BOSTON, May 27 [Reuters] - A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday rejected arguments by several Massachusetts cannabis businesses that the federal prohibition on marijuana could no longer be deemed constitutional, as the U.S. Supreme Court held two decades ago.
The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, opens new tab that changes in how marijuana is regulated and sold in the decades since the Supreme Court upheld the law in 2005 did not mean the federal ban was no longer constitutional.
Lawyers for the cannabis businesses including prominent litigator David Boies had argued that Congress has abandoned its goal of controlling all marijuana in interstate commerce, which they said was a key predicate of the Supreme Court's holding.
In that case, Gonzales v. Raich, the high court held that under the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause, Congress had the authority to criminalize the possession and use of marijuana even in states that permit its use for medical purposes as it did in the Controlled Substances Act.
Today, 38 states, including Massachusetts, have legalized marijuana for medical or recreational use, and under the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendments that have been included in annual appropriation bills since 2014, the Justice Department may not spend funds to interfere with state medical marijuana laws.
The lawsuit was filed in 2023 by Massachusetts retailer Canna Provisions, marijuana delivery business owner Gyasi Sellers, grower Wiseacre Farm and publicly traded multistate operator Verano Holdings (VRNO.NLB), opens new tab.
U.S. District Judge Mark Mastroianni, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, last year rejected their arguments, saying only the U.S. Supreme Court could overturn its 2005 ruling upholding the law.
The plaintiffs say that holding has been undercut by subsequent developments. In 2021, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the 2005 ruling's reasoning may no longer apply and that the ban "may no longer be necessary or proper", in response to the court's decision not to hear a different case.
