21 C.F.R. § 1307.31
Native American Church
The listing of peyote as a controlled substance in Schedule I does not apply to the nondrug use of peyote in bona fide religious ceremonies of the Native American Church, and members of the Native American Church so using peyote are exempt from registration. Any person who manufactures peyote for or distributes peyote to the Native American Church, however, is required to obtain registration annually and to comply with all other requirements of law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33
cases, 1979–2012 · leading case: Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União Do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418 (2006).
Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União Do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418 (2006). “See 21 CFR §1307.31 (2005). In 1994, Congress extended that exemption to all members of every recognized Indian Tribe.”
United States v. Warner, 595 F. Supp. 595 (D.N.D. 1984). “Defendants, neither of whom are of American Indian blood, contend they are members of the Native American Church (NAC), and as such, they are exempt from prosecution, under 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31 , for the acts charged in the indictment.”
United States v. Boyll, 774 F. Supp. 1333 (D.N.M. 1991). “Boyll also claims that, pursuant to 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31 (1990), the listing of peyote as a controlled substance does not apply to him because he is a member of the Native American Church and he imported and possessed peyote for use in bona fide religious ceremonies of the Native…”
Bd. of Ed. of Kiryas Joel Vill. Sch. Dist. v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994). “, 21 CFR § 1307.31 (1993) ("The listing of peyote as a controlled substance .”
Emp. Div., Dep't of Human Resources v. Smith, 485 U.S. 660 (1988). “State, 561 P2d 539 (Okla Crim App 1977); 21 CFR § 1307.31 (1985); Iowa Code Ann § 204.”
Carl Eric Olsen v. Drug Enf't Admin., Carl Eric Olsen v. John Lawn, Adm'r, Drug Enf't Admin., 878 F.2d 1458 (D.C. Cir. 1989). “See 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31 (1987). In an effort to prompt a response from the DEA, Olsen unsuccessfully sued in the Eleventh Circuit to compel agency action.”
O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 973 (10th Cir. 2004). “§ 1996a, and before that, pursuant to regulation, 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31 . Apart from the fact that courts should not direct the nation’s drug policy, courts simply lack the institutional competence to craft a set of religious exemptions to the uniform enforcement of those laws.”
Peyote Way Church of God, Inc. v. Richard Thornburgh, Attorney Gen. of the United States, 922 F.2d 1210 (5th Cir. 1991). “Both federal and Texas statutes criminalize the unprescribed distribution and possession of peyote. 21 U.S.C. §§ 812 , 841, 844; Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann.”
Frances A. Warner v. John A. Graham, Duainne S. Bourcy, Wayne J. Anderson & Weldee Baetsch, 845 F.2d 179 (8th Cir. 1988). “21 C.F.R. § 1307.31 (1987). 3 A number of states have also exempted the sacramental use of peyote from their Controlled Substances Acts.”
Peyote Way Church of God, Inc. v. Meese, 698 F. Supp. 1342 (N.D. Tex. 1988). “that 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31 4 violates the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment and the establishment clause of the First Amendment, and that this section violates Peyote Way members’ constitutional right to privacy; c.”
Native Am. Church of New York v. United States, 468 F. Supp. 1247 (S.D.N.Y. 1979). “” ( 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31 ). In 1976, Alan Birnbaum founded the Native American Church of New York and is now its minister and custodian.”
Frank v. State, 604 P.2d 1068 (Alaska 1979). “§ 668a (Supp. 1979), which authorizes the taking of bald eagles "for the religious purposes of Indian tribes," and 25 C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.