This article explores and develops a comprehensive set of arguments demonstrating the unconstitutionality of drug prohibition policies in Mexico. Some of these arguments have been used to validate recreational and therapeutic uses of marijuana, while others remain unused and unexplored. There are more than ten constitutional framings that are useful to evaluate the unconstitutionality of prohibitionist drug policies. These framings can be grouped into two subcategories: rights-centered and non-rights centered. Rights-centered framings are grounded on equality, health, and the free development of the personality. Non-rights-centered framings include federalism, market regulation and preservation of basic rule of law guarantees. This paper details resources that may be helpful for judges, policy- makers, and civil society organizations interested in a human-rights or constitutional based approach to drug policy. An in-depth case study of Mexico reveals useful arguments to evaluate the legal status of drug policy in many other countries.
Francisca Pou Giménez & Catalina Pérez Correa,
Prohibitionist Drug Policy in Mexico: A Systemic Constitutional Underminer,
31 Wash. Int’l L.J.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wilj/vol31/iss1/4