cannabisnews.com: Long U.S. Battle Over Medical Marijuana Seen Ahead Long U.S. Battle Over Medical Marijuana Seen Ahead Posted by CN Staff on December 17, 2003 at 12:51:40 PT By Adam Tanner and Dan Sorid Source: Reuters San Francisco -- Saying that marijuana saved her life, a woman with a brain tumor said on Wednesday that many legal fights lay ahead despite a federal appeals court's decision to set aside federal drug laws in her case."I feel that the battles are just beginning," Angel Raich, who has an inoperable brain tumor, told a telephone news conference. "I have no doubt that the attorney general, John Ashcroft, will once again try to attack sick, disabled and dying Americans." "No matter how he comes at us, I will continue to fight if it takes every last breath of my body."Ashcroft has given no sign yet as to whether he will seek to appeal the 2 to 1 vote by a panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday. The decision granted Raich and another woman, Diane Monson, an injunction against the 1970 federal Controlled Substances Act on the grounds that the law was likely unconstitutional in their cases."The federal government has to agree that I am not a criminal," and upbeat Monson said.Legal experts said the ruling meant that people who use marijuana for medical purposes cannot be prosecuted if they grow their own drug or receive it for free.California voters approved a measure in 1996 to allow medical marijuana use, but the initiative clashes with federal law which trumps state law. State Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger favors medical marijuana and can even be seen smoking a joint in the 1970s bodybuilding documentary film "Pumping Iron"."We find that the appellants' class of activities -- 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," a three-judge panel ruled in a decision in which one judge dissented.Medical marijuana advocates say the drug can provide valuable relief for the sick. "Without the cannabis I would be dead right now," Raich said. LEGAL BATTLE AHEAD The 9th Circuit court based in San Francisco has often issued maverick rulings, but the nation's ultimate arbiter of law, the Supreme Court, has not been shy about overruling it."A majority of their decisions are overruled by the Supreme Court (when the court agrees to hear appeals of them) and I suspect that the Supreme Court will overrule this decision as well," said Sue Rusche, executive director of the National Families in Action, an anti-drug group.For example, the Supreme Court overruled the 9th Circuit in 2001 when it said California cannabis clubs may not distribute marijuana as a "medical necessity" for seriously ill patients.But in October it let stand a 2002 9th Circuit ruling that doctors who recommend medical marijuana to sick patients cannot be stripped of their licenses to prescribe drugs.On Wednesday, a spokesman at the U.S. Justice Department would only say that the latest ruling was under review.Robert Raich, husband of plaintiff Angel Raich and an attorney in the case, said the 9th Circuit has now cleared the way for medical marijuana use in many states."As a result of that ruling there are many patients throughout the country in all 10 states which permit medical cannabis who now know they should be free from harassment by the federal government," he said. Source: Reuters Author: Adam Tanner and Dan SoridPublished: December 17, 2003Copyright: 2003 Reuters Limited Related Articles & Web Sites:Raich v. Ashcroft in PDFhttp://freedomtoexhale.com/ruling.pdfMedicinal Cannabis Research Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/research.htmAppeals Court Upholds Medical Marijuana Use http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17983.shtml9th U.S. Court Protects Pot Patients http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17982.shtmlCourt Exempts Medicinal Pot From Federal Banhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17981.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #15 posted by Virgil on December 18, 2003 at 09:29:20 PT On the 9th Circuit My economics teacher at UNCC said the reason that you always hear economist arguing is because what they agree about does not make the news. The 9th Circuit is so large there is talk of splitting it. The rulings the SC does not find controversial are passed over. If they Supreme Court takes the appeal, there is a good chance that there immediate decision is that the ruling was wrong.How many rulings did the 9th Circuit make and how many were overturned. Who would know as it would take a media feeding the intellectually hungry to produce that insight.This comes from reading another comment so it is out of the blue. Yes, we are all about running the media blockade and showing the weaknesses of the media. It is one of the gifts we can give to the country while we educate to show that prohibition is mutltiple times worse than cannabis use. On one side of a Prohibition coin, there are the prohibition laws. On the other side of the coin, there is the media and its complicity in prolonging this painful failure of prohibition. [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by Dan B on December 18, 2003 at 06:27:13 PT Virgil The article does imply "total incompetency by the 9 Circuit." I agree with that, it does. And, the reason it does is that it says that the Supreme Court routinely overturns 9th Circuit rulings. Well, if the current Supreme Court is the gauge for correct rulings on the law, I'm a walking, talking tree with flowers growing out my butt. This Supreme Court routinely rules against all constitutional reason and logic. For a case in point, look at who is in the White House.If this Supreme Court routinely rules against the 9th Circuit's decisions, that tells me that there is something very right about the 9th Circuit's track record.However, the 9th Circuits ruling in this matter will not be allowed to stand. This Supreme Court is stacked with prohibitionists, and the worst offender of them all is the fascist Antonin Scalia. Thankfully, four of the nine have working brains. Unfortunately, that's a minority.Dan B [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by Max Flowers on December 17, 2003 at 21:10:23 PT CorvallisEric, I think that hits it on the head The feds have to calculate this carefully because if the supreme court upholds the 9th's ruling, it could very well cause a lot of people to question a lot of other areas where the feds wield power unconstitutionally, and they (the feds) have to ask themselves if they really feel that lucky. They could leave it alone, and accept defeat on cannabis but hold on (or so they would think) to dominance in these other areas. My personal belief however is that they are already in the process of losing that dominance, as awareness of their corruption grows daily and gradually approaches a point where correction of these improprieties will be demanded in all areas where they are occurring. [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by FoM on December 17, 2003 at 18:33:25 PT CorvallisEric The url was so long for the ruling I put it on my personal web site. Here it is. It's 50 pages. It's big and I haven't looked closely at it yet. There again I don't understand lawyer talk very well.Raich v. Ashcroft in PDF: http://freedomtoexhale.com/ruling.pdf [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by CorvallisEric on December 17, 2003 at 18:29:59 PT Just a bit of idle speculation If I have time, I'll read the decisions and maybe have a better grasp. Could it be that the Justice Dept. won't appeal this decision out of fear of unraveling a whole lot of Federal dominance in many different areas? [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by jose melendez on December 17, 2003 at 17:50:39 PT search?q=Wickard+v.+Filburn " . . . decision from the 40's about corn, where a farmer grew his own corn for feeding his own cattle. It never left the farm, but the Supremes ruled he was impacting interstate corn sales by NOT buying corn . . ."http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/443/printsee also: http://www.google.com/search?q=Wickard+v.+Filburn&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 Congress: search THIS [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by charmed quark on December 17, 2003 at 17:16:40 PT Great, great news This decision is wonderful. The Supreme Court has bascally said ( in the ruling against the medical cooperatives)that they felt the commerce clause applicability should be looked at. So an appeal by Ashcroft to the Supremes may be interesting.The 9th Circuit majority based their opinion on recent supreme court decisions involving the gun trade and other stuff I can't remember. The dissenter, the judge borrowed from the midwestern 8th circuit, was strange. He basically EXPANDED the commerce clause in his dissent, saying that by using medical cannabis they weren't using other pharmaceuticals, and not buying the other drugs impacted the interstate commerce of pharmaceuticals! So illicit drugs are impacting licit drugs and therefore the Feds can use the Interstate Commerce clause? Can we say "reaching?"This is worst than the (in)famous decision from the 40's about corn, where a farmer grew his own corn for feeding his own cattle. It never left the farm, but the Supremes ruled he was impacting interstate corn sales by NOT buying corn.-Pete [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by DevoHawk on December 17, 2003 at 15:41:35 PT EJ you poise some great questions The impeachment process became much clearer to me after watching the Clinton debacle.I am learning so much about how our legal system works at it best and worst due to prohibition. Shrub and Asscraft policies have forced me and many of my friends to become so much more aware of what how and why the legal system works. This case will be quite educational.I am very happy for all the people who have peace of mind for at least a short period of time thanks to 9th Circuit. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by FoM on December 17, 2003 at 14:36:45 PT Oh EJ I want to know too! I was looking at an article about Walters v. Conant and I don't understand this much at all. I am a simple minded person. I believe if we win something that we really have won it. I don't understand how it can go on and go on since Prop 215 back in 96. Don't they know that David took Goliath down with a stone and sling shot? He was able to do that because he lacked everything and he had to think and put his heart into it and then he brought down that big bad giant. When people are pushed by those they are supposed to lead and don't hear their cries then what do they expect us to do? [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by E_Johnson on December 17, 2003 at 14:24:57 PT How does this legal stuff work? Is there any scenario in which it becomes disadvantageous to Ashcroft to appeal the decision?If Ashcroft appeals to the Supreme Court and they support the 9th, does that make the 9th's ruling applicable nationwide? If he didn't appeal, then would this ruling would only apply in the 9th District, and stay that way?How does a legal opinion like this get transmitted through the system? [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by FoM on December 17, 2003 at 14:07:09 PT yippierevolutionary Thank you for understanding. p4me is still here. He just has a new name. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by yippierevolutionary on December 17, 2003 at 14:03:05 PT This is Indeed Good News! I would find it hard to believe Ashcroft will let this one go. It also gives us a much better argument in states with upcoming medical referendums, one of the things Jesse asked Kampia was does it matter if states pass these initiatives since the feds just come in anway. Now nothing stands in the way. PS. Fom sorry for talking about Iraq, I hear you loud and clear, I will tone it down. It is just that it bothers me very much and the Cnews community has people who feel similar to me, which I sorely lack where I live.PPS. Whatever happened to P4me? He was the first person who told me that Cannabis should be free for everyone and I used to really enjoy his posts [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on December 17, 2003 at 13:48:30 PT Just a Comment I really appreciate not needing to know more about Hussein or Bush or news like that. I wait so long for good news and I hope we can keep our thoughts on this good news while it lasts. Remember not everyone cares about some things like others. It's a respect for everyones way of thinking to me. Thanks for understanding. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Nuevo Mexican on December 17, 2003 at 13:35:21 PT This just in, your vote is not safe! Democracy in the U.S. is just like the Jim Kerrey movie, The Truman Show'. If you haven't seen it yet, I highly recommend this revealing commentary on the media, and its stake in controlling profits for the illegal war on drugs, through brainwashing, and fear baiting. Still waiting for the ticker on CNN, nothing yet, anybody seen anything on the Cali court decision on the tube:Critics: Convicted felons worked for electronic voting companies RACHEL KONRAD Associated PressSAN FRANCISCO - A manufacturer of electronic voting machines has employed at least five convicted felons as managers, according to critics demanding more stringent background checks for people responsible for voting machine software.Voter advocate Bev Harris alleged Tuesday that managers of a subsidiary of Diebold Inc., one of the country's largest voting equipment vendors, included a cocaine trafficker, a man who conducted fraudulent stock transactions, and a programmer jailed for falsifying computer records.The programmer, Jeffrey Dean, wrote and maintained proprietary code used to count hundreds of thousands of votes as senior vice president of Global Election Systems Inc. Diebold purchased GES in January 2002.According to a public court document released before GES hired him, Dean served time in a Washington correctional facility for stealing money and tampering with computer files in a scheme that "involved a high degree of sophistication and planning."Saddam is just another plastic turkey for bush:Another plastic Turkey moment. They got him:Wipe away the celebration spittle. The capture of Saddam Hussein, like so much surrounding this fantasy war, will produce more questions than it answers. Just as the U.S. administration worked the PR machine when the war 'officially ended' now the capture of Hussein will also prove to be just another plastic Turkey moment. Another moment that does not really matter. http://www.guerrillanews.com/war_on_terrorism/doc3612.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Virgil on December 17, 2003 at 13:32:49 PT Playing shoot the messenger again Attack the 9th Circuit, but do not talk of the decision's implications or its merits. Kill the messenger. The ruling is made. It is now a high profile case that will fill in the blanks that this article ignored.This article almost implies total incompetency by the 9 Circuit. The ruling shows competency. Now we will have a ruling to show corruption from the Supreme Court that suspended the Constitution to give us the war criminal now in Residence. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment