Transcription

Case 2:19-cv-00519-GAM Document 47 Filed 06/11/19 Page 1 of 48IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIAUNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Plaintiff,v.SAFEHOUSE, a Pennsylvania nonprofitcorporation;JOSE BENITEZ, as President andTreasurer of Safehouse,Defendants.SAFEHOUSE, a Pennsylvania nonprofitcorporation,Counterclaim Plaintiff,v.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Counterclaim Defendant,andU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; WILLIAMP. BARR, in his official capacity asAttorney General of the United States; andWILLIAM M. McSWAIN, in his officialcapacity as U.S. Attorney for the EasternDistrict of Pennsylvania,Third-Party il Action No. 19-0519ORDERAND NOW, this day of , 2019, upon considerationof the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant United

Case 2:19-cv-00519-GAM Document 47 Filed 06/11/19 Page 2 of 48States of America and Third-Party Defendants United States Department of Justice, UnitedStates Attorney General William P. Barr, and United States Attorney for the Eastern District ofPennsylvania William M. McSwain, and any response thereto, it is ORDERED that:1.The motion is GRANTED;2.Judgment is ENTERED in favor of the United States of America, U.S.Department of Justice, United States Attorney General William P. Barr, and United StatesAttorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania William M. McSwain, and against Safehouseand Jose A. Benitez;3.It is DECLARED that the establishment and operation of a “ConsumptionRoom,” in which Defendants knowingly and intentionally provide a place for drug users to useillegal controlled substances, including heroin and fentanyl, violates 21 U.S.C. § 856(a)(2); and4.The clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.IT IS SO ORDERED.BY THE COURT:GERALD A. McHUGHUnited States District Judge

Case 2:19-cv-00519-GAM Document 47 Filed 06/11/19 Page 3 of 48IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIAUNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Plaintiff,v.SAFEHOUSE, a Pennsylvania nonprofitcorporation;JOSE BENITEZ, as President andTreasurer of Safehouse,Defendants.SAFEHOUSE, a Pennsylvania nonprofitcorporation,Counterclaim Plaintiff,v.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Counterclaim Defendant,andU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; WILLIAMP. BARR, in his official capacity asAttorney General of the United States; andWILLIAM M. McSWAIN, in his officialcapacity as U.S. Attorney for the EasternDistrict of Pennsylvania,Third-Party il Action No. 19-0519MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGSPlaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant United States of America and Third-Party DefendantsUnited States Department of Justice, United States Attorney General William P. Barr, and United

Case 2:19-cv-00519-GAM Document 47 Filed 06/11/19 Page 4 of 48States Attomey for the EastemDistrict of Pennsylvania William M. McSwain (collectively, "theUnited States") move for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedurel2(c). For the reasons set forth in the attached memorandum of law, which is incorporated hereinby reference, see Local Rule 7.1(c), the United States requests that its motion be granted, andthat judgment be entered in its favor and against Defendants/CounterclaimPlaintiffs Safehouseand Jose A. Benitez.Dated: June I1.2019Respectfully submitted,JOSEPH H. HUNTAssistant Attomey GeneralCivil DivisionGUSTAV W. EYLERBranch DirectorWILLIAM M. McSWAINUnited States AttomeyConsumer Protection BranchJAMES J, GILLIGANActing DirectorFederal Programs BranchAVIDGO RAssistant United States Attomey('hiet. Civil vlslonANDREW E. CLARKAssistant DirectorConsumer Protection BranchJACQUELINE COLEMAN SNEADAssistant DirectorFederal Programs BranchDANIEL K. CRANE-HIRSCHTrial AttorneyConsumer Protection BranchT.UTCHLOWI:RIC D ILLBRYAN C. HUGHESERIN E. LINDGRENAssistant United States AttomeysEastem District ol Pennsylr ania615 Chestnut Street, Suite 1250Philadelphia, P A 19106-447 6TEL: (2ls) 861-8200FAX: (215) 861-8618TAMRA T. MOORESenior CounselFederal Programs BranchCo-Counsel.for the United StatesCounsel.for the United Stotes

Case 2:19-cv-00519-GAM Document 47 Filed 06/11/19 Page 5 of 48IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIAUNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Plaintiff,v.SAFEHOUSE, a Pennsylvania nonprofitcorporation;JOSE BENITEZ, as President andTreasurer of Safehouse,Defendants.SAFEHOUSE, a Pennsylvania nonprofitcorporation,Counterclaim Plaintiff,v.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Counterclaim Defendant,andU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; WILLIAMP. BARR, in his official capacity asAttorney General of the United States; andWILLIAM M. McSWAIN, in his officialcapacity as U.S. Attorney for the EasternDistrict of Pennsylvania,Third-Party il Action No. 19-0519MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF THE UNITED STATES’MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

Case 2:19-cv-00519-GAM Document 47 Filed 06/11/19 Page 6 of 48Table of ContentsI.Procedural and Factual Background .2II.Argument .4A.Safehouse’s Proposed Consumption Rooms Plainly Violate21 U.S.C. § 856(a)(2).4B.Contrary to Safehouse’s Contention, the Phrases “for the purpose of,”“except as authorized by this subchapter,” and “illegal use” areNot Ambiguous .8C.III.1.“For the purpose of”: Defendants’ Purportedly BeneficentPurposes Do Not Exempt Them from § 856(a)(2) Becausethe Drug User’s Purpose is at Issue .82.The Phrase “Except as authorized by this subchapter”:Nothing in Subchapter I of the CSA Authorizes ConsumptionRooms .133.The Phrase “illegal use”: § 856(a)(2) Squarely Applies toSafehouse Because People Would Use Illegal Drugs in ItsConsumption Rooms .16None of Safehouse’s Affirmative Defenses Has Merit.181.Contrary to Safehouse’s Contention, “Medical Necessity” DoesNot Excuse a Violation of the CSA .182.Safehouse’s Affirmative Defense that the CSA is Unconstitutionalas Applied is Foreclosed by Gonzales v. Raich .203.Safehouse’s Claim that the Religious Freedom Restoration ActProtects Its Religious Expression Fails as a Matter of Law.22a.Application of § 856(a) to Safehouse Does Not SubstantiallyBurden Defendants’ Claimed Religious Belief.24b.Safehouse Admits that It Seeks to Engage in Activitythat is Motivated by Socio-Political or PhilosophicalReasons, Not Religious Ones .29Conclusion .36

Case 2:19-cv-00519-GAM Document 47 Filed 06/11/19 Page 7 of 48Table of AuthoritiesCasesPage(s)Adams v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue,170 F.3d 173 (3d Cir. 1999). 29Adkins v. Kaspar,393 F.3d 559 (5th Cir. 2004) . 25Africa v. Pennslyvania,662 F.2d 1025 (3d Cir. 1981) . 32, 33Allah v. Stachelek,1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7972 (E.D. Pa. 1998). .27Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.,573 U.S. 682 (2014) . 23Callahan v. Woods,658 F.2d 679 (9th Cir. 1981) . 30Cash v. IRS,2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11603 (M.D. Pa. 2019) . . 27Caviezel v. Great Neck Public Schools,701 F. Supp. 2d 414 (E.D.N.Y. 2010) . 30Check v. New York City Department of Education,2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71124 (E.D.N.Y. 2013) .31Cheffer v. Reno,55 F.3d 1517 (11th Cir. 1995) . 26, 29Curto v. A Country Place Condominium Association, Inc.,921 F.3d 405 (3d. Cir. 2019) . 23Cutter v. Wilkinson,544 U.S. 709 (2005) . 30Delaware County, Pennsylvania v. Federal Housing Finance Agency,747 F.3d 215 (3d Cir. 2014) . 20Fallon v. Mercy Catholic Medical Center,877 F.3d 487 (3d Cir. 2017) . 32, 33ii

Case 2:19-cv-00519-GAM Document 47 Filed 06/11/19 Page 8 of 48General Brown Central School District,851 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1988) . 30Geneva College v. Secretary United States Department of Health & Human Services,778 F.3d 422 (3d Cir. 2015) . 24Gonzales v. Oregon,546 U.S. 243 (2006) . 15, 16Gonzales v. Raich,545 U.S. 1 (2005) . 14, 20, 21, 22Goodall v. Stafford County School Board,60 F.3d 168 (4th Cir. 1995) . 25Gozlon-Peretz v. United States,498 U.S. 395 (1991) . 18Henderson v. Kennedy,253 F.3d 12 (D.C. Cir. 2001) . 26, 28Huddleston v. United States,415 U.S. 814 (1974) . 18Kaemmerling v. Lappin,553 F.3d 669 (D.C. Cir. 2008) . 24Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. Burwell,794 F.3d 1151 (10th Cir. 2015) . 24Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Associaiton,485 U.S. 439 (1988) . 24, 25Mack v. Warden Loretto FCI,839 F.3d 286 (3d Cir. 2016) . 25Mahoney v. Doe,642 F.3d 1112 (D.C. Cir. 2011) . 26Patel v. U.S. Bureau of Prisons,515 F.3d 807 (8th Cir. 2008) . 27Planned Parenthood Association v. Walton,949 F. Supp. 290 (E.D. Pa. 1996) . 26iii

Case 2:19-cv-00519-GAM Document 47 Filed 06/11/19 Page 9 of 48Pomper v. Thompson,836 F.2d 131 (3d Cir. 1987) . 10Real Alternatives, Inc. v. Secretary Department of Health & Human Services,867 F.3d 338 (3d Cir. 2017) . 24, 25, 31Reno v. Koray,515 U.S. 50 (1995) . 18Robinson v. Shell Oil Co.,519 U.S. 337 (1997) . 5Rose v. Bartle,871 F.2d 331 (3d Cir. 1989) . 4Smith v. Kyler,295 F. App’x 479 (3d Cir. 2008). 25Sutton v. Rasheed,323 F.3d 236 (3d Cir. 2003) . 30Tavarez v. Klingensmith,372 F.3d 188 (3d Cir. 2004) . 18Turbe v. Government of Virgin Islands,938 F.2d 427 (3d Cir. 1991) . 4United States v. Akinyoyenu,199 F. Supp. 3d 106 (D.D.C. 2016) . 14United States v. Banks,987 F.2d 463 (7th Cir. 1993) . 12United States v. Blake,Crim. No. 200