cannabisnews.com: Court Boosts Medical Pot





Court Boosts Medical Pot
Posted by CN Staff on December 17, 2003 at 07:37:32 PT
By Brian Seals and Staff and Wire Report
Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel 
San Francisco -- A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that a congressional act outlawing marijuana may not apply to sick people with a doctor’s recommendation in states that have approved medical marijuana laws.The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that prosecuting these medical marijuana users under a 1970 federal law is unconstitutional if the marijuana isn’t sold, transported across state lines or used for non-medicinal purposes.
"The intrastate, noncommercial cultivation, possession and use of marijuana for personal medical purposes on the advice of a physician is, in fact, different in kind from drug trafficking," Judge Harry Pregerson wrote for the majority.The court added that "this limited use is clearly distinct from the broader illicit drug market, as well as any broader commercial market for medical marijuana, insofar as the medical marijuana at issue in this case is not intended for, nor does it enter, the stream of commerce."The decision was a blow to the Justice Department, which argued that medical marijuana laws in nine states were trumped by the Controlled Substances Act, which outlawed marijuana, heroin and a host of other drugs nationwide.But it was welcome news for groups like the Santa Cruz-based Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana, which was raided by federal agents in September 2002."This is so perfect," said Mike Corral, co-founder of the group. "This is the best Christmas present that could come down for our group.WAMM member Suzanne Pfeil said the ruling eases the anxiety for medical marijuana patients who must deal with chronic illness and the possibility of federal prosecution. "Anything that can reduce the stress and fear medical marijuana patients live with since (Attorney General John) Ashcroft began these raids is wonderful news."The Justice Department was not immediately available to comment on the ruling from a court some call the nation’s most liberal appeals court.Randy Barnett, a Boston University constitutional law professor, said the case was precedent-setting."It’s the first time there’s been a ruling that the application of the Controlled Substances Act to the application of cultivation of medical cannabis is unconstitutional," he said.The case concerned two seriously ill California women who sued Attorney General John Ashcroft. They asked for a court order letting them smoke, grow or obtain marijuana without fear of federal prosecution.The case underscores the conflict between federal law and California’s 1996 medical marijuana law, which allows people to grow, smoke or obtain marijuana for medical needs with a doctor’s recommendation.Corral said Tuesday’s ruling could have implications for two suits WAMM has before the 9th Circuit, one seeking return of 167 marijuana plants uprooted during the September 2002 raid and another seeking an injunction that would bar federal agents from raiding medical marijuana gardens. Santa Cruz County and the city of Santa Cruz signed on as plaintiffs to that latter suit. Ben Rice, one of WAMM’s attorneys, called the ruling "pretty fabulous.""What it tells us is the panel agreed with us — the commerce clause (of the Constitution) does not allow that kind of intrusion into state law," Rice said.He said WAMM’s cases could proceed in two directions, staying before a 9th Circuit Court panel while also going back to U.S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel for reconsideration. Fogel was the judge who heard the cases that led to WAMM’s appeals. However, Rice said there will be more legal battles ahead, as Tuesday’s ruling is almost certain to be appealed."We’ve known all along this is going to mean a trip to the Supreme Court," Rice said.A U.S. District judge tossed the case in March, saying the Controlled Substances Act barred him from blocking any potential enforcement action against medical marijuana patients Angel Raich and Diane Monson. Tuesday’s ruling sends the case back to U.S. District Judge Martin Jenkins, who was ordered to sign a preliminary injunction blocking federal drug action directed toward Raich and Monson.While the women’s case has yet to be tried, the court said the two "have demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits."Raich, a 38-year-old Oakland woman suffering from ailments including scoliosis, a brain tumor, chronic nausea, fatigue and pain, smokes marijuana every few hours. She said she was partially paralyzed on the right side of her body until she started smoking marijuana.She and her doctor say marijuana is the only drug that helps her pain and keeps her eating to stay alive."I feel safe for the very first time ever since I’ve been a patient," Raich said of the ruling. "This is very triumphant not only for myself but for patients and caregivers across the country."Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington state have laws similar to California’s, which has been the focus of federal drug interdiction efforts. Agents have raided and shut down several medical marijuana growing clubs.The appeals court, the nation’s largest, does not have jurisdiction over Colorado and Maine.The case is Raich v. Ashcroft, 03-15481.Sentinel staff writer Brian Seals contributed to this report. Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel (CA)Author: Brian Seals and Staff and Wire ReportPublished: December 17, 2003 Copyright: 2003 Santa Cruz SentinelContact: editorial santa-cruz.comWebsite: http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:WAMMhttp://www.wamm.org/Raich v. Ashcroft in PDFhttp://freedomtoexhale.com/ruling.pdfPictures and News from WAMM Protesthttp://freedomtoexhale.com/eventpics.htmMajor Ruling Favors Medical Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17977.shtmlMedical Pot Users Win Key Ruling http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17976.shtmlAppeals Court Sets Aside Federal Marijuana Lawhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17975.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #4 posted by FoM on December 17, 2003 at 17:30:30 PT
News Brief from TheKSBWChannel.com
Marijuana Ruling Could Affect WAMM Lawsuits SF Federal Appeals Court Issues Landmark Ruling December 17, 2003SANTA CRUZ, Calif. -- In a landmark ruing this week, a federal appeals court in San Francisco said a federal law outlawing marijuana does not apply to sick people who are allowed to smoke pot with a doctor's recommendation.For the Women's Alliance for Medical Marijuana -- a group based in Santa Cruz County -- the ruling could impact two lawsuits the organization has before the court. The first suit seeks the return of 167 marijuana plants uprooted during a September 2002 raid by federal agents. The other suit bars the federal government from future medical marijuana garden raids, but legal experts expect an appeal."But right now, people should feel terrific that there will be an appeal by the other side and there's a chance the law will change," attorney Ben Rice said.For Dr. Arnie Leff, who prescribes marijuana for some patients, the ruling is a significant victory. But it's still up to Congress to end all the legal maneuvering."The real issue is the Congress of the United States becoming compassionate ... the Congress of the United States modifying its controlled substances act," Leff said.The 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco is known for issuing maverick rulings, but the U.S. Supreme Court has not been shy about overruling it.A spokesman for the U.S. Justice Department would say only that the ruling is under review.Copyright 2003 by TheKSBWChannel.comhttp://www.theksbwchannel.com/news/2712398/detail.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by DevoHawk on December 17, 2003 at 10:02:14 PT
The Feds may actually consider giving up.
MikeEEEEE that is very funny. Like the bully who takes his first hit on the face, gets a bloody nose, and runs home crying.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by jose melendez on December 17, 2003 at 09:20:36 PT
where are the debates?
Since John Ashcroft wants to change topics and seems to have rescinded his offer of debating the merits of cannabis legalization, it seems prudent to point out that W.A.M.M. was the group that was able to get costs down to 94 cents per gram.Walters himself is off somewhere whining that he wants more resources to be focused on increasing street values to maintain that $10,000 per pound price point he keeps claiming as the reason for the increased, profitable vigilance. OK, well he does not really admit that his efforts to restrict pot farming increase the street prices of pot. But since he's refusing to debate, I'll gladly use his own words and works against him, especially since I have existing law, history and science behind me.
Traitors: Caught waging war on U.S. citizens by CNN? See Art. III, Sec. 3
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by MikeEEEEE on December 17, 2003 at 07:49:28 PT
Great News
The Feds may actually consider giving up.The drug war should be declared unconstitutional.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment