In the annals of cannabis history, #0excludeGlossary stands as a pivotal Supreme Court decision that reshaped the legal landscape for marijuana in America. The case arose when Timothy Leary, a counterculture icon, was apprehended for cannabis possession under the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937. Leary contended that complying with the Act would force him to incriminate himself, thus breaching his Fifth Amendment rights. The Supreme Court’s ruling in his favor in 1969 declared the Act unconstitutional, marking a significant victory for cannabis advocates and setting a precedent for future legal challenges. This case remains a cornerstone in the discourse on cannabis legalization and reform. [Source: Oyez, Legal Information Institute]
Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6 (1969), is a U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with the constitutionality of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937. Timothy Leary, a professor and activist, was arrested for the possession of marijuana in violation of the Marihuana Tax Act. Leary challenged the act on the ground that the act required self-incrimination, which violated the Fifth Amendment. The unanimous opinion of the court was penned by Justice John Marshall Harlan II and declared the Marihuana Tax Act unconstitutional. Thus, Leary's conviction was overturned. Congress responded shortly thereafter by replacing the Marihuana Tax Act with the newly written Controlled Substances Act while continuing the prohibition of certain drugs in the United States.
| Leary v. United States | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued December 11–12, 1968 Decided May 19, 1969 | |
| Full case name | Timothy Leary v. United States |
| Citations | 395 U.S. 6 (more) 89 S. Ct. 1532; 23 L. Ed. 2d 57; 1969 U.S. LEXIS 3271; 69-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶ 15,900; 23 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2006 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit |
| Holding | |
| The Marihuana Tax Act required self-incrimination, thus violating the Fifth Amendment of Constitution. Leary's conviction reversed. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Harlan, joined by Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, White, Marshall; Warren (in part) |
| Concurrence | Stewart |
| Concurrence | Black (in judgment) |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. V, Marihuana Tax Act | |
