The “Vine of the Soul” vs. The Controlled Substances Act: Implications of the Hoasca Case

Journal of Psychoactive Drugs

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 193-199

  Bullis, Ronald K ^a  

^a NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Controlled substances; Entheogens; First amendment; Hoasca; Sacramental drugs; Spirtuality

Indexed keywords

PSYCHEDELIC AGENT; PSYCHOTROPIC AGENT;

COURT; DECISION MAKING; GOVERNMENT; HOASCA; HUMAN; INGESTION; LAW; RELIGION; REVIEW; TEA;

EID: 49149122773     PISSN: 02791072     EISSN: 21599777     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02791072.2008.10400630     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Amicus Curiae Brief. 2005. Counsel on Spiritual Practices, 2004 U.S. Briefs 1084; 2005 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 610.
2. th Cir.); 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 5278.
3. Brief for Respondents. 2005. Gonzales v. 0 Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal, 2004 U.S. Briefs 1084; 2005 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 594.
4. Bullis, R. 1990. Swallowing the scroll: Legal implications of the recent Supreme Court peyote cases. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 22 (3): 325-32.
5. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah. 1993. 508 U.S. 520, 124 L.Ed. 2d 472, 113 S. Ct. 2217.
6. Controlled Substance Act (CSA). 2000. 84 Stat. i242asamended2i U.S.C. §§ 801-904 (2000 ed. and Supp. I)
7. Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Ore. v. Smith. 1990. 494 U.S. 872, 110 S. Ct. 1595, 108 L.Ed.2d 876.
8. Gonzales v. 0 Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal. 2006. 546 U.S. 418, 126 S.ct. 1211, 163 L. Ed. 2d 1017; 2006 U.S. LEXIS 1815,74 U.S.L.W. 4119.
9. Krajick, K. 1992. Vision quest. Newsweek June 15: 62-63.
10. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal v. Ashcroft. 2003. 342 F.3d 1170; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 18373 (lO* Cir.)
11. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal v. Ashcroft. 2002. 282 F. Supp. 2d 1236; 2002 U.S. Dist. 26749 (NM).
12. Oral Argument Transcript. 2005 (I November). U.S. Supreme Court, Gonzales v. 0 Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal (2005 Trans LEXIS 48).
13. 5th Cir.).
14. Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). 1993. 42 U.S.C. 2000bb.
15. Schedule of Controlled Substances. 2003. 21 USCS 1 812.
16. Smith, H. 2000. Cleansing the Doors of Perception: The Religious Significance of Entheogenic Plants and Chemicals. New York: Jeremy Tarcher/Putnam.
17. United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances. (1971, 1979-1980). 32 U.S. T. 543, T. I. A. S. No. 9725.
18. U.S. v. Meyers. 1995. 95 F.3d 1475, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 23363; cert. den’d, 1997 U.S. LEXIS 7248.