|
''Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal'', , 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. == Background == In 1999, U. S. Customs 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. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|