6 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 19 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Raich v. Gonzales.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Raich v. Gonzales Anchor | green | “federal law does not recognize a fundamental right to use medical marijuana prescribed by a licensed physician to alleviate excruciating pain and human suffering” | 4 |
| 2 | Seeley v. State | green | “have a fundamental right to have marijuana prescribed as his preferred treatment over the legitimate objections of the state” | 3 |
| 3 | Raich v. Gonzales | green | “does not narrowly and accurately reflect the right that he seeks to vindicate.” | 3 |
| 4 | Raich v. Gonzales | green | “the right to use marijuana to preserve bodily integrity, avoid pain, and preserve her life” | 3 |
| 5 | Sacramento Nonprofit Collectiv v. Eric Holder, Jr. | green | “the use of medical marijuana is more accepted today than it was in 2007,” | 3 |
| 6 | S. Wilson v. Loretta E. Lynch | green | “not similarly situated to individuals that avail themselves of treatment methods that comply with federal law” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.