Epstein Secrets

ught "the testimony of all witnesses before any grand jury which investigated this matter which is favorable to this defendant." In its answer to Rich's motion, the Govern- ment stated that it would provide grand jury transcripts only insofar as it was re- quired to do so by 18 U.S.C. . 8500. The tr

tivities that substantially affect interstate commerce. See also United States I Ili 514 U.S. 549, 558-59, 115 S.Ct. 1624, 1 1 L. .2d 626 (1995); Reich, 125 S.Ct. at 2215 (Scalia, J., concurring) (noting that *1103 for over thirty years, "our cases have mechanically recited that the Commerce Claus

1 lied *1112 to interstate commerce cases. See 514 U.S. at 558-59, 115 S.Ct. 1624; Morrison, U.S. Page 12 at 609-14, 120 S.Ct. 1740; see also Raich, 125 S.Ct. at 2215 (Scabs, l., concurring) (noting that for over thirty years, "our cases have mechanically recited that the Commerce Clause permi

estic commerce comprised of "three general categories of regulation in which 1 Congress is authorized engage under its com- merce power,"Gonzales Reich, 545U.S. I, ---, 125 S.Ct. 2195, 2205, 16 L.Ed.2d I (2005):(I) the use of the channels of interstate commerce; (2) the instrumentalities of inters

(C.A.11 (Ala.)) 2008 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. EFTA00192140 Page I of 20 Wesdaw. 435 F.3d 1100 435 F.3d 1100, 06 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 696, 2006 Daily Journal D.A.R. 962 (Cite as: 435 F.3d 1100) H U.S. I. Clark C.A.9 (Wash.),2006. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circu

d by criminal proceedings under a void law, and therefore within the exceptions stated in Justice Peckham's opinion in the Young Case. In Truax I Raich, 239 U.S. 33, 36 Sup.Ct. 7, 60 L.Ed. 131, L.R.A. 1916D, 545, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 283, the act was unconstitutional and the Attorney General was restr

ic activity." United States v. Max- well, 446 F.3d 1210, 1215 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 705, 166 L.Ed.2d 545 (2006). Thus, in Raich, the Supreme Court upheld the application of the federal Controlled Substances Act ("CSA") to the purely intrastate growth and use of marijuana f

w.com/print/printstream.aspx?sv=Full&prft=HTMLE&fn=_top&mt=... 12/31/2007 EFTA00191934 Page 2 of 9 507 F.3d 1213 Page 2 507 F.3d 1213, 07 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 13,202. 2007 Daily Journal D.A.R. 17,149 (Cite as: 507 F.3d 1213) The Court of Appeals generally defers to the district court in imposing s

ches. The majority's reasoning also protects the rich (who can generally afford more sophisticated dev

ginal U.S. Government Works. 13 EFTA00315003 Horowitz. Adam 11 24 2015 For Educational Use Only U.S. v. Cotterman, 709 F.3d 952 (2013) 13 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2531, 2013 Daily Journal =. 3018 Dissent at 985. The Supreme Court has never endorsed the proposition that the goal of deterring illegal con