COM 0102.002 2000-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE www.cognitivelibertyorg/newsrelease/guerrero release.htm September 14, 2000 Rastafarian Wins Religious Defense Before Guam Supreme Court The Cuam Supreme Court has dismissed criminal charges against a man who claimed that he is a Rastafarian and was importing marijuana for religious use. The decision was based on the Guam courts interpretation of Guam's Free Exercise Clause, rather than the Free Exercise Clause of the Federal Constitution. In reaching it's decision, the Guam Supreme Court reasoned that the proper test under Guam's Free Exercise protection is the stria scrutiny test that the U.S. Supreme Court used prior to its disastrous 1990 opinion in the Smith peyote case (494 US 872). Under the stria scrutiny test, the Guam court held that the prosecutor had the burden of proving that Guam's ban on all marijuana importation was justified by a rnmpelling governmental interest, and that the importation ban achieved its objective by the least restrictive means possible. The prosecutor, in a foolish strategic decision, presented absolutely no evidence to justify Guam's wholesale ban against importing marijuana. Thus, the Cuam Supreme Court wasted no time concluding that because marijuana was a necessary sacrament of the Rastafarian religion, and because the prosecution failed to justify the burden placed on the practice of the Rastafarian religion by the law against importing marijuana, the importation ban violated Guam's free exercise protection. This opinion (Guam v. Guerrero, September 8, 2000. 2000 Guam 26, CRA 99-025) is a major breakthrough for religious users of controlled substances. The published opinion from Cuam's highest court will be persuasive precedent for defendants outside of Guam, who will be able to cite the case for the proposition that strict scrutiny is, indeed, the proper test to apply when a religious defense is raised m criminal drug charges. The full opinion is on-line at the Drug Law Library at our Center for Liberty and Ethics: www.congitiveliberty..org/lawlibrary/cases?guerrero case.htm