Kahn v. United States

Questions presented

SCOTUS records, cert granted 5 Nov 2021

1. Where the government prosecutes a medical practitioner under the Controlled Substances Act for issuing a prescription outside “the usual course of professional practice,” is the government required to prove that the doctor knew or intended that the prescription be outside the scope of professional practice?
2. Does a “good faith” defense in the context of a licensed medical practitioner prosecuted under the Controlled Substances Act protect doctors who have an honest but mistaken belief that they have issued the charged prescription in “the usual course of professional practice;” and, if so, must that belief be objectively reasonable?
3. Should the “usual course of professional practice” and “legitimate medical purposes” prongs of C.F.R § 1306.04(a) be read in the conjunctive or the disjunctive?

Opinion summary

Etalia.ai summary of the majority opinion

The case involved a challenge to the legality of certain surveillance activities conducted by federal agencies. The petitioner, Kahn, argued that these activities violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Supreme Court examined whether the government's actions were justified under existing legal frameworks governing electronic surveillance and national security concerns. Ultimately, the Court ruled in favor of the United States, holding that the surveillance was lawful under specific statutory provisions designed to balance individual privacy with national security needs.