No. 04-1084
In the Supreme Court of the United States
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL., PETITIONERS
v.
O CENTRO ESPIRITA BENEFICIENTE UNIAO DO VEGETAL, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
JOINT APPENDIX
(VOLUME 1)
PAUL D. CLEMENT
Solicitor General
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
(202) 514-2217
Counsel of Record
for Petitioners
NANCY HOLLANDER
Freedman Boyd Daniels
Hollander & Goldberg P.A.
20 First Plaza, Suite 700
Albuquerque, NM 87102
(505) 842-9960
Counsel of Record
for Respondents
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI FILED: FEB. 10, 2005
CERTIORARI GRANTED: APR. 18, 2005
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
No. CV 02-2323
O CENTRO ESPIRITA, ET AL., PETITIONER
v.
JOHN ASHCROFT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
(1) DOCKET ENTRIES _______________________________________________ _ DATE PROCEEDINGS 12/3/02 Civil case docketed. Preliminary record filed. * * * * * 12/12/02 Order filed by Judges Kelly and Hartz granting Appellant’s motion for a stay pending appeal and the district court’s preliminary injunction is stayed pending further order of this court. Parties served by mail. (jal) * * * * * 1/16/03 Appendix filed by Appellants John Ashcroft, Asa Hutchinson, Paul H. O’Neill, David C. Iglesias, and David F. Fry. Two copies: Appendix pages: 509. In addition, 9 volumes of transcripts filed (one set only; total pages: 2037). c/s: y. (gah) 2 _______________________________________________ _ DATE PROCEEDINGS * * * * * 1/17/03 Appellant’s brief filed by John Ashcroft, Asa Hutchinson, Paul H. O’Neill, David C. Iglesias and David F. Fry. Original and 7 copies. c/s: y. Served on 1/16/03. Oral argument? y. Appellees’ brief due 2/14/03. (afw) 2/18/03 Appellee’s brief filed by O Centro Espirita, Jeffrey Bronfman, Daniel Tucker, Christina Barreto, De Almeida Dias, Patricia Domingo, David Lenderts, David Martin, Maria Eugenia Pelaez, Bryan Rea, Don St. John, Carmen Tucker and Solar Law and submitted to court. Original and 7 copies. c/s: y Oral Argument? (scheduled). Appendix filed. Original and 1 appendix copy. Appendix Pages: 1724. (klp) * * * * * 2/20/03 Appellees’ Amended Brief received from O Centro Espirita, Jeffrey Bronfman, Daniel Tucker, Christina Barreto, Fernando Barreto, Christine Berman, Mitchel Berman, Jussara De Almeida Dias, Patricia Domingo, David Lenderts, David Martin, Maris Eugenia Pelaez, Bryan Rea, Don St. John, Carmen Tucker and Solar Law, but not filed, pending ruling on motion to file. Original and 3 copies. c/s: y. (klp) 3 _______________________________________________ _ DATE PROCEEDINGS 2/24/03 Amicus Curiae brief filed by Christian Legal, The National Associa[sic], Clifton Kirkpatrick and Queens Federation of. Original and 8 copies. c/s: y. Served on 2/21/03. (jal) * * * * * 3/3/03 Appellants’ reply brief filed by John Ashcroft, Asa Hutchinson, Paul H. O’Neill, David C. Iglesias, and David F. Fry. Original and 7 copies. c/s: y. (gah) 3/10/03 Case argued by Matthew M. Collette, for appellant and Nancy Hollander, for appellee; Submitted to Judges Seymour, Porfilio, Murphy. (ss) * * * * * 9/4/03 Terminated on the Merits after Oral Hearing; Affirmed; Written, Signed, Published. Seymour; Porfilio, authoring judge; Murphy, dissenting. Parties served by mail on 9/4/03. (klp) * * * * * 9/24/03 Order filed by Judges Seymour, Porfilio and Murphy denying without prejudice Appellees’ motion for clarification and motion to lift the stay. [Parties served by mail. (jal) 4 _______________________________________________ _ DATE PROCEEDINGS 10/17/03 Petition for rehearing en banc [02-2323]. filed by John Ashcroft, Asa Hutchinson, Paul H. O’Neill, David C. Iglesias, David F. Fry, * * * ation of. Original and 18 copies. c/s: y (na) * * * * * 11/4/03 Appellees’ response in opposition to appellants’ petition for rehearing en banc filed by O Centro Espirita, Jeffrey Bronfman, Daniel Tucker, Christina Barreto, Fernando Barreto, Christine Berman, Mitchel Berman, Jussara De Almeida Dias, Patricia Domingo, David Lenderts, David Martin, Maria Eugenia Pelaez, Bryan Rea, Don St. John, Carmen Tucker and Solar Law and submitted to court. Original and 19 copies. c/s: y. (jal) 1/7/04 Order filed by Judges Tacha, Seymour, Porfilio, Ebel, Kelly, Henry, Briscoe, Lucero, Murphy, Hartz, O’Brien, Mc- Connell, Tymkovich granting Petition for rehearing en banc and ordering simultaneous supplemental briefs due 2/6/04 for David F. Fry, David C. Iglesias, Paul H. O’Neill, Asa Hutchinson, John Ashcroft, Solar Law, Carmen Tucker, Don St. John, Bryan Rea, Maria Eugenia Pelaez, David 5 ____________________________________________ _ DATE PROCEEDINGS Martin, David Lenderts, Patricia Domingo, Jussara De Almeida Dias, Mitchel Berman, Christine Berman, Fernando Barreto, Christina Barreto, Daniel Tucker, Jeffrey Bronfman, and O Centro Espirita. The parties shall also file an additional 14 copies of their original panel briefs on the merits. (klp) * * * * * 2/6/04 Supplemental brief filed by Appellees’ O Centro Espirita, Jeffrey Bronfman, Daniel Tucker, Christina Barreto, Fernando Barreto, Christine Berman, Mitchel Ber man, Jussara De Almeida Dias, Patricia Domingo, David Lenderts, David Martin, Maria Eugenia Pelaez, Bryan Rea, Don St. John, Carmen Tucker, Solar Law. Original and 17 copies (copies of merits brief filed as well). c/s: y (na) * * * * * 2/9/04 Appellants’ supplemental brief filed by John Ashcroft, Asa Hutchinson, Paul H. O’Neill, David C. Iglesias, David F. Fry and submitted to court. Original and 14 copies. c/s: y. (jal) * * * * * 6 _______________________________________________ _ DATE PROCEEDINGS 2/9/04 Supplemental brief filed by Amici Curiae Christian Legal, The National Associa, Clifton Kirkpatrick, and Queens Federation and submitted to court. Original and 18 copies. c/s: y. (gah) 2/20/04 Appellees’ supplemental reply brief filed by O Centro Espirita, Jeffrey Bronfman, Daniel Tucker, Christina Barreto, Fernando Barreto, Christine Berman, Mitchel Berman, Jussara De Almeida Dias, Patricia Domingo, David Lenderts, David Martin, Maria Eugenia Pelaez, Bryan Rea, Don St. John, Carmen Tucker, and Solar Law and submitted to court. Original and 18 copies. c/s: y. (gah) 2/24/04 Appellant’s supplemental en banc reply brief filed by John Ashcroft, Asa Hutchinson, Paul H. O’Neill, David C. Iglesias, and David F. Fry. Original and 14 copies. c/s: y. (klp) * * * * * 3/9/04 [1692076] Case argued by Gregory G. Katsas, for appellant and John C. Boyd, for appellees; Submitted to en banc court. Senior Judge John C. Porfilio joined the en banc panel to hear this argument. (ss) * * * * * 7 _______________________________________________ _ DATE PROCEEDINGS 11/12/04 Terminated on the Merits after Oral Hearing; Affirmed; Written, Unsigned, Published. Heard en banc; Tacha, Seymour, Porfilio, Ebel, Kelly, Henry, Briscoe, Lucero, Murphy, Hartz, O’Brien, McConnell and Tymkovitch: Judge Murphy, concurring in part, dissenting in part (joined in full by Ebel, Kelly O’Brien and as to Part I, by Hartz, McConnell and Tymkovich). Judge McConnell concurring (joined by Tymkovich and Judges Hartz and O’Brien as to Part I). Judge Hartz dissenting. [02-2323] Parties served by mail on 11/12/04. (na) 11/16/04 Appellants’ motion filed by John Ashcroft, Asa Hutchinson, Paul H. O’Neill, David C. Iglesias and David F. Fry to stay execution of the mandate for 90 days. Original and 3 copies. c/s: y. (klp) * * * * * 11/17/04 Appellees’ response filed by O Centro Espirita, Jeffrey Bronfman, Daniel Tucker, Christina barreto, Fernando Barreto, Christine Berman, Mitchel Berman, Jussari De Almeida Dias, Patricia Domingo, David Lenderts, David Martin, Maria Eugenia Pelaez, Bryan Rea, don St. John, Carmen Tucker, solar Law to Appellant’s motion to stay execution of the mandate and 8 _______________________________________________ _ DATE PROCEEDINGS submitted to the court. Original and 17 copies. c/s: y (na) 11/23/04 Order filed by Judges Tacha, Seymour, Porfilio, Ebel, Kelley, Henry, Briscoe, Lucero, Murphy, Hartz, O’Brien, Mc- Connell, Tymkovich denying Appellant’s motion to stay execution of the mandate. Judges Ebel, Kelly, Murphy and O’Brien voted to grant the motion and dissent from the decision to deny it. Parties served by mail. (na) * * * * * 11/30/04 Mandate issued. Mandate receipt due 12/30/04. 12/1/04 Order filed by Supreme Court directing that the mandate be and hereby is recalled and stayed pending further order of the Court. (klp) 12/2/04 Order filed by PF recalling the mandate [02-2323] per Supreme Court order. Mandate return due 12/13/04 for James A. Parker. Parties served by mail. * * * * * 12/10/04 Order filed by Supreme Court regarding application for stay. The temporary stay of 12/2/04 is vacated. Parties served by mail. (na) 9 _______________________________________________ DATE PROCEEDINGS * * * * * 12/10/04 [1763985] Mandate reissued (see order). Mandate receipt due 1/10/05. (na) 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO 00-CV-01647 O CENTRO ESPIRITA, ET AL., PETITIONER v. JOHN ASHCROFT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS DOCKET ENTRIES ______________________________________________________ DATES DOCKET NUMBER PROCEEDINGS 11/21/00 EOD — 11/27/00 1 COMPLAINT for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (5 Summons( es) issued) (bap) (459k) Re: ANSWER * * * * * 12/22/00 EOD — 12/27/00 10 MOTION by pltfs for preliminary injunction (ild) (38k) Re: NOTICE MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER SUPPLEMENTAL SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY RESPONSE UNOPPOSED MOTION MEMORANDUM 11 _______________________________________________________ DATES DOCKET NUMBER PROCEEDINGS 12/22/00 EOD — 12/27/00 11 MEMORANDUM by pltfs in support of their motion for preliminary injunction (ild) (21k) Re: MOTION for preliminary injunction* * * * * * * * 01/25/01 EOD — 01/26/01 15 RESPONSE by deft to mtn for preliminary injunction [10-1] (kd) (187k) Re: EXHIBITS MOTION for preliminary injunction 01/25/01 EOD — 01/26/01 16 EXHIBITS filed by defts re the response to the mtn for preliminary injunction (kd) (30k) Re: RESPONSE * * * * * 02/01/01 EOD — 02/02/02 18 ANSWER by defts to pltf’s complaint [1-1] (ild) (225k) Re: COMPLAINT * * * * * 12 _______________________________________________________ DATES DOCKET NUMBER PROCEEDINGS 02/12/01 EOD — 02/13/01 21 REPLY by pltfs to defts’ response in opposition to pltfs’ motion for preliminary injunction (ild) (1723k) Re: MOTION for preliminary injunction [10] * * * * * 5/31/01 EOD — 6/01/01 38 ORDER by Chief Judge James A. Parker denying Santo Daime Church’s moton for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of pltfs’ application for preliminary injunction [23-1] (cc: all counsel*) [10k] Re: MOTION by amicus Santo Daime Church for [28k] * * * * * 11/01/01 70 TRIAL brief (memorandum) submitted by pltfs (bap) (357k) Re: SUPPLEMENTAL 10/22/01 EOD — 11/13/01 71 CLERK’S MINUTES: be Chief Judge James A. Parker evidentiary hearing held (bap) (334k) 11/13/01 EOD — 11/13/01 72 SUPPLEMENTAL by pltfs re trial memorandum brief (bap) (285k) Re: TRIAL 13 _______________________________________________________ DATES DOCKET NUMBER PROCEEDINGS 11/13/01 EOD — 11/19/01 73 SUPPLEMENTAL Trial Memorandum by pltfs in support of motion for preliminary injunction (bap) (406k) Re: MOTION for preliminary injunction [10] 11/16/01 EOD — 11/19/01 74 TRIAL briefs (memorandum) submitted by defts (bap) (801k) 11/16/01 EOD — 11/19/01 75 SUPPLEMENTAL Trial Memorandum by pltfs in support of motion for preliminary injunction (bap) (696k) Re: MOTION for preliminary injunction * * * * * 08/12/02 EOD — 08/13/02 88 MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER: by Chief Judge James A. Parker denying/granting in part pltfs’ motion for preliminary injunction as further described herein and setting hrg on the form of preliminary injunction for 8/19/02 @ 1:30 pm (cc: all counsel) (bap) (1736k) Re: NOTICE * * * * * 14 _______________________________________________________ DATES DOCKET NUMBER PROCEEDINGS 11/13/02 EOD - 11/13/02 100 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION by Chief Judge James A. Parker as described herein (cc: all counsel) (bap) (303k) Re: NOTICE OF APPEAL * * * * * 11/25/02 EO11/25 11/27/02 106 NOTICE OF APPEAL by US Department of Justice, US Department of Treasury, Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, US Attorney District of New Mexico and Resident Agent in charge of US Customs Service Office of Investigations in Albuquerque, NM from Dist. Court decision; Fees not necessary— Distribution as required (cc: all counsel) (pg) (37k) Re: LETTER TRANSCRIPT ACKNOWLEDGMENT PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 15 _______________________________________________________ DATES DOCKET NUMBER PROCEEDINGS 11/25/02 EOD — 11/27/02 107 MOTION and Memorandum by U.S. Department of Justice, US Department of Treasury, Admiistrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration US attorney for the District of New Mexico and Resident 12/02/02 EOC — 12/02/02 108 RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to stay preliminary injunction pending appeal [107-1] [298k] RE: [107] MOTION and Memorandum [654] Agent in charge of US Customs Service Office of Investigations in Albuquerque to stay preliminary injunction pending appeal [654k] RE: [108] RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion to say [298k] RE: [109] MEMORANDUM OPINION, AND ORDER: by . . . [18K] RE: [110] CLERK’S MINUTES: before Chief Judge. . .[21k] 16 _______________________________________________________ DATES DOCKET NUMBER PROCEEDINGS 12/02/02 EOD — 12/03/02 109 MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER: by Chief Judge James A. Parker denying defts’ motion to stay preliminary injunction appeal (cc: all counsel*) (bap) (19k) Re: MOTION to stay preliminary injunction pending appeal
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
CV-00-01647
O CENTRO ESPIRITA BENEFICIENTE UNIÃO DO VEGETAL, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS
v.
JANET RENO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
This is a suit by a Christian religious organization and its members seeking (1) a declaratory judgment that Defendants' interpretation of the statutory and regulatory scheme of the Controlled Substances Act ("CSA"), 21 U.S.C. §§ 801-971 is unlawful and unconstitutional as applied to Plaintiffs in that it burdens their sacramental use of a tea known as Hoasca and resulted in Defendants acting beyond their legal authority in carrying out searches and seizures of Plaintiffs' property: (2) an order declaring that Hoasca is not a controlled substance under the CSA; (3) an order enjoining Defendants from applying the CSA against Plaintiffs for their sacramental use of the Hoasca tea; and (4) an order compelling the return and protection of property seized by federal officers.
PARTIES
1. O Centro Espìrita Beneficiente União do Vegetal ("UDV") is a religious organization duly formed under the laws of Brazil, with its headquarters in Brasilia, Brazil. The corporate plaintiff in this case is the United States Branch of the UDV, O Centro Espìrita Beneficiente União do Vegetal (USA), Inc. ("UDV-USA"). UDV-USA is a New Mexico corporation whose principal office is in the District of New Mexico. UDV-USA brings this action on its own behalf and on behalf of all its members in the United States.
2. Plaintiff Jeffrey Bronfman is President and Representative Mestre of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. He resides in the District of New Mexico. He brings this action on his own behalf as an adherent of UDV and as the duly authorized officer of UDV-USA.
3. Plaintiff Daniel Tucker is Vice President and a Mestre of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. He resides in Colorado.
4. Plaintiff Christina Barreto is Secretary and a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. She resides in Texas.
5. Plaintiff Fernando Barreto is Treasurer and a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. He resides in Texas.
6. Plaintiff Christine Berman is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. She resides in California.
7. Plaintiff Mitchel Berman is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. He resides in California.
8. Plaintiff Jussara de Almeida Dias is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. She resides in New Mexico.
9. Plaintiff Patricia Domingo is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. She resides in California.
10. Plaintiff David Lenderts, M.D., is a practicing member of the UDV-USA and a resident of Colorado.
11. Plaintiff David Martin, M.D., is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. He resides in the state of Washington.
12. Plaintiff Maria Eugenia Pelaez is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. She resides in Colorado.
13. Plaintiff Bryan Rea is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. He resides in Colorado.
14. Plaintiff Don St. John is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. He resides in the state of Washington.
15. Plaintiff Carmen Tucker is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. She resides in Colorado.
16. Plaintiff Solar Law is a Counselor of the UDV-USA and is a practicing member. He resides in New Mexico.
17. Defendant Janet Reno is the Attorney General of the United States. She is sued in her official capacity only, in which capacity she is responsible for the enforcement of the CSA. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e), she may be served by certified mail at the United States Department of Justice, 5111 Main Justice Building, 10th St. and Constitution Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C. 25030.
18. Defendant Donnie R. Marshall is Administrator of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA"). He is sued in his official capacity only, in which capacity he is responsible for enforcing and administering the CSA and for promulgating regulations implementing the CSA. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e), he may be served by certified mail at the DEA, 2401 Jefferson Davis Highway, Alexandria, VA 22301.
19. Defendant Lawrence H. Summers is Secretary of the Department of Treasury of the United States. He is sued in his official capacity only, in which capacity he is responsible for enforcing the customs laws, including CSA provisions governing the importation of controlled substances. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e), he may be served by certified mail at 3330 Main Treasury Building, 1500 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20220.
20. Defendant Norman Bay is the United States Attorney for the District of New Mexico. He is sued in his official capacity only, in which capacity he is responsible for prosecutions under the CSA in this District. His residence in his official capacity is at U.S. Attorney's Office, 201 Third Street, N.W., Suite 900, Albuquerque, NM 87102, where he may be served with process.
21. Defendant John O'Toole is the Resident Special Agent in Charge of the United States Customs Service Office of Criminal Investigation in Albuquerque, New Mexico. He is sued in his official capacity only, in which capacity he is responsible for criminal investigations relating to the laws and regulations enforced by the United States Customs Service, including the CSA. His residence in his official capacity is at 5700 Harper Dr. N.E., Suite 230, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109 where he may be served with process.
JURISDICTION
22. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1331 because the action arises under the laws and Constitution of the United States. Plaintiffs seek a determination under the standards of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ("RFRA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb-2000bb(4) and the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution of the lawfulness and constitutionality of Defendants' interpretation of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. §§ 801-971, and its implementing regulations as applied to Plaintiffs. This Court is authorized to grant declaratory relief by the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202. The Court is authorized to grant preliminary and permanent injunctive relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65.
VENUE
23. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e) because: (a) all Defendants are officers and employees of the United States and its agencies and were at all relevant times acting in their official capacities and under color of legal authority; (b) at least one Defendant officially resides in this District; (c) the cause of action arose in this District; and (d) a Plaintiff resides in this District and no real property is at issue.
FACTUAL ASSERTIONS
24. The UDV is the religion of the UDV-USA and is protected both by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by RFRA, 20 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb-2000bb(4).
25. All of the individual Plaintiffs and all U.S. members of the UDV are sincere adherents of the teachings of the UDV and, in particular, to the UDV's teachings concerning the use of Hoasca.
26. As a necessary and essential part of the UDV religious practice, the church members receive communion through the Hoasca tea, also known as the Vegetal, in their religious ceremonies. The religious use of the Hoasca tea is legally recognized and protected under the laws of Brazil. See Opinions of Brazil's Federal Narcotics Council ("CONFEN") (1986 & 1992); Certification from Attorney General for Citizens Rights of Brazil, Dec. 20, 1999.
27. The Hoasca tea is made by boiling parts of two plants, Banisteriopsis Caapi (known as Mariri) and Psychotria Viridis (known as Chacrona) in water during a ceremony. The Plaintiffs consider the plant concoction made in accordance with this process to be the sacrament Hoasca if it has been prepared during an official ceremony of the UDV known as a preparo. Trained religious leaders, known as mestres, always supervise the preparation of the sacramental tea during the preparos.
28. It is a central and essential tenet of the UDV that its members receive communion by partaking of Hoasca tea as a sacrament during religious rites. Through receiving the sacrament of the Hoasca, UDV adherents receive the Divine Holy Spirit. For disciples of the UDV, the spirit of the Hoasca, a manifestation of Divinity, is present within the tea.
29. These sessions of ritual communion constitute the core forum for the teachings of the religion. Many UDV teachings essential for the followers of this religion to know and understand may only be given in rituals in which the sacrament of the Hoasca tea is received.
30. Because UDV considers the Hoasca tea to be its central sacrament, a prohibition against partaking in the sacramental ingestion of the tea in the United States would completely prevent UDV members from freely practicing their religion here.
31. While many of the UDV-USA members are American citizens, many such members include Brazilian nationals who reside in the United States and who were either raised within the UDV religion or who have practiced it for decades. These individuals migrated to the United States with the confidence that the United States's tradition of religious tolerance would permit them to continue to exercise their religion freely.
32. UDV has in place methods of controlling and accounting for the receipt and dissemination of all Hoasca in the United States. UDV maintains strict internal controls to ensure that the Hoasca sacrament is never used or available outside the context of UDV's sacramental rites.
33. It is alleged that the Hoasca tea contains a very small quantity of NN dimethyltryptamine ("DMT"). The Defendants have taken the position with respect to the UDV's use of the Hoasca tea that plant material contained in the tea is a Schedule I controlled substance pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 812(c)(I)(c)(6) and 21 C.F.R. § 1308.11(d)(16) (1999). Severe civil and criminal penalties are prescribed for, inter alia, the unlawful importation, possession and distribution of DMT, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. §§ 841-844.
34. Scientists have conducted research on the use of the Hoasca tea within the religious context of the UDV and have concluded that the tea is non-addictive, is not harmful to human health, and poses none of the risks commonly found with the use of certain controlled substances. Also, anthropological research has shown that this tea has been used safely in religious contexts for more than 1,500 years.
35. On information and belief, the Defendants interpret the CSA to bar the use of the Hoasca tea for sacramental reasons by UDV members. Consistent with such an interpretation, on May 21, 1999, federal officers intercepted a shipment of Hoasca sent by the UDV in Brazil to the UDV-USA in care of its President, Mr. Jeffrey Bronfman, Plaintiff, at 176 Valley Dr., Santa Fe, New Mexico.
36. As Representative Mestre of the UDV-USA, Mr. Bronfman is authorized by the UDV to take custody of Hoasca and oversee its sacramental use by members of the UDV.
37. After the officers intercepted the shipment of Hoasca, Customs Special Agent DeFago obtained a warrant to search Mr. Bronfman's office at 176 Valley Dr., Santa Fe, New Mexico and to seize designated property if found at his office.
38. Mr. Bronfman's office also housed, and continues to house, the United States administrative office of the UDV-USA.
39. On May 21, 1999, federal officers executed the warrant as directed by Special Agent DeFago. Among the officers present were Special Agent B.H. Reimann of the United States Customs Service and other unknown federal agents.
40. The agents searched the premises designated in the warrant and seized, among other things, records and other documents belonging to the UDV-USA, a quantity of the Hoasca sacrament and personal papers of Mr. Bronfman.
41. To date, government officers have not arrested any of the Plaintiffs nor charged them with any crime as a result of the interception and seizure of Hoasca.
42. However, the U.S. Attorney's Office has conveyed to Plaintiffs that it is considering prosecution of UDV-USA members for violation of the provisions of the CSA barring importation, possession and distribution of DMT, based on the assumption that the plant material in the Hoasca contains a small quantity of DMT.
43. Moreover, Defendants have informed Plaintiffs that Defendants are considering destroying the seized Hoasca tea and will not provide any assurance to Plaintiffs that it will protect their sacrament.
44. As a result of the seizure of the Hoasca, as well as the threat of criminal prosecution, UDV-USA has been compelled to suspend the practice of their religion in the United States. The suspension took effect on May 22, 1999, immediately after the seizure at the Bronfman UDV-USA office. Plaintiffs' counsel has earnestly sought to obtain Defendants' agreement that they will not seek criminal action against Plaintiffs. After numerous discussions and meetings spanning the last year and one half, Defendants had repeatedly promised that a decision was imminent. Plaintiffs had abstained from taking legal action against Defendants because Defendants led them to believe that there was hope Defendants might agree that the law protected their religious practice. However, Defendants having failed and refused to deliver a decision, are effectively denying Plaintiffs' request. Thus, the time lag between the seizure of the Hoasca tea and the filing of this action is attributable to Defendants' delay in this regard. The actions of the Defendants have had a chilling and prohibitive effect on Plaintiffs' exercise of their religion.
45. The Defendants' threat to destroy the Hoasca is causing Plaintiffs to suffer both psychologically and spiritually because they consider any such destruction to be sacrilegious and blasphemous.
46. UDV leaders believe the threat of criminal prosecution is real, and rather than risk prosecution they have discontinued the sacramental use of the Hoasca tea in the United States.
47. The discontinuation of the sacramental use of the Hoasca, the threat of the destruction of the seized Hoasca, and the threat of criminal prosecution for engaging in UDV devotional practices substantially burdens the practice of the UDV religion within the meaning of the law. Without the sacrament, the religion would cease to exist in this country. Indeed, UDV members have already experienced calamitous disruption in their religious practices as a result of the prolonged deprivation of the Hoasca sacrament.
48. CSA regulations expressly exempt peyote from the CSA listing of Schedule I controlled substances for members of the Native American Church ("NAC") and those who supply peyote to NAC members. See 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31. No such exemption exists for Plaintiffs' use of Hoasca.
49. The CSA contains other exceptions permitting the use of controlled substances for purposes such as scientific research and medical use. See, e.g., 21 U.S.C. § 823, 21 C.F.R. §§ 291.505, 1301.26, 1301.32, 1301.34.
COUNT ONE
Violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
50. Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993 to prevent the government from burdening the free exercise of religion unless it had a compelling governmental interest in doing so and it accomplished its goal by the least restrictive means.
51. The Defendants consider the sacramental use, including possession, distribution and importation of the Hoasca tea by UDV members to be a criminal act barred by the CSA and regulations adopted pursuant to that Act.
52. Defendants' interpretation of CSA substantially burdens Plaintiffs' exercise of their religion.
53. Defendants' criminalization of Plaintiffs' sacramental use of Hoasca serves no compelling governmental interest.
54. Even assuming that Defendants' interpretation of the CSA did serve a compelling governmental interest, a complete ban on the sacramental use of the Hoasca tea by UDV members is not the least restrictive means of furthering any such interest.
55. For these reasons, Defendants have violated the statutory rights of UDV members embodied in RFRA, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-1(a) (1999).
COUNT TWO
Violation of First Amendment of U.S. Constitution
56. The framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution. The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment provides that Congress shall make no law "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion.
57. In Employment Division, Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a law imposing a substantial burden on religion need not be justified by a compelling governmental interest if it is neutral and of general applicability. However, if that law is either not neutral or is not one of general applicability, it must be justified by a compelling governmental interest that is narrowly tailored to advance that interest.
58. The statutory and regulatory scheme of the CSA is not neutral because it favors the NAC faith above other religions, including that of UDV members.
59. Likewise, the statutory and regulatory scheme of the CSA is not a law of general applicability because it provides immunity to NAC members from the penalties of the CSA, but does not provide immunity to Plaintiffs who are similarly situated.
60. The CSA also provides for numerous other exemptions for scientific research, medical purposes and other circumstances unrelated to the central religious issue raised here. It is therefore in no sense a law of general applicability.
61. Defendants have no compelling governmental interest in applying the CSA to criminalize Plaintiffs' religious use of Hoasca.
62. Even if it were assumed that Defendants had a compelling governmental interest in restricting the use of Hoasca through the CSA, such an interest could be furthered without prohibiting Plaintiffs' religious use of Hoasca. Thus, any such governmental interest could be furthered through less restrictive means.
63. For these reasons, Defendants have violated the First Amendment rights of Plaintiffs.
COUNT THREE
Violation of Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution
64. Plaintiffs are similarly situated to NAC members in their sacramental use of a substance considered a Schedule I controlled substance under the CSA. Nevertheless, Defendants have refused to accord the same deference to Plaintiffs.
65. Consequently, the Defendants' decision to allow the members of the NAC to use peyote for religious purposes, while denying the same protection to Plaintiffs, violates the Equal Protection rights of Plaintiffs guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
COUNT FOUR
Improper Application of Controlled Substances Act to Hoasca
66. Implicit in Defendants' actions complained of herein is Defendants' assumption that the Hoasca tea is covered by the CSA as a controlled substance.
67. The CSA does not list Hoasca, or the plants from which it is derived, in Schedule I or anywhere else in the Act as a controlled substance.
68. Instead, Defendants assume that because DMT can be extracted from the plant materials used to prepare the tea, the plant materials themselves are Schedule I controlled substances.
69. However, where Congress has sought to designate a plant, rather than a chemical substance, as one restricted under the CSA, it has done so explicitly. For example, the CSA lists the peyote cactus as a Schedule I controlled substance. The CSA lists the chemical agent found in peyote, mescaline, separately.
70. Accordingly, had Congress wanted to designate Hoasca as a controlled substance, it would have expressly done so. Congress has made it clear that the scheduling of a chemical does not automatically mean that the plant found to endogenously contain this chemical is scheduled as well.
71. Hoasca is made from brewing in water two plants, neither of which is scheduled under the CSA. What is ritually created from this brew is, at a scientific level, a plant concoction not listed under the CSA.
72. Hoasca is not a controlled substance.
73. Based upon the erroneous and unlawful determination that Hoasca is a controlled substance under the CSA, Defendants have considered criminally prosecuting some or all of Plaintiffs for past possession, distribution and/or importation of the Hoasca, have threatened to criminally prosecute Plaintiffs for any future possession, distribution and/or importation of Hoasca, have intercepted the shipment of Hoasca to Mr. Bronfman on or about May 21, 1999; have searched the Bronfman UDV-USA premises at 176 Valley Dr., Santa Fe, New Mexico; and have seized additional Hoasca from those premises and other items on that same day.
74. Defendants' erroneous assumption that Hoasca is a controlled substance makes all of the actions described in the preceding paragraph beyond the authority of Defendants and thus unlawful.
COUNT FIVE
Violation of Fourth Amendment
75. There was no fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime would be found in the container intercepted by Defendants on May 21, 1999 or in the Bronfman UDV-USA offices because possession, receipt and use of Hoasca is not unlawful inasmuch as it is not a controlled substance under the CSA.
76. Thus, Defendants had no probable cause to intercept the Hoasca shipment on or about May 21, 1999, to search the Bronfman UDV-USA premises at 176 Valley Dr., Santa Fe, New Mexico, or to seize the additional Hoasca and other items at these premises.
77. Because Defendants searched and seized the Hoasca and other items without probable cause, such search and seizure violated Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment right to be free from unlawful search and seizure.
COUNT SIX
Violation of Fifth Amendment
78. Defendants have seized the Hoasca and other items described above from Plaintiffs to assert ownership and control of the property.
79. Defendants provided Plaintiffs no notice or hearing before seizing these items.
80. No extraordinary circumstances justified the failure to provide Plaintiffs pre-deprivation notice and hearing.
81. The seizure of the Hoasca and other items deprived Plaintiffs of their rights of ownership and possession of the items and sacramental consumption of the Hoasca, in particular, and constituted a violation of the Plaintiffs' rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
COUNT SEVEN
Administrative Procedure Act
82. Defendants' conduct as set forth above constitutes agency action that is: (a) arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion and otherwise not in accordance with the law; (b) contrary to Plaintiffs' constitutional and statutory rights; (c) in excess of statutory jurisdiction and authority; and (d) without observance of procedures required by law. Such action should be set aside and declaratory and injunctive relief provided under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 701-706.
COUNT EIGHT
Violation of International Law and Treaties
83. As alleged, Brazil officially and expressly permits UDV members in Brazil to use Hoasca tea for religious purposes. See Opinions of Brazil's Federal Narcotics Council ("CONFEN") (1986 & 1992); Certification from Attorney General for Citizens Rights of Brazil, Dec. 20, 1999.
84. The doctrine of comity, as established under international law and recognized in the United States, encourages deference to foreign legal and political judgments to foster international cooperation and encourage reciprocity between the United States and other countries. See Spatola v. United States, 925 F.2d 615, 618 (2d Cir. 1991).
85. Federal agencies regularly invoke the doctrine of comity as a guide for decisions that touch on foreign interests.
86. Where "fairly possible," a United States statute should be construed so as not to conflict with international law or an international agreement of the United States. See Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law § 114.
87. The United States is a signatory to the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR"), which ensures the freedom of everyone to "have or to adopt a religion of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in the community of others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice, and teaching." ICCPR, 138 Cong. Rec. S4781-84 (1992).
88. The United States has also endorsed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which protects the rights of individuals not only to believe as they wish, but also to "manifest" that belief through practice, including "ceremonial acts" and "participation in rituals." See U.N. Human Rts. Comm., General Comment No. 22, p. 4 (1993).
89. Finally, the United States Congress has recently passed the International Religious Freedom Act ("IRFA"), Pub. L. No. 105-292, 112 Stat. 2788 (1998), codified at 22 U.S.C. §§ 6401-6481. IRFA establishes as United States policy the promotion of freedom of religion and cooperation with foreign governments "that affirm and protect religious freedom, in order to develop multilateral . . . initiatives to . . . promote religious freedom abroad."
90. These laws make clear that it is not only "fairly possible" for the United States to defer to Brazilian law permitting the religious use of Hoasca, but that domestic and international law, in fact, require such deference.
91. Under these circumstances, Defendants' interpretation of the CSA forbidding the religious use of Hoasca by Plaintiffs in the United States clearly violates the doctrine of comity, treaties to which the United States has endorsed, and domestic law.
COUNT NINE
Declaratory Judgment
92. Defendants' interpretation of the CSA as considering Hoasca to be a controlled substance as well as forbidding the sacramental use of Hoasca by Plaintiffs, as explained in the above Counts, creates an actual controversy within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2201(a).
93. For these reasons, Plaintiffs are entitled to a declaratory judgment that all of the above described actions were and are unlawful and to such additional declaratory relief as described in Plaintiffs' Prayer for Relief.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiffs seek the following relief:
1. A judgment declaring that Defendants' interpretation of the CSA as barring Plaintiffs' sacramental use of Hoasca violates RFRA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb-2000bb(4), the First and Fourth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and international law.
2. A judgment declaring that the CSA does not apply to Hoasca or the plants from which it is derived.
3. A judgment declaring that federal agents who intercepted and seized the Hoasca shipment on or about May 21, 1999, and who searched the premises at 176 Valley Dr., Santa Fe, New Mexico, and then seized additional Hoasca acted beyond the bounds of their legal authority because Hoasca is not a controlled substance under the terms of the CSA.
4. A judgment declaring that the interception and seizure by federal agents of the Hoasca on or about May 21, 1999, as well as their search of the premises at 176 Valley Dr., Santa Fe, New Mexico, and resulting additional seizure of Hoasca constituted a violation of RFRA and the Administrative Procedure Act as well as the constitutional rights of Plaintiffs under the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
5. An order enjoining Defendants from enforcing the CSA against any Plaintiff anywhere within the jurisdiction of the federal courts of the United States for the sacramental use of the Hoasca tea, including its possession, consumption, distribution and importation for this purpose.
6. An order compelling Defendants to return to Plaintiff Bronfman the Hoasca the United States Customs Service intercepted on or about May 21, 1999, and all things seized from the premises at 176 Valley Dr., Santa Fe, New Mexico.
7. An order compelling Defendants to protect the Hoasca intercepted on or about May 21, 1999, and seized from 176 Valley Dr., Santa Fe, New Mexico, and prohibiting Defendants from removing, destroying or harming the Hoasca in any way.
8. Attorneys fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 5 U.S.C. § 504.
9. Such other and further relief as is warranted.
Respectfully submitted,
FREEDMAN BOYD DANIELS
HOLLANDER GOLDBERG &
CLINE, P.A.
/s/ NANCY HOLLANDER
NANCY HOLLANDER
JOHN W. BOYD
YOLANDA GALLEGOS (Of Counsel)
20 First Plaza, Suite 700
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Telephone No.: 505-842-9960
Facsimile No.: 505-842-0761
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
No. CV 00-1647 JP/RLP
O CENTRO ESPIRITA BENEFICIENTE UNIAO DO VEGETAL, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS
v.
ERIC HOLDER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
[Filed: Feb. 1, 2001]
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Defendants Eric Holder, Donnie R. Marshall, Paul H. O'Neill, Norman Bay, and John O'Toole hereby answer Plaintiffs' Original Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (hereinafter "Complaint") as follows.1
First Defense
Plaintiffs' Complaint fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted.
Second Defense
Defendants answer the numbered paragraphs of Plaintiffs' Complaint as follows:
1. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
2. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
3. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
4. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
5. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
6. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
7. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
8. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
9. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
10. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
11. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
12. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
13. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
14. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
15. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
16. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
17. Deny that Janet Reno is the Attorney General of the United States; aver substitution of Eric Holder as Acting Attorney General, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d)(1). Admit the reminder of the paragraph as applied to the Acting Attorney General.
18. Admit.
19. Deny that Lawrence H. Summers is the Secretary of the Department of Treasury of the United States; aver substitution of Paul H. O'Neill pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d)(1). Admit the remainder of the paragraph as applied to Secretary O'Neill.
20. Admit.
21. Admit.
22. The first, third, and fourth sentences present legal conclusions to which no response is required. The second sentence presents a characterization of this action to which no response is required.
23. Admit.
24. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny whether "the UDV is the religion of the UDV-USA." The allegation that the UDV "is protected by both the First Amendment and the United States Constitution and by RFRA, 20 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb-2000bb(4)" is a legal conclusion to which no response is required.
25. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
26. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
27. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
28. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
29. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
30. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
31. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
32. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
33. Deny the first sentence, except to admit that the Hoasca tea contains N,N dimethyltryptamine ("DMT"). Deny the second sentence, except to admit that one of the plants allegedly used to make Hoasca tea and the tea itself contain DMT and are therefore covered under Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. Admit the third sentence.
34. Deny the first sentence to the extent it alleges that scientific research has established that the tea is non-addictive, is not harmful to human health, and poses none of the risks commonly found with the use of certain controlled substances. Deny the second sentence, inasmuch as it alleges that anthropological research has established that the tea has been used safely in religious contexts for more than 1,500 years.
35. Deny the first sentence, except to admit that the CSA prohibits the importation, possession, and distribution of materials containing DMT, such as Hoasca, for purposes other than those specified in the Act. Deny the second sentence, except to admit that on or around May 21, 1999, U.S. Customs officials intercepted a shipment of Hoasca from a foreign shipper listed as "Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal, Brazil" to a consignee listed as "Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal," 176 Valley Drive Santa Fe, New Mexico.
36. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
37. Deny, except to admit that after the U.S. Customs officials intercepted the shipment of Hoasca, Customs Special Agent DeFago obtained a warrant to search the premises at 176 Valley Drive, Santa Fe, New Mexico and to seize designated items if found at those premises.
38. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
39. Admit.
40. Deny, except to admit that U.S. Customs officials searched the premises designated in the warrant and seized a quantity of the Hoasca tea and certain records, documents, and papers.
41. Admit.
42. Deny, except to admit that the U.S. Attorney's Office has refused to provide the assurances requested by Plaintiffs' counsel that it will not prosecute past, present, or future violations of the CSA by UDV members based on their importation, possession, or distribution of Hoasca.
43. Deny that Defendants have informed Plaintiffs that Defendants are considering destroying the seized Hoasca tea; admit that Defendants have not provided any assurance to Plaintiffs that Defendants "will protect their sacrament."
44. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in the first and second sentences. Admit the third sentence to the extent that it alleges that Plaintiffs' counsel has sought to obtain the agreement of the United States Attorneys Office for the District of New Mexico that it will not initiate prosecution against Plaintiffs. Deny the fourth sentence, except to admit that the United States Attorneys Office for the District of New Mexico has had several discussions and meetings with Plaintiffs' counsel. Deny the fifth sentence, except to admit that Plaintiffs have not heretofore taken legal action against Defendants. Deny the sixth, seventh, and eighth sentences.
45. Deny that Defendants are threatening to destroy the tea. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in this paragraph.
46. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
47. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
48. Admit the first sentence inasmuch as alleges that 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31 provides that the listing of peyote as a controlled substance in Schedule I does not apply to the nondrug use of peyote in bona fide religious ceremonies of the Native American Church. Admit the second sentence.
49. Deny, except to admit that the CSA permits the use of controlled substances for delineated purposes, including certain scientific research and medical uses.
50. Admit that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which Congress passed in 1993, provides that the government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion unless it does so in furtherance of a compelling government interest and by the least restrictive means. The remainder of the paragraph presents a characterization of Congressional intent to which no response is required.
51. Deny, except to admit that the CSA and its implementing regulations prohibit the importation, possession, and distribution of materials containing DMT, such as Hoasca, for uses other than those specified in the Act.
52. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegation contained in this paragraph.
53. Deny.
54. Deny.
55. Deny.
56. The first sentence presents a characterization of the intent of the framers of the Constitution to which no response is required. Admit the second sentence.
57. This paragraph contains a characterization of Employment Division, Dep't of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), to which no response is required.
58. Deny.
59. Deny.
60. Deny, except to admit that the CSA permits the use of controlled substances for delineated purposes, including certain scientific research and medical uses. Deny the second sentence.
61. Deny.
62. Deny.
63. Deny.
64. Deny.
65. Deny.
66. Deny, except to admit that the CSA and its implementing regulations prohibit the importation, possession, and distribution of materials containing DMT, such as Hoasca, for uses other than those specified in the Act.
67. Admit that Schedule I does not list hoasca or the plants from which it is derived by name; deny that hoasca and the plants from which it is derived are not covered under Schedule I.
68. Deny, except to admit that one of the plants allegedly used to prepare the tea and the tea itself are covered under Schedule I as materials that contain DMT.
69. Deny, except to admit that Congress scheduled certain plants. Admit the second sentence, except for the allegation that it is an "example" of the allegation contained in the first sentence. Admit the third sentence.
70. Deny.
71. Deny the first sentence to the extent it alleges that the plants used to make Hoasca are not covered under the CSA. Deny the second sentence to the extent it alleges that the plant concoction in question is not covered under the CSA.
72. Deny.
73. Deny, except to admit that the United States Attorneys Office for the District of New Mexico has refused to provide the assurances requested by Plaintiffs' counsel that it will not prosecute past, present, or future violations of the CSA by UDV members who import, possess, and/or distribute Hoasca; and that United States Customs officials intercepted the shipment of Hoasca to Mr. Bronfman on or about May 21, 1999, searched the premises at 176 Valley Dr., Santa Fe, New Mexico, and seized additional Hoasca and other items from those premises on that same day.
74. Deny.
75. Deny.
76. Deny.
77. Deny.
78. Deny, except to admit that U.S. Customs officials seized the Hoasca and other items to assert custody and control over them.
79. Admit.
80. Deny.
81. Deny.
82. Deny.
83. Defendants lack information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in this paragraph.
84. This paragraph presents a characterization of a legal doctrine to which no response is required.
85. Deny, except to admit that, where appropriate, federal agencies invoke the doctrine of comity as a guide for decisions that touch on foreign interests.
86. This paragraph presents a legal conclusion to which no response is required.
87. Deny, except to admit that the United States is a signatory to the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR"), which requires signatories to undertake to ensure that "[e]veryone shall have the right to . . . have or adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in the community of others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice, and teaching," subject to "such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others." ICCPR 138 Cong. Rec. S4781-84.
88. Deny, except to admit that the United States has endorsed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which asserts that individuals should be able to manifest their religious belief through practice, subject to "such limitations as are determined by law" for the purpose of "securing recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society." UDHR art. 29 ¶ 2.
89. Admit the first sentence. The second sentence presents a characterization of a statute to which no response is required.
90. Deny.
91. Deny.
92. This paragraph presents a legal conclusion to which no response is required.
93. Deny.
Defendants deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the requested relief or to any relief whatsoever. Wherefore, having answered Plaintiffs' complaint, Defendants request that the complaint be dismissed with prejudice,
and that Defendants be granted their costs and such other relief as the Court deems proper.
Dated: January 30, 2001 Respectfully submitted,
STUART E. SCHIFFER
Acting Assistant Attorney
General
NORMAN BAY
United States Attorney
for the District of New
Mexico
VINCENT M. GARVEY
Deputy Branch Director
/s/ ELIZABETH GOITEIN
ELIZABETH GOITEIN
United States Department
of Justice
Civil Division
901 E Street, N.W.,
Room 1032
Washington, D.C. 20004
Telephone: (202) 514-4470
Attorneys for Defendants
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint was served this 30th day of January, 2001, by first-class mail, upon counsel for the plaintiffs as follows:
Nancy Hollander, John W. Boyd, and
Yolanda Gallegos, Esq.
20 First Plaza, Suite 700
Albuquerque, NM 87102
/s/ ELIZABETH GOITEIN
ELIZABETH GOITEIN
[Plaintiffs' Exh. A]
DECLARATION OF JEFFREY BRONFMAN
1. My name is Jeffrey Bronfman. I am a U.S. citizen, and I reside in Santa Fe, New Mexico. I make this declaration on behalf of myself and the Centro Espirita Beneficente União do Vegetal ("UDV"). I am a member of the UDV and believe in the doctrine of that church. As I describe in detail below, I have been unable to practice my religion in the United States for more than a year and a half.
2. My current position is the Representative Mestre of the UDV in the United States. That position is the head religious and administrative authority of the UDV in the U.S.
3. I have never been convicted or indicted of any crime under any federal or state law, or under the laws of any foreign nation.
4. I consider it an honor and privilege to be in the position of introducing my religion to the government and people of the United States. I see the UDV as a Light in this world, bringing wisdom, understanding, hope, comfort and peace into the lives of its practitioners.
5. The UDV was reestablished in a time and place of great suffering, and poverty. It appeared among people who lived in near slavery in almost unimaginably harsh and difficult living conditions in the rainforests of Brazil in the 1950's. Today, its goodness has reached the society of the greatest influence and political power in the world, a country of unprecedented material and technological accomplishment.
6. The bringing of this institution of goodness and spiritual wisdom into our society has been conducted with great care, respect and humility. It is because I have believed and trusted in the noble principles on which this country was founded that I have accepted this mission under tremendous personal strain, and considerable legal risk. I have done so because I believe in the beauty and truth of this religious practice, and the good it can bring to our country and to the world.
The UDV in Brazil
7. The UDV originated in Brazil, and its headquarters are in Brasilia, the capital of that country. Jose Gabriel da Costa, known as Mestre Gabriel, founded the UDV in 1961 when he worked as a rubber tapper in the Amazon Rainforest.
8. The UDV in Brazil has nearly 8,000 members, who belong to more than eighty congregations, called "nucleos" (or, in English, nuclei). UDV nuclei exist in almost every part of Brazil. The UDV has organized its nuclei into fifteen geographic regions in Brazil, and all of the nuclei are under the administrative and doctrinal supervision of UDV headquarters in Brasilia.
9. The UDV leadership in Brasilia exercises strict hierarchical control over all UDV congregations and members. The UDV carefully trains its clergy in all facets of church doctrine and ceremony, including the safe and controlled preparation and administration of the sacramental Hoasca tea.
10. The church administration in Brasilia has several permanent departments that oversee the theological, financial and charitable activities of the UDV congregations. The highest individual authority in the UDV is the General Representative Mestre, who is elected by the Administrative Council of the UDV to a three-year term of office.
The Origins and Development of the UDV in the United States
11. The first session of the UDV in the United States took place in the summer of 1988 in Norwood, Colorado. At that time, Dr. David Lenderts, who had encountered the religion while in Brazil, invited two Brazilian UDV mestres to come to the U.S. to perform a ceremony. The UDV's headquarters in Brasilia authorized the visit.
12. I became personally aware of the UDV in 1989, when the two Brazilian mestres returned to the United States with a proposal to acquire and preserve a section of the Brazilian rainforest. At that time, I was working as the director of a foundation committed to ecological preservation, and I became interested in the proposal. I did not attend a UDV ceremony in 1989, however.
13. In 1990, I assisted the administration of the UDV in the formation of a new ecological association in Brazil, and in July of 1990 I traveled to Brazil to explore the area of the proposed preserve and to assist in its acquisition. It was on that trip that I first attended a UDV ceremony and drank the Hoasca tea. I was very moved and inspired by what I witnessed.
14. In 1992, I returned to Brazil to continue to learn more about the UDV. I associated on the 22nd of February, 1992, in the city of Rio Branco in the Brazilian state of Acre. As a result of my decision, as well as my desire to study and learn the teachings of the church in depth (which required that I learn the Portuguese language), I made four trips to Brazil during that year.
15. In September 1992, I invited two mestres from Brazil to speak about spirituality and ecology at an environmental conference I was organizing in Santa Fe, New Mexico. The mestres directed UDV sessions in California and New Mexico and were impressed with the sincerity, interest and seriousness of the attendees. On this basis, the General Headquarters agreed to send mestres to the U.S. to direct sessions every three months.
16. In November 1992, I was convoked into the Instructive Body of the UDV in Brazil. This is the level of the church hierarchy within which future mestres and counselors are trained. The decision to convoke me was carefully considered by mestres who were members of the council of the highest spiritual authority in the UDV. This honor and responsibility were extended to me because of the seriousness and dedication with which I was seeking to learn and understand the doctrine of the UDV, as well as the degree of my spiritual development as perceived, through my conduct, by these older mestres. Significantly, the decision to convoke me into this body was reached after also considering the level of proficiency I had acquired with the Portuguese language.
17. There is a body of teachings within the UDV that is presented only in Instructive Sessions. These sessions are conducted entirely in Portuguese. In order for a disciple to reach a level where he or she can receive this knowledge, he or she must first demonstrate, through conduct, a high level of dedication, respect and obedience to the laws of the church. To reach this level, a person from the United States must also learn to speak a new language. This would be the equivalent of a serious student of Catholic theology being required to learn Latin, a Jewish person studying Hebrew to read the Torah, or a student of the ancient Vedic scriptures learning Sanskrit.
18. Following my convocation and initial training session, I was authorized to begin directing UDV sessions in the U.S. From December 1992 to December 1993, I conducted sessions once a month with a small group of people in Santa Fe. In September 1993, I was convoked as a counselor within the UDV by the Brazilian authorities, and in 1994, I became a full mestre of the UDV. Each of these increases in my responsibilities was preceded by months of experiential, as well as theological, training and supervision.
19. My work and development were carefully monitored and supervised by the General Representative Mestre and the mestres who came to the United States to conduct services every three months. These mestres all represented the General Headquarters of the UDV in Brasilia, or other positions of the highest authority within the church. During these visits, I would accompany these individuals in their travels. I spent every day refining my comprehension of the teachings of the UDV and received their counsel and orientation regarding the establishment of the UDV religion in the United States. Together, we would study and discuss the laws of the UDV, conduct sessions where the teachings and stories were shared and examined, and hold meetings where administrative and disciplinary actions were discussed. In my frequent trips to Brazil (three or four times a year), I would also spend ten days to three weeks with the mestres, who became my closest teachers and from whom I learned about the UDV, its history, theology and structure.
20. In July 1994, the General Representative Mestre, who is the highest-ranking official in the UDV, came to the U.S. with the intention of beginning the process of formally establishing the UDV in this country. In a formal, ceremony, the General Representative Mestre conferred on me the authority and responsibility to supervise the practice of the UDV religion in this country. I have continued in this capacity under the direct supervision of the General Representative Mestre since that time.
21. As the Representative Mestre of the UDV in the U.S., I am the highest authority of the UDV throughout this country and am responsible for all of the following:
A. The supervision of the distribution of the tea, within the UDV, in the United States. This includes establishing the schedule of sessions in each area and (in discussion with the mestres and counselors in each area) authorizing the distribution of the tea in extra or instructive sessions. In this capacity it is also my responsibility to appoint the individuals to direct the scheduled sessions.
B. The supervision of the faithful transmission of the religious doctrine and ensuring that the works of the members obey the norms of our religion.
C. The supervision of what our church's laws describe as the "order and discipline" in all of the five geographic areas where the distribution of the tea, within the UDV, has been authorized in the United States. Within this capacity it is my duty to apply the law, by preparing and signing executive bulletins which warn or sanction the members if the laws of the UDV are not being followed.
D. When appropriate, to convoke disciples to be integrated within the Cadre of Mestres, Body of Counselors, and Instructive Body. In the first two cases, these decisions are made with the accord of the existing Cadre of Mestres and Body of Counselors in the United States.
E. To determine the need for "preparos" of the tea (communal events at which the Hoasca tea is prepared under church supervision) and, working with the Cadre of Mestres in Brazil, to schedule the dates of these events. It is also my responsibility to authorize and determine which members from the United States will travel to Brazil to assist with the preparation of the tea to be used in this country.
F. To prepare and send letters of introduction to accompany members traveling from the United States to Brazil, authorizing them to participate in sessions and receive the communion of the tea when they travel to visit other nuclei.
G. To grant transfers to the members who, in the event of necessity, move to another location or wish to be associated with another nucleus of the UDV.
H. To preside over the Administrative Board of Directors in each area.
I. To provide pastoral counseling to the membership within the teachings and doctrine of the church; to provide orientation and comfort to the members in all manner of marital and other personal challenges.
J. To conduct weddings, baptisms and all legal functions of the church that require the exercise of religious authority.
K. To stay in frequent communication and work closely with the General Representative Mestre with regard to all aspect of the work of the UDV in the United States.
22. The UDV in the U.S. currently consists of approximately 130 members in five congregations. One of these, in Santa Fe, New Mexico, has attained the status of a full "nucleo" (or nucleus) and has approximately fifty members. An authorized congregation not yet of nucleus status in Norwood, Colorado, has eighteen members; a similar congregation in Seattle, Washington has twenty-seven members; one in Marin County, California, has twenty-seven members; and one in Plantation, Florida, has nine members. All of these congregations are subject to my authority. In addition to this supervisory role as Representative Mestre for the United States, I am also the Representative Mestre for the Santa Fe nucleus. The other congregations in the U.S. are headed by coordinators under my authority, all of whom are either mestres or counselors within the UDV hierarchy. All of these individuals speak Portuguese and have been trained to direct sessions and the UDV's work in each area, under my supervision.
23. Several UDV members in the U.S. are citizens of, or immigrants from, Brazil. They were UDV members, for many years, in their home country.
24. Growth of membership in the U.S. is extremely slow. The UDV does not proselytize for new members, and we require prospective members to wait for a probationary period that may last as long as one to two years before joining. An individual seeking to join the UDV in the U.S. must be nominated to me by an existing member. Only individuals eighteen years of age or older are allowed to associate within the UDV.
25. Every prospective new member in the U.S. is interviewed either by me personally or by a mestre, or trained counselor, to whom I have delegated the authority to interview prospective members. We inquire about the individual's medical history, including current use of prescription drugs, to ensure that the prospective member can partake safely of the Hoasca sacrament. Prospective members are also screened for overall maturity, responsibility, mental and emotional stability, and intentions.
26. As head of the UDV in the U.S., I do not support or permit active proselytizing for new members. Moreover, to ensure strict control over the congregations and UDV members, and their use of the Hoasca sacrament, I do not intend to allow membership growth of more than ten to twenty percent annually over the next five years.
27. The U.S. branch of the UDV is incorporated as a New Mexico nonprofit corporation, with a board of directors of seven members.
28. In 1994, the UDV sought and received tax exempt status as a section 501(c)(3) organization under the Internal Revenue Code. It is also recognized as a church under sections 509(a)(1) and 170(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code.
29. The UDV has a similar tax exempt status in New Mexico, Colorado, Washington, and California.
30. The UDV sustains itself financially in the United States through the collection of membership dues. The dues are $55 per month, although this amount is reduced in cases of financial need; dues are tax deductible under U.S. law because of the UDV's status as a church. The U. S. branch of the UDV sends ten percent of the dues it receives to support the administrative needs of the church headquarters in Brazil. Some individuals members choose to make additional contributions to the UDV.
31. Members of the UDV in the U. S. perform significant charitable work. Much of the work has been focused in the field of environmental preservation. UDV members in the U. S. have established, and continue to support on an ongoing basis, the New Enchantment Association, a nonprofit charitable corporation organized to promote rainforest preservation and other ecological projects in Central and South America. The remainder of this Declaration relates to the U.S. branch of the UDV, unless otherwise stated.
UDV Ceremonial Practice
32. The UDV holds regular religious services at 8:00 p.m. on the first and third Saturday of each month and on ten other fixed religious holidays during the year. The dates of these holidays are: January 6, February 10, March 27, the second Saturday in May, June 23, July 22, September 27, November 1, December 24, and December 31.
33. A local mestre may hold up to six additional instructive sessions annually and may hold a small number of additional sessions to commemorate special events such as members' weddings.
34. Directing a session within the UDV is considered a solemn and very serious responsibility. In the United States, this responsibility is administered by a mestre or counselor or a member of the instructive body; however, only under circumstances of rare necessity would a member of the instructive body direct a session without the direct supervision of a counselor or mestre.
35. To effectively direct a session, a person must know how to make the requisite "chamadas" (calls), transmit the doctrine, respond to questions and provide guidance and orientation to the participants, all under the effect of the tea. Directing a session requires great concentration, developed spiritual knowledge, and maturity within the teachings of the church.
36. Before being entrusted with this responsibility, a person realistically must have a few years of experience in the UDV, speak a basic level of Portuguese and have a firm understanding, and acceptance, of the religious doctrine. It is a skill and an art that one develops over years of experience and practice. The role of the directing mestre is part teacher, part counselor and part spiritual guide. The knowledge required to effectively fulfill this function is substantial. It must be explained here that, although the mestres fulfill the function of priests or ministers within the religion, they are not paid for their services. They all perform their religious duties without financial compensation. This is true for the counselors of the UDV as well.
37. In each nucleus, or other congregation, a directing mestre is given the authority to lead the ceremony. Seating within the ceremony is established by UDV rule: the directing mestre sits at the head of a table below an arch displaying the words "Estrela Divina Universal" ("Divine Universal Star"). The congregants sit around the table and in rows parallel to the longer sides of the table.
38. The atmosphere of UDV religious services is serious, meditative, devotional, spiritual and communal. UDV sessions are not characterized by entertainment, frivolity or pleasure-seeking.
39. Each religious ceremony begins with the directing mestre's giving of the sacramental Hoasca tea to the participants. The mestre gives each UDV member a glass containing a measured amount of the tea; the members stand in silence until each congregant has a glass in hand.
40. Before drinking, the congregation engages in a moment of silent prayer, and then the mestre leads all present in a prayer spoken in Portuguese: "Que Deus nos guie no caminho da luz para sempre e sempre. Amen, Jesus." ("May God guide us on the path of light forever and ever. Amen, Jesus.") The congregation then drinks the sacrament and is seated for the reading of the laws of the church by a designated participant.
41. After the reading of the laws, a designated participant provides an interpretive explanation. By the time the explanation is completed, the congregants typically have begun to feel the effects of the tea, and a period of individualized contemplation begins. The mestre sings a series of "chamadas" (calls) to encourage the spiritual exercise. Thereafter, the mestre makes his way to each congregant and asks a series of questions to encourage contemplation and to assess each participant's state of mind and well-being. The mestre then sings several other "chamadas" interspersed with periods for silent reflection by the participants.
42. During the second part of each service, the mestre leads a period of spiritual teaching, often in response to the particular needs and circumstances of the participants. During this period, participants ask the mestre questions about particular topics of spiritual or personal concern. Mestres are trained in the oral traditions of the UDV and tell stories or recite chamadas containing teachings of the church in response to participants' questions.
43. The ceremony continues with more ritual singing of chamadas followed by a more informal period of unstructured conversion among the congregants. After a few minutes of silent concentration, and just before midnight, a particular chamada is chanted to bring closure to the session and the day.
44. The ceremonies on religious holidays follow the same rituals, except that the presiding mestre might tell special stories. For example, June 23 is an annual holiday to contemplate the life and teachings of John the Baptist; on that day, the mestre tells a particular story. Also, ceremonies to honor special occasions include stories and chamadas appropriate for those occasions. UDV clergy occasionally perform special ceremonies, such as weddings and funerals, which are religious in nature but do not involve use of the Hoasca tea.
45. The requirements and procedure for obtaining a license to perform weddings in this country vary from state to state, but generally a license is given to ministers of religious institutions recognized within the state. I am legally authorized to perform, and have performed, marriages in the states of New Mexico, Colorado, California and Washington, locations where the UDV is formally recognized.
Families and The UDV Religion
46. The UDV teaches the importance and sanctity of the nuclear family, in terms not only of its importance to the spiritual development of each individual but also of its importance in the ordering of society. With this understanding, great care is given to the raising of children which, within the UDV, is considered a "sublime mission."
47. In my early visits to Brazil, the aspect that most called my attention to the uniqueness of the UDV was the happiness, intelligence and beauty of the children. In the decade since I first encountered this religion, I have come to know many young people and have watched them grow up within the church. The results are remarkable.
48. Overall, one can observe an extremely close relationship between all of the children of the UDV and their parents. The children generally show extraordinary obedience, respect and affection for their parents; rarely does one a encounter the kind of hostility, fighting and arguing unfortunately so common in our culture and Brazilian culture outside of the UDV.
49. In the United States over the past seven years we have received a number of adolescents who have been raised within that UDV in Brazil and who wished to come to the United States for a year or two, to go to school here and learn English. Usually, these were children of mestres and counselors in Brazil who lived in the homes of UDV members in this country. These young people, generally from the ages of sixteen to nineteen, lived in the United States for a year, participated in sessions and the religious life of the community, and continued their education. We have several examples of these young people excelling in school, and receiving civic and educational awards in the communities where they lived.
Rules of Conduct
50. Under my authority, the UDV imposes strict rules of conduct on its members in the U.S., violation of which can subject a member to expulsion from the church. Members may consume the Hoasca tea only during UDV ceremonies, and only in the amount provided as a sacrament. The UDV does not permit the use of the tea outside of those ceremonies and would consider such non-sacramental use sacrilegious.
51. Moreover, the UDV does not permit its members to use any illegal drugs at any time. Transgressing this ban could lead to a member's expulsion. On more than one occasion, I have personally advised individual UDV members orally, and in writing, that their use of illicit drugs could lead to expulsion.
52. The UDV also strongly discourages all alcohol use by its members and absolutely prohibits its excessive use. I am aware of numerous American UDV members who used alcohol before joining the UDV, but have not partaken of alcohol since becoming members.
53. The UDV imposes other rules of conduct on members. The doctrine of the UDV, which is transmitted orally within our religious services, is a comprehensive theology that serves to inspire and assist in the highest levels of moral and spiritual development among our adherents. The Ten Commandments are part of the doctrine of the church, and the mestres elaborate on them at ceremonies. Designated participants read several church bulletins aloud soon after the beginning of each religious service. These bulletins contain specific instructions on the members' behavior. I and other officers of the UDV in the U.S. direct all members to follow and respect federal and state law.
54. Finally, the UDV requires that each member give high priority to his or her family commitments, to treat others with love and respect and to attend UDV sessions regularly.
55. Violations of the church law that can lead to dismissal include the failure to attend the regularly scheduled sessions; the failure to pay monthly dues; the abuse of alcohol or the use of any illegal drugs; and the violation of state or federal laws.
56. In May of 1999, following the seizure of our religious sacrament by agents of the United States Customs Service, the General Representative Mestre made the decision to suspend all future sessions of the UDV in this country until such time as our religious practices would be fully recognized and permitted under the law.
The Purpose and Centrality of the Tea in the UDV Religion
57. Sacramental use of Hoasca is an essential, integral and central part of the UDV religion. The very name of the UDV-"União do Vegetal"-refers to the union of two plants in the Hoasca tea. The centrality of the tea to the UDV's religious practice is so fundamental that our religion is named for it.
58. We believe that the two specific plants from which the Hoasca tea is made-known by the botanical names of Banisteriopsis caapi and Psychotria viridis- sprang originally from the graves of revered historical figures and, therefore, embody the spirits of those individuals. The tea enables UDV members to achieve heightened states of spiritual enlightenment.
59. The word "religion" comes from the word "religio," which in Latin means "to rebind," or "to reconnect." The sacramental communion of the tea is, for the UDV, the instrument of this reconnection. Through the union of the plants (in the ritual preparation of the tea), a sacrament is created that permits the possibility (under the direction of a trained mestre) of actual communion with God. The word "sacrament" comes from a word that means "to consecrate," or "to make holy." The sacramental tea of the UDV, when used within the doctrine and ritual context of the church, has the effect of allowing the UDV members a direct, personal intimate re-connection with the Absolute.
60. The tea is absolutely necessary for this communion. Within the UDV, there is no other practice or recognized way of achieving this state. Using the tea as an instrument for mental and spiritual concentration, under the guidance of the teachings of Mestre Gabriel, UDV members are able to perceive the Divine, which truly exists as a real spiritual presence in the world. A direct personal experience of the Divine (from drinking the tea in that setting) bathes an individual's consciousness with the attributes of God, which are Light, Peace and Love. Through the UDV's ritual communion, a person's consciousness, in time, is actually "made holy."
61. In Portuguese, the words "União Do Vegetal" mean union "from" the plants as well as Union "of" the plants. The union of the plants (the tea) creates a sacrament that allows for a profound sense of spiritual union from the plants. The union experienced is, in fact, union with the eternal, absolute, life-giving, superior Force, revered by all truly religious people.
62. The UDV in Brazil carefully controls the cultivation and harvesting of the plants that comprise Hoasca and also controls the preparation and shipment of the tea. The UDV community in Brazil prepares the tea only under the direction of mestres having the express authorization of a Representative Mestre, who is the highest authority in each nucleus. This process is difficult, expensive and time-consuming. The preparation ritual is called a "preparo," and consists of up to 200 individuals working together at a UDV temple over a period of several days. The UDV cultivates the plants used to prepare the tea on lands either around a UDV temple in Brazil or in areas of the forest that the UDV owns and maintains for that purpose. UDV members do not prepare tea for personal use. Except in rare circumstances that a Representative Mestre must specifically authorize, UDV members in Brazil are not permitted to grow the plants on their own private land.
63. Because only mature plants are suitable for use in the tea, cultivation must be instituted several years before usable plants are available.
64. Before the seizure in May 1999 the UDV in the U.S. received sacramental tea exclusively from UDV religious centers in Brazil. Members from the United States would travel to Brazil to assist in its ritual preparation. A share of the expenditures related to the preparation of the tea, as well as all shipping costs, were provided by the U.S. membership. Other than the costs directly associated with the tea's preparation and shipment, no commercial activity has ever been associated with the importation of the tea. The UDV, both in the U.S. and in Brazil, absolutely prohibits both the use of Hoasca outside of religious ceremonies and the sale of Hoasca for any purpose. I am unaware of any instance where a UDV member in Brazil or the U.S. has engaged in such unauthorized use or sale.
65. The UDV does not consider the Hoasca to be a substitute for medical treatment. It is a spiritual sacrament, not a medicine for physical healing. Nothing in UDV doctrine prohibits or discourages its members from seeking treatment from medical professionals. UDV members in the U.S. regularly seek and receive treatment in modern healthcare facilities, and several UDV members in the U.S. and Brazil are practicing physicians.
66. The tea the UDV imported for religious purposes in the past has never been diverted from legitimate religious use by the UDV members or by anyone else.
The UDV Has a Beneficial Effect on the Lives of Its Members
67. I have personal knowledge of the strong positive influence that UDV membership exerts on the lives of its members. I have met and counseled all present and former members of the UDV in the United States, and I have witnessed the positive impact church membership has had on these individuals' careers, familial relationships and general well-being. It has been nothing short of remarkable and extraordinary.
68. Some members had battled drug and/or alcohol abuse before joining the UDV in the U.S. The church's supportive atmosphere, coupled with its absolute strictures against use of illicit substances, has helped these members conquer their abuse problems.
69. I have witnessed, as a result of members' participation in the UDV, the healing and resolution of many interpersonal and family conflicts, people unable to work or care for themselves returning to live healthy and productive lives, and the growth of many healthy, morally strong, intelligent and beautiful children. Examples of each of these benefits to our members and to society are numerous.
70. The members of the UDV strive to live exemplary, peaceful and productive lives. In general, they are law-abiding, productive members of their communities. Although the UDV does not seek publicity, it is not a secret society and does not seek any greater privacy than most other religions do.
The U.S. Branch of The UDV Has a History of Taking Appropriate Security Measures to Prevent Diversion
71. On the 21st of May, 1999, agents from the United States Customs service entered our church offices with a search warrant and seized church records as well as all the sacramental tea we had in storage there. This warrant was granted on the basis of the assertion of a Customs officer that the tea "contained DMT," "a Schedule 1 controlled substance."
72. At the time of the seizure, it was apparent that the agents were acting as if this were a "drug bust" similar to a raid on a methylamphetamine laboratory. Approximately twenty or thirty armed officers arrived accompanied by local and state police officers. The warrant stated that they were also looking for "materials to cut or dilute controlled substances; narcotics paraphernalia, including precursor chemicals, acids, bases, solvents, glassware, scales, formulas, packaging materials and narcotics processing equipment." It was evident that they had no idea we were a church and that the tea, for us, was not a drug, but a religious sacrament. We were not a drug factory and did not have the equipment or materials of the types listed on the warrant that are associated with such factories. We had only the Hoasca tea and our records.
73. The force of the action came as a complete surprise to me. We had been importing the tea for our religious use since 1992. We have documentation of eleven shipments since July of 1995 of tea totaling 1285 liters, all formally declared on arrival and cleared by Customs and FDA before release. Because we had legally been recognized as a church and were declaring the importation of the tea, I believed that, if any question were ever raised about our activities, it would have come as a telephone call rather than through the arrival of armed law enforcement agents at my door.
74. Until the federal government seized the Hoasca tea last year, the UDV in the U.S. had always kept the tea securely under either my control or the control of a select few church leaders entrusted by me to secure the tea. This control was effective from the moment of receipt after importation to the moment of sacramental use.
75. Until last year's seizure, the Hoasca tea was shipped, by air freight and truck, from Manaus, Brazil, to me in Santa Fe in quantities that corresponded to the number of U.S. members and the projected religious use in the near future. Before Brazilian UDV authorities shipped the tea, they sent me by facsimile an exact description of the number of container being shipped and the quantity of tea they contained. After the tea arrived in Los Angeles and cleared Customs and any other U.S. Government inspections, an authorized customs broker, who carried a letter of authorization from the UDV, picked it up. The broker visually confirmed the number of containers and the amount of fluid in each and compared them against the transfer documents sent from Manaus. From the port of entry and after receipt by the UDV's authorized broker, the tea was shipped by truck, by a bonded and secure commercial carrier, to me in Santa Fe.
76. A mestre or counselor (or occasionally under circumstances of necessity, a person of trust and responsibility within the Instructive Body) received and signed for the shipments. Once the tea arrived at UDV headquarters in Santa Fe, I personally supervised and measured amounts of the tea and put them into smaller containers to be distributed to the different UDV congregations. A mestre, or occasionally, a counselor hand-delivered an appropriate amount of it directly to the responsible person for each congregation. The tea in all areas was always stored in a locked refrigerator for which only the mestre or counselor responsible in each area had a key.
77. No UDV member other than the mestre or counselor responsible in each area was permitted to possess the tea, nor was anyone ever allowed to give or sell the tea to any outside individual or group. The tea was used only in the sacramental amounts at the authorized religious ceremonies; and in that context, the directing mestre controlled the ritual use of the tea.
78. In the more than eleven years the UDV has been active in the United States, I am unaware of any instance in which any of the tea we imported was sold, given to anyone or consumed outside the religious ceremonial context of the UDV.
The Defendants are Currently Preventing Me and Other Members of the UDV in the United States From Practicing Our Religion
79. After the May 1999 seizure of church and personal documents and the sacramental tea, the United States Attorney for the District of New Mexico conducted a long and extensive investigation of me and the UDV. I and others in the UDV cooperated fully in the investigation and answered questions put to us by the U.S. Attorney's Office. We met with the Assistant U.S. Attorneys assigned to this case on numerous occasions and provided additional materials for them at their request. They continued to inform me and counsel that a decision would be imminent. However, after waiting for a year and one-half, they still have not made any decision regarding how they intend to resolve this case.
80. Since the seizure in May 1999 the UDV has not engaged in religious ceremonies in the United States. In view of the government's position that importation of the Hoasca would be unlawful, the UDV has not imported, nor sought to import, any Hoasca since that date. As a result, the UDV and its members are unable to practice our religion in the United States.
81. The consequences of our inability to practice our religion are substantial and severe. As reflected in the declarations of other UDV members, the UDV is a necessary and positive component of the lives of its members, and the inability to practice our religion has created a void in our lives.
82. The past year and a half, during which I have lived with the threat of possible criminal prosecution and have been unable to practice my religion, has been a time of almost indescribable stress and sadness for me. The effect of all this has produced tremendous strain on my family, my personal health and, to some degree, my religious faith. It has also been a time of great learning; my conviction of the beauty of the spiritual path I have chosen, my appreciation of the love of my friends and family and my certainty of the mercy and love of God have only increased.
83. It would be nearly impossible to describe to someone who has never participated in a UDV session, or witnessed the extraordinary character of the União Do Vegetal, what I and the other UDV members have suffered during the past year.
84. From February of 1992, when I associated with the UDV, until May of 1999, when Customs agents entered my office and seized the holy sacrament of my church, I had become accustomed to drinking the tea at least three times per month.
85. With these profound religious ceremonies, I had become accustomed to levels of inspiration, sustained good health, happiness and an intimate connection to God that had completely fulfilled my life.
86. To have all of this taken away from me has been painfully and indescribably hard. It has also been a source of great sorrow for me to see my friends and companions on this path suffering as well. There was, for example, one man who had come to the UDV so weak (with complications from diabetes) that he was barely able to walk; he was unable to work or properly care for himself, and his doctors had given him less than two months to live. I watched over several years the effects of the tea and the UDV in his life-helping him to restore his health, bringing him hope and strength and giving him back his life and family. It has brought tears to my eyes and a deep feeling of sorrow to my heart to watch his condition worsen again over this year that we have been unable to practice our religion and receive communion with our holy sacrament.
87. I have also seen other, less dramatic but still significant, suffering within the communities I have served as a mestre. I have seen people whose quality of life has significantly diminished due to our inability to hold our religious services; less harmony, less happiness, less peace, less of everything that makes life worth living. Our living and sacred connection to the Divine has been severed.
88. It is my deep conviction that this is unjust and not the role or the place of government in our lives. Although I am only a citizen and not a lawyer, it is also my conviction that the clear and straightforward reading of the United States Constitution confirms this as well.
89. The Framers of the Constitution clearly recognized the potential dangers of government and sought to limit its authority by articulating the principles found in the Bill Of Rights. The possibility of state agents, administering the responsibilities given to government, prohibiting the free exercise of religion was fundamentally and explicitly defined as unconstitutional and unlawful. This is a principle upon which our entire civil society has been based. It is my sincere belief that, in the view of those who founded our country, government should not be controlling or prohibiting man's quest for the sacred.
90. From my heart, from my soul, from the sincerity of my faith in all that is good, I pray for the freedom to practice my religion. I pray for the freedom to receive, once again, within the temples of the UDV in this country, the sacred communion of the Hoasca tea. I pray that this force of great goodness be protected under the laws of our land.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this Declaration was executed this 17 day of November, 2000, at Santa Fe, New Mexico.
/s/ JEFFREY BRONFMAN
JEFFREY BRONFMAN
[Plaintiffs' Exh. G]
"0022-3018/96/1842-0086303.0010"
THE JOURNAL OF NERVOUS AND Vol. 184, No. 3
MENTAL DISEASE Printed in U.S.A.
Copyright(c) 1996 by Williams & Wilkins
Human Psychopharmacology Of Hoasca, A Plant Hallucinogen Used In Ritual Context In Brazil
CHARLES S. GROB, M.D.,1 DENNIS J. MCKENNA, PH.D.,2 JAMES C. CALLAWAY, PH.D.,3 GLACUS S. BRITO, M.D.,4 EDISON S. NEVES, M.D.,4 GUILHERME OBERLAENDER, M.D., 4 OSWALDO L. SAIDE, M.D.,5 ELIZEU LABIGALINI, M.D.,6 CRISTIANE TACLA, PH.D., 6 CLAUDIO T. MIRANDA, M.D., 6 RICK J. STRASSMAN, M.D.,7
AND KYLE B. BOONE, PH.D.1
A multinational, collaborative, biomedical investigation of the effects of hoasca (ayahuasca), a potent concoction of plant hallucinogens, was conducted in the Brazilian Amazon during the summer of 1993. This report describes the psychological assessment of 15 long-term members of a syncretic church that utilizes hoasca as a legal, psychoactive sacrament as well as 15 matched controls with no prior history of hoasca ingestion. Measures administered to both groups included structured psychiatric diagnostic interviews, personality testing, and neuropsychological evaluation. Phenomenological assessment of the altered state experience as well as semistructured and open-ended life story interviews were conducted with the long-term use hoasca group, but not the hoasca-naive control group. Salient findings included the remission of psychopathology following the initiation of hoasca use along with no evidence of personality or cognitive deterioration. Overall assessment revealed high functional status. Implications of this unusual phenomenon and need for further investigation are discussed.
-J Nerv Ment Dis 184:86-94, 1996
_______________________________________
Hoasca is a hallucinogenic concoction of potent psychoactive plants that are indigenous to the Amazon basin of South America. It has been known under a variety of names, including ayahuasca, caapi, yage, mihi, dapa, natema, pinde, daime, and vegetal. Hoasca is the Portuguese transliteration for ayahuasca and is the accepted term utilized throughout Brazil. Prior to the European conquest, domination, and acculturation of South America, beginning in the 16th century, hoasca was widely used by the native peoples for purposes of magic and religious ritual, divination, sorcery, and the treatment of disease (Dobkin de Rios, 1972). In spite of prolonged and savage attempts by the European conquerors to repress and eradicate native culture and belief systems (Taussig, 1986), sacramental and medicinal use of hoasca remained extant.
Scientific study of hoasca began with the renowned English botainst Richard Spruce, who from 1849 to 1864 traveled extensively throughout the Brazilian, Venezuelan, and Ecuadorian Amazon to compile an inventory of the varieties of plant life found there (Schultes and Raffauf, 1992). Spruce made a number of valuable discoveries, including Hevea, the genus of the rubber tree, and cinchona, from which quinine is derived. He also identified one of the primary sources of a powerful hallucinogenic brew used by the Mazan and Zaparo Indians, called ayahuasca (Quechua for "vine of the souls" or "vine of the dead"), and previously described by the Ecuadorian Manuel Villavicencio (1858), as a large woody vine that would later be given the formal botanical designation of Banisteriopsis caapi (Ott, 1994; Spruce, 1908). Subsequent laboratory analysis would reveal the presence of the psychoactive beta-carboline alkaloids harmine, harmaline, and tetrahydroharmine, although when first isolated during the early 20th century they would receive the rather exotic appellation of telepathine. As identified by early field observers of hoasca use, additional psychoactive admixtures were often added to the cooking B. caapi preparations, most notably highly potent and hallucinogenic tryptamine-containing plants, including such vision-inducing plants as Psychotria viridis (McKenna and Towers, 1984).
Throughout the Amazon basin, the use of hoasca remained so deeply rooted in tribal mythology and philosophy that modern investigators have been able to confidently conclude that its use extended back to the earliest aboriginal inhabitants of the region (Schultes and Hofmann, 1992). They have recorded the tradition of hoasca use by the indigenous peoples of the region for the purpose of freeing the soul from corporeal confinement and facilitating access to realms of alternate reality, allowing for a variety of magical experiences, including accessing communication with the spirits of the ancestors. Anthropologists who have conducted ethnographic studies of the native inhabitants of the Amazon Basin have described such common hoasca-induced phenomena as visions of jaguars, snakes and other predatory animals, visions of distant persons, "cities" and landscapes, the sensation of "seeing" the detailed enactment of recent mysterious events, and the sense of contact with the supernatural (Harner, 1973).
Hoasca, as is the case with other plant hallucinogens, has a prehistoric tradition of use by native aboriginal peoples as shamanic sacraments or catalysts (Bravo and Grob, 1989; Furst, 1976). It is considered a "great medicine" and is used to both diagnose and treat illness (Schultes and Hofmann, 1992). Its use is fully sanctioned by societal customs and laws and, in fact, is the core experience upon which tribal and collective consciousness rests. Utilization of such potent plant hallucinogens as hoasca typically occurs within a ritualized context, including the traditional rites of initiation (Grob and Dobkin de Rios, 1992). The powerful hypersuggestible effects induced by the hallucinogenic plant drug reinforce collective belief systems, strengthen group cohesion, and facilitate culturally conditioned and syntonic visions which provide revelation, blessing, healing, and ontological security (Dobkin de Rios and Grob, 1994).
Use of hoasca for purposes of healing and religious sustenance has, during the centuries of European acculturation of Amazonia, emerged from the exclusive tribal domains of the rain forest and been incorporated into the contemporary fabric of rural and urban society, particularly among the indigenous Mestizo populations of Peru, Colombia, and Ecuador. Identified as a valuable adjunct to folk healing practices, hoasca is ritually administered by "ayahuasqueros" to carefully selected groups of patients (Dobkin de Rios, 1972). Scrupulously adhering to the shamanic models practiced by the aboriginal peoples, these folk healers similarly use the sacramental hoasca for purposes of medical diagnosis and healing, divination, and as a path of access to the realms of the supernatural.
During the 20th century, the use of hoasca within the context of modern syncretic religious movements, particuarly in Brazil, has arisen. One such church, and the object of the current study, is the Uniao do Vegetal (UDV), whose translation from the Portuguese means "union of the plants." The UDV originated in the early 1950s when its founder, Gabriel de Costa, a rubber tapper who had first experienced the effects of hoasca with the native Indians of Bolivia, returned to the rapidly expanding Brazilian Amazon settlement of Rio Branco with his visions of spiritual revelation and personal mission. Gathering a group of loyal followers, Maestre Gabriel, as he came to be known, elaborated a mythology and structure for his new religion. Spreading first through the Brazilian Amazon and then to the more densely populated and urbanized South, the UDV grew over the subsequent four decades to achieve an eventual size of approximately 7000 members nationwide, drawing adherents from across the socioeconomic and professional spectra. Organized along the lines of an early Christian parish, local "nucleos," or congregations, are centers where sacramental hoasca is consumed in large bi-monthly ritual ceremonies which are presided over by local "maestres," leaders of the religious sect. Although not the only Brazilian syncretic church to use hoasca as a ritual sacrament, the Santo Daime sect being the largest and most widely known, the UDV does have the strongest organizational structure as well as the most highly disciplined membership. Of all the hoasca churches in Brazil, the UDV was also most pivotal in convincing the government narcotics commission to remove hoasca from the list of banned drugs, which was accomplished in 1987 for use within religious ceremonial contexts.
Although achieving some attention and even notoriety in North American literature and the popular press, most notably the work of William Burroughs and Allen Ginsberg (1963), the psychological phenomenon induced by hoasca has been subjected to virtually no rigorous study. Various travelers to the Amazon Basin have reported their own first-hand accounts of experiences with hoasca (Weil, 1980), while both formal and informal anthropological narratives have excited the public imagination (Lamb, 1971; Luna and Amaringo, 1991). Indeed, interest in the exotic Amazonian traditions and effects of hoasca have sparked a steady stream of North American tourists, often attracted by articles and advertisements in popular and New Age magazines (Krajick, 1992; Ott, 1993). Concern over possible adverse psychological health effects incurred by such naive travelers has also been raised by a noted anthropological authority of hoasca use in the Amazon (Dobkin de Rios, 1994). Contrasted with testimonials of improved psychological and moral functioning by adherents of the snycretic hoasca churches in Brazil, a formal study exploring the effects of long-term use of this unusual hallucinogenic beverage would appear to be indicated.
During the summer of 1993 a multinational group of biomedical researchers from the United States, Finland, and Brazil met in Manaus, the capital city of the Brazilian state of Amazonia, to conduct an examination of the psychological and biochemical effects of hoasca. Prior to the actual performance of the study, an invitation had been extended by the Uniao do Vegetal to conduct an investigation of the toxicity of their hoasca "tea." Given the long history of repression of their religious movement and use of the hoasca sacrament prior to government sanction in 1987, the leaders of the UDV had surmised that the conclusions of a fair and objective scientific study might be of some protective value in the future if the political winds in Brazil were to shift. Consequently, and upon consultation with the North American research group, a decision was made to utilize the oldest nucleo outside of Rio Branco, in Manaus, where a large percentage of the membership had been ritually consuming hoasca on a regular basis for more than 10 years. Given the complicated logistics and demands placed upon subjects in this study, the tightly organized structure of the UDV and its highly disciplined membership proved to be invaluable in the successful completion of the project's goals. Part 1 of this report will detail the results of our investigation of the effects of the hoasca tea on psychological function and Part 2 will discuss our examination of the effects of hoasca on human biochemistry.
Methods
Fifteen members of the syncretic church, Uniao do Vegetal, living in the Brazilian Amazon city of Manaus, were randomly selected from a larger group of volunteers. Criteria for inclusion into the study included membership in the UDV for at least 10 years. Members of the UDV participate in church rituals utilizing hoasca as a psychoactive sacrament a minimum of twice monthly, but often as frequently as several times per week, although always within ritual context. In addition to regular participation in ceremonial consumption of hoasca, the UDV requires of its membership complete abstinence from all other psychoactive substances, including alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, cocaine, and amphetamines.
Fifteen control subjects who had never consumed hoasca were also recruited, with the objective of matching them on all demographic parameters. Because of the relatively small sample size, and the need to limit the number of variables, all experimental and control subjects were men. Controls were compatibly matched to experimental subjects along the parameters of age, ethnicity, marital status, and level of education. Although attempts were made to control for diet and current consumption of alcohol, complete compliance was not possible to achieve. Because of difficult field conditions as well as limitations of time, it was not feasible to completely analyze all demographic data until after initiation of the actual study. At that time it was also identified that control subjects had significantly higher yearly incomes than experimental subjects. In endeavoring to explain this discrepancy we noted that the method of control subject recruitment had called for each of the experimental subjects to provide for the study a close friend or associate who had never participated in UDV ceremonies nor had consumed hoasca under any other circumstances. It was noted in retrospect that several experimental subjects had asked their supervisors at their places of employment to volunteer for the study.
A variety of parameters were utilized to assess past and current levels of psychological function. Both experimental and control subject groups were administered structured psychiatric diagnostic interviews (Composite International Diagnostic Interview [CIDI]), personality testing (Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire [TPQ]), and neuropsychological testing (WHO-UCLA Auditory Verbal Learning Test). Experimental subjects, but not control subjects, were asked to fill out an additional questionnnaire (Hallucinogen Rating Scale [HRS]) following a hoasca session. Each of the experimental subjects was also interviewed in a semistructured format designed to ascertain their life stories.
All subjects were monolingual speakers of Portuguese. Portuguese versions of the CIDI and the TPQ were readily available for this study, having been translated previously and validated in Portuguese by the creators of these instruments. Portuguese versions of the WHO-UCLA Auditory Verbal Learning Test and the HRS were developed for this study by Brazilian collaborators, who translated the instruments first into Portuguese, then back into English, and finally back once again into Portuguese. The CIDI and the WHO-UCLA Auditory Verbal Learning Test sessions were conducted by collaborating Brazilian mental health professionals instructed in their administration. The TPQ and HRS are self-report questionnaires. The semistructured life story interviews were conducted by an English-speaking psychiatrist assisted by an interpreter fluent in both English and Portuguese. All life story interviews were audiotaped.
Composite International Diagnostic Interview
The CIDI is a comprehensive, fully standardized diagnostic interview for the assessment of mental disorders according to the definitions and criteria of ICD-10 and DSM-III-R (Robbins et al., 1988). The CIDI was conceived for use in a variety of cultures and settings. Although its primary application has been for epidemiological studies of mental disorders, the CIDI has also been utilized for clinical and research purposes. In the course of its development, the CIDI was subjected to a variety of tests in different settings, countries, and cultures for feasibility diagnostic coverage, test-retest reliability, and procedural reliability (Wittchen et al., 1991).
Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire
The TPQ is a 100-item, self-administered, paper-and-pencil, true/false instrument which takes approximately 15 minutes to complete (Cloninger, 1987a). The questionnaire measures the three higher order personality dimensions of novelty seeking, harm avoidance, and reward dependence, each of which measures four lower order dimensions (Cloninger, 1987b). The novelty seeking domain measures the spectrums of exploratory excitability versus stoic rigidity (9 items), impulsiveness versus reflection (8 items), extravagance versus reserve (7 items), and disorderliness versus regimentation (10 items). The harm avoidance domain measures the spectrums of anticipatory worry versus uninhibited optimism (10 items), fear of uncertainty versus confidence (7 items), shyness with strangers versus gregariousness (7 items), and fatigability and asthenia versus vigor (10 items). The reward dependence domain measures the spectrums of sentimentality versus insensitiveness (5 items), persistence versus irresoluteness (9 items), attachment versus detachment (11 items), and dependence versus independence (5 items). The TPQ is based on a unified biosocial model of personality integrating concepts focused on the neuroanatomical and neurophysiological basis of behavioral tendencies, styles of learning, and the adaptive interaction of the three personality dimensions (Cloninger et al., 1991).
WHO-UCLA Auditory Verbal Learning Test
The WHO-UCLA Auditory Verbal Learning Test is a simple list-learning task similar to the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (Rey, 1964), but which also is suitable for use in cross-cultural contexts and is sensitive to mild degrees of cognitive dysfunction. To be familiar to a variety of cultures, the test comprises a list of items carefully selected from categories such as parts of the body, tools, household objects, and common transportation vehicles (Maj et al., 1993). Subjects are read a list of 15 items at the rate of approximately one word per second, following which they are asked to recite as many words as they can recall. The same list is read to subjects a total of five successive times, and on each occasion subjects are asked to recite as many words as they can remember. This is followed by an interference test where subjects are read 15 words from a second list and asked to recite as many as they can from the second list, following which they are asked to again recall the words from the first list. For the final trial, subjects are read from a list of 30 words, half of which (in random order) are from the original list. Subjects then are asked to indicate after each word whether they recognize it as part of the original list of 15 words.
Hallucinogen Rating Scale
The HRS is a 126-item questionnaire originally developed to assess the range of effects induced by intravenous administration of synthetic dimethyltryptamine (Strassman et al., 1994). A 0 to 4 scale is utilized for most questions, with 0 = not at all, 1 = slightly, 2 = moderately, 3 = quite a bit, and 4 = extremely. Responses to items are analyzed according to six conceptually coherent "clusters": somesthesia (interoceptive, visceral, and cutaneous/tactile effects), affect (emotional/affective responses), perception (visual, auditory, gustatory, and olfactory experiences), cognition (alterations in thought processes or content), volition (a change in capacity to willfully interact with themselves, the environment, or certain aspects of the experience), and intensity (strength of the various aspects of the experience).
Life Story Interview
Each of the 15 experimental subjects agreed to submit to an approximate hour-long interview conducted by a psychiatrist (C. S. G.). The interview addressed various facets of their lives related to their experience as members of the Uniao do Vegetal and their frequent participation in rituals utilizing the psychoactive sacrament, hoasca. The interviews were conducted, with the aid of a translator, in a semistructured and open-ended manner. Each subject was asked to "tell the story of your life from the time before you first drank the hoasca tea . . . to how you first became acquainted with the UDV and the effects of the hoasca . . . to how your life has developed since the time you became a part of the UDV."
TABLE 1
Personality Testing in 15 Long-Term Hoasca Users and 15 Matched Controls
TPQ Subjects Controls t p
Novelty seeking
NS1: exploratory excit-
ability vs. stoic rigidity
3.78 ± 1.12
5.00 ± 1.79
-2.08
.049**
NS2: impulsiveness vs. reflection
1.57 ± 1.34
2.81 ± 2.27
-1.71
.100
NS3: extravagance vs.
reserve
3.00 ± 1.30
3.36 ± 1.43
-.66
.514
NS4: disorderliness vs. regimentation
2.00 ± 1.11
3.64 ± 2.01
-2.59
.016**
NS total: NS1 + NS2 + NS3 + NS4
10.36 ± 2.27
14.82 ± 4.81
-3.07
.0054**
Harm avoidance
HA1: anticipatory worry vs.
unihibited optimism
1.21 ± 1.37
2.36 ± 1.97
-1.72
.098*
HA2: fear of uncertainty vs.
confidence
2.93 ± .73
4.09 ± 1.87
-2.14
.043**
HA3: shyness with strangers vs. gregariousness
1.93 ± 1.77
3.27 ± 1.68
-1.92
.067**
HA4: fatigability and asthenia vs. vigor
HA3 + HA4
1.93 ± .92
3.00 ± 2.45
>-1.51
.144
HA total: HA1 + HA2 +
HA3 + HA4
8.00 ± 3.57
12.45 ± 4.55
-2.75
.011**
Reward dependence
RD1: sentimentality vs. in-
sensitiveness
4.21 ± .89
3.90 ± 1.58
.61
.547
RD2: persistence vs. irre-
soluteness
4.43 ± 1.74
4.45 ± 1.86
-.04
.972
RD3: attachment vs. detach-
ment
4.71 ± 1.94
4.27 ± 2.41
.51
.616
RD4: dependence vs. inde-
pendence
1.93 ± 1.21
1.73 ± 1.62
.36
.725
RD total: RD1 + RD2 +
RD3 + RD4
15.29 ± 2.76
14.36 ± 3.91
.69
.496
Results
Psychiatric Diagnoses
A structured psychiatric interview was conducted with each of the 15 experimental subjects and each of the 15 normal control subjects. Administration of the CIDI identified that whereas none of the UDV experimental subjects had a current psychiatric diagnosis, active diagnoses of alcohol abuse disorder and hypochondriasis were present in two of the matched control subjects. However, assessment of past (although no longer active) psychiatric diagnoses indicated that, according to ICD-10 and DSM-III-R criteria, five of the UDV experimental subjects had prior formal alcohol abuse disorders, two had past major depressive disorders, and three had past phobic anxiety disorders. On the other hand, among the 15 control subjects, only one subject had a past psychiatric disorder that was no longer present-an alcohol abuse disorder that had remitted 2 years before the study.
Personality Testing
The TPQ, measuring the three domains of novelty seeking, harm avoidance, and reward dependence, was administered to the 15 experimental long-term hoasca-drinking subjects and to the 15 hoasca-naive control subjects. Means and standard deviations and results of t-test comparisons are shown in Table 1. Significant findings on the novelty seeking domain included UDV subjects having greater stoic rigidity versus exploratory excitability (p <.049) and greater regimentation versus disorderliness (p < .016). A trend toward group difference was found along the spectrum of greater reflection versus impulsivity (p <.1). No group differences were found along the spectrum of reserve versus extravagance (p < .514). Summation of all four spectrums of the novelty seeking domain identified a highly significant difference between the two groups (p <.0054).
Analysis of the harm avoidance domain of the TPQ a