Just need help rewording this case

Gonzales v Raich

Material Facts:In 2005 medical marijuana users saw their dreams go up in smoke when the United States Supreme Court. California and nine other states authorized a case, the Compassionate Use Act, enable cannabis for healing use.In 1970 Congress enacted the federal controlled substances act which bands the cultivation and use of marijuana 26 years later in 1996 a law that allowed its citizens to cultivate and use marijuana for medical purposes.Angel Raich and Diane MonsonIn Addition, the federal Drug Enforcement Agency ruinedand collected all herd (weed) parallel from the Controller Substances Act. Finally, the prosecutor produced medical marijuana and has been prosecuted by the federalorganization.

Issue:Does the federal Controlled Substance trump the state instituted Compassionate Use Act?

Majority Rules: Yes

Majority Rationale:

1. Law:Article 1 Section 8 by which the Commerce Clause originates, allows Congress "to make all Laws necessary and proper for carrying into Execution" its authority to "regulate Commerce [...] among the several States." More local economies might influence the interstate economy. The primary purpose of the CSA is to "control the supply and demand of controlled substance in both lawful and unlawful drug markets.

2. Jurisprudence: Living document--The Commerce Clause has been interpreted to instances of influence instead of being actual interstate issues themselves.

3. Precedent:Wickard v.Filburn (the homegrown wheat would affect interstate commerce)

Dissenting Holding: No

Dissenting Rationale:

1. Law:Article 1, Section 8 does not allow Congress to delve into intrastate economies. The broad interpretation of economies and commerce allows Congress to be very controlling.

2. Jurisprudence:Original intent and strict constitution--the states were meant to experiment and "try novel social and economic experiments." By extending Congress' reach to intrastate development by broadening the definition of the economy and counting in their influence, Congress is allowed to regulate intrastate activity without check.

3. Precedents: United States v. Lopez (gun-control is not commerce, therefore Congress has no ability); United States v.Morrison