Before the High Court: the legal systematics of Cannabis

Jocelyn Bosse

doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2020.1804671

Before the High Court: the legal systematics of Cannabis

Jocelyn Bosse

Laws

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

60 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This article examines the history of a legal-scientific controversy: the challenges to criminal prohibitions on marijuana, which invoked contested scientific views of the taxonomy of the cannabis plant. Facing prosecution in the 1970s, numerous defendants raised the ‘botanical defence’, an argument that relied on the expert testimony of scientists to dispute the classification and nomenclature of genus Cannabis. This article analyses judicial opinions from the three nations where the botanical defence was raised – the United States, Canada, and Australia – where the meaning of the name, ‘Cannabis sativa L.’, was found to be in the domain of judicial, not scientific, authority. Although this satisfied the need for closure in the criminal cases, the article draws attention to the ongoing consequences of the taxonomic debate for the regulation of the cannabis plant under intellectual property laws.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	302-329
Journal	Griffith Law Review: Law Theory Society
Volume	29
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2020.1804671
Publication status	Published - 25 Nov 2020

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2020.1804671

GLR Legal Systematics of Cannabis AMAccepted author manuscript, 955 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{cee46fa22189403cb1ed3f2e383243b9,

title = "Before the High Court: the legal systematics of Cannabis",

abstract = "This article examines the history of a legal-scientific controversy: the challenges to criminal prohibitions on marijuana, which invoked contested scientific views of the taxonomy of the cannabis plant. Facing prosecution in the 1970s, numerous defendants raised the {\textquoteleft}botanical defence{\textquoteright}, an argument that relied on the expert testimony of scientists to dispute the classification and nomenclature of genus Cannabis. This article analyses judicial opinions from the three nations where the botanical defence was raised – the United States, Canada, and Australia – where the meaning of the name, {\textquoteleft}Cannabis sativa L.{\textquoteright}, was found to be in the domain of judicial, not scientific, authority. Although this satisfied the need for closure in the criminal cases, the article draws attention to the ongoing consequences of the taxonomic debate for the regulation of the cannabis plant under intellectual property laws.",

author = "Jocelyn Bosse",

year = "2020",

month = nov,

day = "25",

doi = "https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2020.1804671",

language = "English",

volume = "29",

pages = "302--329",

journal = "Griffith Law Review: Law Theory Society",

issn = "1038-3441",

publisher = "Taylor & Francis",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Before the High Court: the legal systematics of Cannabis

AU - Bosse, Jocelyn

PY - 2020/11/25

Y1 - 2020/11/25

N2 - This article examines the history of a legal-scientific controversy: the challenges to criminal prohibitions on marijuana, which invoked contested scientific views of the taxonomy of the cannabis plant. Facing prosecution in the 1970s, numerous defendants raised the ‘botanical defence’, an argument that relied on the expert testimony of scientists to dispute the classification and nomenclature of genus Cannabis. This article analyses judicial opinions from the three nations where the botanical defence was raised – the United States, Canada, and Australia – where the meaning of the name, ‘Cannabis sativa L.’, was found to be in the domain of judicial, not scientific, authority. Although this satisfied the need for closure in the criminal cases, the article draws attention to the ongoing consequences of the taxonomic debate for the regulation of the cannabis plant under intellectual property laws.

AB - This article examines the history of a legal-scientific controversy: the challenges to criminal prohibitions on marijuana, which invoked contested scientific views of the taxonomy of the cannabis plant. Facing prosecution in the 1970s, numerous defendants raised the ‘botanical defence’, an argument that relied on the expert testimony of scientists to dispute the classification and nomenclature of genus Cannabis. This article analyses judicial opinions from the three nations where the botanical defence was raised – the United States, Canada, and Australia – where the meaning of the name, ‘Cannabis sativa L.’, was found to be in the domain of judicial, not scientific, authority. Although this satisfied the need for closure in the criminal cases, the article draws attention to the ongoing consequences of the taxonomic debate for the regulation of the cannabis plant under intellectual property laws.

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2020.1804671

DO - https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2020.1804671

M3 - Article

SN - 1038-3441

VL - 29

SP - 302

EP - 329

JO - Griffith Law Review: Law Theory Society

JF - Griffith Law Review: Law Theory Society

IS - 2

ER -

Before the High Court: the legal systematics of Cannabis

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this