The "vine of the soul" vs. the Controlled Substances Act: implications of the hoasca case.

The 2006 Supreme Court decision allowing a religious group to import, distribute, and ingest the hallucinogen hoasca for sacramental use sets a precedent for religious freedom with psychotropic substances. The article outlines the church's and government's arguments, explains the case facts and decision, and evaluates the likelihood of future religion-based exceptions for entheogen use, offering a profile of groups most likely to receive such exemptions.

Study at a glance

Abstract

In 2006, the Supreme Court paved the way for the sacramental use of a hallucinogen, hoasca, to be imported, distributed and ingested by a religious group. This case has broad implications for religious freedom for using sacramental psychotropics and how such cases might be decided in the future. This article outlines the arguments used both by the church and by the government. It lists the facts of the cases, explains and analyzes the decision, evaluates the likelihood of expansions of religion-based exceptions for entheogen use in light of the Supreme Court's decision and offers a profile for those groups most likely to receive such an exemption.