cannabisnews.com: Medical Marijuana Advocates See Conflict Medical Marijuana Advocates See Conflict Posted by CN Staff on December 18, 2003 at 08:42:25 PT By Sarah Linn, Associated Press Writer Source: Associated Press Portland -- When federal drug agents showed up at Travis Paulson's Lebanon home two months ago with a search warrant, the medical marijuana grower thought he had nothing to fear. Under Oregon law, Paulson is licensed to raise, use and provide marijuana for medicinal purposes. But because federal law forbids the drug, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency confiscated 104 plants and cuttings, leaving Paulson and six other patients with nothing. Paulson said the incident highlights the struggle between the nine states that permit medical marijuana use and the U.S. government. "I live in Oregon. My life is governed by Oregon law," said the 52-year-old Paulson, who smokes marijuana to combat pain from childhood hip injuries. "The only time I worry about the federal government is when they raise the price of stamps or I pay my taxes." He supports a recent appellate court ruling against a 1970 federal law outlawing sick people's use of marijuana with a doctor's recommendation. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday in San Francisco that prosecuting these users is unconstitutional if the marijuana isn't sold, transported across state lines or used for non-medicinal purposes. That effectively bars the Justice Department from prosecuting medical marijuana cases during legal proceedings, said Kevin Neely, spokesman for the Oregon attorney general's office. Drug enforcement officials declined to comment, saying that the agency was still examining the ruling. "We have a job to do, and that is to enforce federal drug laws," spokesman Rusty Payne said. "That's what we do. That's what we'll continue to do." But medical marijuana advocates said the ruling paves the way for other legal victories. "I've seen more and more positive action swinging our way. Marijuana is becoming more and more accepted," said Leroy Stubblefield, a 55-year-old cardholder whose suit against the Justice Department and the Drug Enforcement Agency is pending in federal appeals court. Two years ago, a federal drug agent seized 12 marijuana plants from the Sweet Home residence Stubblefield shares with two caregivers - just after the quadriplegic Vietnam veteran was cleared by local authorities to use the drug. "My chin dropped to my chest," Stubblefield said. "Our rights were definitely violated." Medical marijuana groups, meanwhile, are working to expand the program approved by Oregon voters in 1998. The plan would increase the plant limit from seven plants to 10, drop the $100 licensing fee to $50, and create nonprofit dispensaries throughout the state. About 7,000 Oregonians hold doctor-approved cards allowing them to grow three mature plants and four immature plants and a possess small amount of harvested marijuana for medical purposes. Another 2,000 or so are on waiting lists. About 4,000 caregivers are allowed to grow marijuana for others but are barred from using it themselves. Complete Title: Medical Marijuana Advocates See Conflict Between State, FedsSource: Associated Press Author: Sarah Linn, Associated Press Writer Published: December 18, 2003 Copyright: 2003 Associated Press Related Articles & Web Sites:SOMM-NEThttp://www.somm-net.org/Hemp & Cannabis Foundationhttp://www.thc-foundation.org/Ruling Bolsters Medical Marijuana Lawhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17988.shtmlLet Fed Quit Fighting Oregon Over Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17617.shtmlOregon Medical Marijuana Grower Sues US http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15186.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #10 posted by agog on December 19, 2003 at 13:33:08 PT: Please Pause for a moment of Science FOM, Kap and all the other kind posters...These two articles together, especially the one you added in your comment FOM, really illustrate the fear and ignorance the public at large and even more appallingly those that are supposed to be responsible for the administration of programs have of this HERB. As a former uniformed service member one of my sljo's was a command urinalyis coordinator. I felt compelled to learn some science behind it and if I'm not mistaken only the metabolites are detected, further, there is no way to determine impairment using said methodology. I believe it is also why DOT issued a ban on all DOT employees consuming any hemp based products as well. (are we citizens or subjects/property...hmm) I continue to be amazed that that simple truth alone hasn't brought this whole witch hunt process to its knees in court. I really hope that as the states recognize the legitimacy of med users that the challenge can be made in civil court either under ADA or some other statute to end workplace testing of that sort. Having said all that I would have no argument against legitimate "impairment" / fitness for duty testing as that seems at least reasonable. Oh yes, another thing... the actual text of the "drug free workplace" law/reg/contract clause really only states that illicit drugs shall not be introduced/consumed in the workplace. I've ranted long enough, all the best to y'all I remain... agog [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by FoM on December 18, 2003 at 14:57:47 PT Just a Note kapt, I felt I should remove my comment because I didn't get permission to post the link to the song and it bothered me. Sorry about that. I'll ask if it's ok and can repost it if it is. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by FoM on December 18, 2003 at 11:54:50 PT News Article from Snipped Source Marijuana Act Clouds Antidrug Work Rules Cases in Oregon courts examine whether workers can be fired for state-sanctioned use of marijuana as medicine. December 18, 2003Portland truck-maker Freightliner fired forklift driver John Thomas in January after the Teamster broke an overhead water line and subsequently tested positive for marijuana. Nearly a year later, the question of whether Thomas should be reinstated has ramifications for employers and employees statewide. That's because in addition to his Teamster card, Thomas carries something else in his wallet he claims makes his firing illegal: a state-issued medical marijuana registration card, which gives him the right to treat chronic pain by smoking the drug. Freightliner has asked a federal judge to block a labor arbitrator's order that Thomas, a 41-year-old motorcycle enthusiast, be put back to work. Thomas, in turn, is suing the truck-maker for discrimination under Oregon's disabilities act. A federal appeals court ruled this week that the federal Controlled Substances Act does not trump laws in nine states, including Oregon, that allows medical marijuana use. That decision puts a spotlight on Thomas' case and two others filed in state court, each of which addresses the question of whether and how companies are allowed to use drug tests while accommodating workers with state permission to smoke marijuana. Freightliner and other companies say they need drug tests to ensure a safe and drug-free work site. Complicating matters further, some employers risk losing millions in federal contracts if they don't abide by federal drug-free workplace laws. "We are putting the employer in a difficult spot," said Klaus Martin, a McMinnville physician who performs worker-injury evaluations and drug tests for employers. "We're saying here we allow medical marijuana. Then we turn around and say, 'Hey, you have to provide a drug-free environment.' " Much is at stake for employees, too. Medical marijuana advocates argue that without some accommodations, more than 6,000 legal marijuana users in the state won't be able to work. For those who don't smoke, the issue is becoming a safety concern as the number of medical marijuana cards continues to rise. "I wouldn't want to be near a forklift operator under the influence of marijuana," said Steve Hillesland, business agent for the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, District Lodge No. 24, which represents 800 workers at Freightliner. Competing laws and legal opinions have left both employers and employees dazed and confused. "There really is no guidance in the law on what should happen here," said Grant Higginson, state public health officer with the Oregon Department of Human Services, which issues the registration cards. Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/exclude/1071752243221280.xml [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by kaptinemo on December 18, 2003 at 11:54:15 PT: FoM, I pray it doesn't come to that I really do. Civil wars...never are.This country has already had one civil war, and some people are uncomprehendingly, romantically obssesed with it, forgetting how bloody it was. A civil war with modern weapons...well, we've seen where countries around the world have gone in that direction.But if the Feds don't lighten up and back off of their idiotic attempts to undermine the Constitution, they may make it inevitable. That Fed agents HAVEN'T been shot for stealing life-preserving medicine from desperately ill and painfully afflicted, dying patients is a testimony to the peaceableness of cannabists in general. (The only people shooting at Fed agents regarding cannabis are the mercenary Mex growers on Fed land.) But that respect for life isn't shared by the Feds, as we've seen by their actions.I only hope that this latest ruling from the 9th is allowed to stand. To refuse it is to signal all-out war on MMJ users and caregivers.And, somebody, somewhere, gravely ill and dying painfully, with nothing left to lose, who normally would never consider violence, might decide to 'send a message' of his own. That would hurt the cause plenty.Dear God, what is it about this government that it can't leave the sick and dying the f- alone? Isn't enduring painful illnesses and/or facing personal extinction enough of a horror? [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by jose melendez on December 18, 2003 at 10:27:39 PT Fire Rusty Payne We have rights to uphold, and those specifically exclude you from gainful employment waging war on US! Article III, Section 3 defines drug warriors as traitors. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Sam Adams on December 18, 2003 at 10:21:07 PT New job description! "We have a job to do, and that is to enforce federal drug laws," spokesman Rusty Payne said. "That's what we do. That's what we'll continue to do."Well, don't look now, but those laws were just struck down... [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on December 18, 2003 at 10:08:54 PT kaptinemo I wonder how they would feel if someone could bash down their door in the middle of the night and point guns at their ailing parents heads who are living with them? What's good for one should be good for the other. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by SystemGoneDown on December 18, 2003 at 09:25:26 PT: Joshua Wolf Shenk Very Intersting essay. It thouroughly provokes ANYONE to show how hypocritical and misled we as Americans view drugs... http://www.shenk.net/altered.htm [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by kaptinemo on December 18, 2003 at 09:22:58 PT: Partly off topic Or perhaps, dead-on topic:From DEAWatch, printed verbatim, with no editing on my part whatsoever: someone actually wrote this. Someone who thinks the Bill of Rights are fit for printing on toilet paper. Someone who, I seriously doubt, was speaking tongue-in-cheek but earnestly meant what he wrote:http://members.aol.com/deawatch/daily.htm*17 Dec 2003, 15:12 PST, 3rd Edition"We make things up as we go along", con't:I think that getting attacked again like we were on 9/11 -- but this next time on a far larger scale -- is probably the best thing that could happen to our country.Everytime I watch the news and see how our brave guys in Iraq can kick down doors and arrest everyone in the house I wish we could do the same thing here. But only another terrorist attack on our country would make most Americans frightened out of their wits enough to allow us to do that.Just imagine... if we could enter any dwelling at any time using any level of force we could uncover just about every drug den and jail every drug dealer, their family members and anyone living with them.*Yepper, Agent Jack Boot...and come face to face with what the Second Amendment was actually all about: prevention of DOMESTIC tyranny as well as foreign-applied villainy.When will these creeps ever learn that they 'serve' at OUR discretion? [ Post Comment ] Post Comment