About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


2017 U. Ill. L. Rev. 1299 (2017)
Tripping over Legal Highs: Why the Controlled Substances Analogue Enforcement Act Is Ineffective against Designer Drugs

handle is hein.journals/unilllr2017 and id is 1325 raw text is: TRIPPING OVER LEGAL HIGHS: WHY THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ANALOGUE ENFORCEMENT ACT IS INEFFECTIVE AGAINST DESIGNER DRUGS JEREMY MANDELL* Though the United States has an established framework of clas- sifying and combating traditional drugs, the relatively new problem of synthetic drugs calls for a similarly new solution. This Note discusses the established legal tools we have used in the past and highlights their insufficiencies in contending with synthetic drugs. It also describes methods implemented in other countries, along with proposed solu- tions that have popped up in our legislature in recent years. Ultimately, this Note recognizes that our status quo drug laws were built for a different time and are too slow to react to the ana- logues and synthetics of today. To update the laws suitable for this new frontier, this Note proposes four changes. First, this Note sug- gests that the United States amend the Controlled Substances Act to eliminate loopholes and allow for more flexible scheduling. Second, it advises that we take a second look at our current scheduling to ensure that it comports with our current knowledge of drugs. Third, it sug- gests that we legalize those drugs that we know are less harmful. Fi- nally, it recommends that we promote education about drugs, both le- gal and illegal. With the changes this Note proposes, our drug laws can be updated for the modern era and the challenges we now face. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 1300 II. BACKGROUND ..................................... ..... 1303 A. What Are Designer Drugs?............... ............. 1303 B. What's Wrong with Designer Drugs? ................ 1305 C. Regulation Issues .............................. 1307 D. How Other Countries Are Dealing with Designer Drugs .... 1310 III. ANALYSIS ............................................... 1313 A. The Loopholes in the CSAEA ................ ..... 1313 1. What Does Substantially Similar Mean? ..................... 1314 2. Structural Issues.... ......................... 1316 * J.D. Candidate, 2017, University of Illinois College of Law. I would like to thank Professor Andrew D. Leipold for his guidance in writing this Note. I would also like to thank the editors, mem- bers, and staff of the University of Illinois Law Review. I dedicate this Note to my mother and father for their overwhelming love and support. 1299