How Much Do You Really Have to Know?: An Analysis of the Mens Rea Requirement of 21 U.S.C. § 841(C)(2)

Authors

Kirsten Ennis

Document Type

Note

Abstract

(Excerpt)

The varying interpretations of the mens rea of 21 U.S.C. § 841(c)(2) have been at issue in the circuit courts for a number of years. While one circuit has held that the standard is wholly subjective, others have ruled that the statute’s language allows for either a subjective or objective finding of knowledge on the part of the defendant, and one circuit has failed to adopt a conclusive stance on the issue. This Note explores these conflicting interpretations of the mens rea requirement of 21 U.S.C. § 841(c)(2) and advocates for a mixed subjective/objective standard. Part I describes the history and purpose of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act and specifically, the current language of 21 U.S.C. § 841(c)(2)’s requisite mens rea. Part II discusses the competing interpretations of “knowing or having reasonable cause to believe” in the circuit courts. Finally, Part III argues that the correct view is an interpretation that is both subjective and objective. It examines various tools of statutory interpretation, including legislative history, the maxim that a statute should be interpreted to give each word or phrase a distinct meaning, and the “mischief approach” to statutory construction.