc: Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico
- Supreme Court opinion (2006) (PDF)