Gonzales vs. Raich is a case that has been granted, argued, and decided. This case appeared during the years of 2004 to 2005. During 1996 there was a voting due to the Compassionate use act and legalizing marijuana for any medical use.
People wanted or needed marijuana for a medical use it was legal until something happened. Marijuana was banned because of the conflict between California’s Laws and Federal Controlled Substances. Drug Enforcement Administration and U.S attorney General John Ashcroft in federal district court got sued by the medical marijuana users.
The decision that has been made by the court is that, it may be turn into something illegal by the production of and uses of the homegrown marijuana. As the use of marijuana, the FCSA outlawed the use of medical marijuana. Although, the court did rule that these home grown marijuana is ruining the national economic markets.
6-3 was in favor of Gonzales and so Gonzales has won the case due to the use of medical marijuana. This case is important because this case is one of the cases where a special decision had to be thought about. The decision on this case helped back then and now because now, public health is even more looked at.
Atkins vs. Virginia Atkins vs. Virginia is a case that has been granted, decided, and argued.This case appearedduring the year of 2002.
Atkins vs. Virginia is a case about a guy named Daryl Renard Atkins who was convicted with an amount of crimes like abduction, armed robbery, and capital murder. During Atkin’s penalty trial in other words sentencing phase, According to the case on oyez.com, the defense that was part of the trial only depended on one witness which was the forensic psychologist who was the one that testified Atkins saying that Atkins was mentally ill, disabled, and retarded. Atkins was almost sentenced to death by the jury but the Virginia Supreme Court asked and ordered for a second sentencing hearing. The real question is according to the case of Atkins vs.
Virginia on oyez.com, Is the execution of mentally retarded persons “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment? The US Supreme Court decided that executing people who are mentally retarded violates the Eighth Amendment on cruel and unusual punishments. Even though it did violate the Eighth Amendment, the states can always check and suspect who is mentally retarded. The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 and a number of states also mentioned that death is not the proper and correct answer for punishment for people who mentally ill, disabled, and retarded. The impact on this case is that if there is a case that is similar or exactly like this again, the court or jury would not just go and make it sentence to death when specifically someone is mentally ill, disabled, and retarded. This case was important because it teaches lesson and it would not happen again, this helps now because nobody would be sentenced to death who have been convicted and mentally retarded.