Church of the Holy Light of the Queen v. Mukasey
February 27, 2023 DOI: 10.4324/9780429001161-3 via OpenAlex
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractA legal dispute between a Santo Daime church in Oregon and the US government led to a regulatory process for ayahuasca in that state. The chapter examines how the Church of the Holy Light of the Queen (CHLQ) clashed with federal authorities, analyzing the particularities of the case and the ways different norms were applied and categories contested. The outcome, a district court decision, produced a regulation without consensus between the parties. The case illustrates the US government's approach to ayahuasca groups and how courts mediate such conflicts.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Case study Case report |
|---|---|
| Topics | Ayahuasca |
| Keywords | Government linguistics Political science State computer science Law |
| Citations | 2 |
| Key finding | The legal dispute between the Church of the Holy Light of the Queen and the US government resulted in a regulation of ayahuasca in Oregon that lacked consensus between the parties. |
Abstract
The purpose of this chapter is to analyze the legal dispute between the US government and a Santo Daime church—the Church of the Holy Light of the Queen (CHLQ), located in Ashland, Oregon—that culminated in the regulation process of ayahuasca in that state. Initially, I will briefly describe the insertion of the Santo Daime into the United States, the beginning of tensions with the governmental institutions, and the development of the dispute between CHLQ and the federal government. The focus then turns specifically to the analysis of the dispute between CHLQ and representatives of the US government, taking into account the particularities of the dispute, as well as the ways in which the regulation of ayahuasca became effective after the final decision of the district court. One of my central objectives is to analyze how different norms are put into action, operated, and how categories are disputed in the midst of this process. Based on these elements, I intend to problematize the particularities of the forms of regulation of ayahuasca that result from this dispute that reaches an outcome without consensus between both parties. In fact, the case study in question will be valuable in reinforcing the analysis of the US government's modus operandi in dealing with ayahuasca groups, as well as the orientation of its courts as they face the challenge of mediating disputes between such institutions and the government.