BRONZKALA and assisted suicide
Richards, Edward P.
RichardsE at UMKC.EDU
Wed Sep 6 17:51:07 PDT 2000
> My thanks to those who have made thoughtful contributions to
> this thread. The argument is, I think, unquestionably that
> use of controlled substances is part of a national market and
> a commercial activity. However, I am not convinced that this
> distinguishes the CSA persuasively from LOPEZ. Guns are also
> part of a national market that is highly regulated by the
> federal government.
I would start by disagreeing that the gun market is highly regulated by the
federal government. Compared to the regulations on controlled substances, there
is little or no federal regulation of guns. There is unregulated private sale
of guns, private manufacture, and other than the banning of automatic weapons,
few federal regulations on possession of guns. The next distinction is that
banning possession of guns - as opposed to commercial use or sale - is much
farther from commerce than is regulating the commercial use of drugs.
Physicians are in the business of dispensing controlled substances, and there is
extensive case law that medical practice itself is part of interstate commerce.
(Look at the antitrust cases.) Thus this can be seen as valid restriction on
the practice of medicine, separate from the regulation of drugs - something the
feds do not do a lot, but clearly have the legal authority to do. The folks
possessing the guns were not independently engaged in commerce, unlike the docs.
Edward P. Richards
Executive Director - Center for Public Health Law
Professor of Law
University of Missouri Kansas City
(816)235-2370 Fax (816)235-5276
richardse at umkc.edu
More information about the Conlawprof