GONZALES V. O CENTRO ESPIRITA BENEFICENTE UNIAO DO VEGETAL 546 U.S. 418 (2006) CASE BRIEF

GONZALES V. O CENTRO ESPIRITA BENEFICENTE UNIAO DO VEGETAL

546 U.S. 418 (2006)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Centro (P) filed a declaratory and injunctive action, alleging, that applying the Controlled Substances Act to its sacramental hoasca use violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. Gonzales (D) appealed from an affirmation that the Government failed to demonstrate a compelling interest justifying the substantial burden on the church.

FACTS: P is a religious sect that receives communion by drinking a sacramental tea, brewed from plants that contain a hallucinogen regulated under the Controlled Substances Act. D concedes that this practice is a sincere exercise of religion. D sought to prohibit P from engaging in the practice, on the ground that the Controlled Substances Act bars all use of the hallucinogen. P sued to block enforcement against it of the ban on the sacramental tea, and moved for a preliminary injunction. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 overruled the concept that D that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment does not prohibit governments from burdening religious practices through generally applicable laws. RFRA prohibits the Federal Government from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion, unless the Government 'demonstrates that application of the burden to the person' represents the least restrictive means of advancing a compelling interest. P got a preliminary injunction which was affirmed on appeal. D claims that it has a compelling interest in the uniform application of the Controlled Substances Act.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner