cannabisnews.com: Court Plants Red Cross in the War on Marijuana





Court Plants Red Cross in the War on Marijuana
Posted by CN Staff on December 24, 2003 at 20:52:52 PT
By Richard Glen Boire, California Daily Journal
Source: Los Angeles Daily Journal 
Last week, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that federal criminal laws against marijuana are unconstitutional when applied to sick people who are using the drug with their doctor's approval in accordance with state law. Raich v. Ashcroft, 2003 U.S.App.LEXIS 25317 (9th Cir. Dec. 16, 2003).Since 1996, California's Compassionate Use Act has permitted seriously ill people to use marijuana if their doctors approve.
Yet the federal government has refused to abide by California's law, saying that all marijuana use is a federal crime. Since Sept. 11, 2001, alone, Drug Enforcement Agency and other federal agents have terrorized over 35 California users or providers of medical marijuana.Angel McClary Raich, one of the appellants in the 9th Circuit case, is battling an inoperable brain tumor. She lives in chronic pain, constantly nauseated and emaciated. The other appellant, Diane Monson, has a degenerative disease of the spine and suffers chronic muscle spasms.Both women's doctors approved of their medical use of marijuana. Raich's doctor tried over 35 pharmaceutical medicines before marijuana, but all of them produced intolerable side effects and had to be discontinued. Marijuana not only has provided these women with some degree of relief, but also has been a lifesaver, at least for Raich. Her doctor testified that foregoing marijuana treatment could prove fatal.Patients like Raich and Monson, who are battling serious illnesses, should not be saddled with the additional burden of battling with their own government. But that's exactly what is happening in the war on drugs.In conventional wars, like the ongoing war in Iraq, the U.S. government is supposed to recognize certain limits, such as identifying enemy combatants and sparing civilians. The government must remove the sick and the wounded from the battlefield and care for them, even if they are enemy soldiers. The first pictures broadcast after the capture of Saddam Hussein showed him receiving medical care.But in the war on drugs, a war that the federal government is fighting against our own civilian population, the government recognizes few, if any, limits. This is a war fought indiscriminately, by spraying machine-gun fire at anything that moves, even the sick and wounded.When civilian atrocities occur during a war, it raises troubling questions about the overall legitimacy of that war. War is never easy on civilians, but it's another matter entirely when the government intentionally targets them.While the 9th Circuit's opinion is narrowly limited to patients who use marijuana for medical purposes in compliance with state law, it begs the question of why exactly the federal government is hell-bent on waging war against peaceful adults who smoke marijuana for pleasure or relaxation. Wouldn't that money be spent better helping heroin and other drug addicts get treatment, educating our children or providing decent healthcare for older Americans?The starting salary for a Drug Enforcement Agency agent is $40,000 year, which is almost exactly what a new registered nurse earns. Sick people are served better by nurses than by DEA agents.Likewise, the average yearly salary for a starting teacher is $30,000, meaning that for every three DEA agents sent to bust medical-marijuana patients, we could have four new teachers.Marijuana is illegal because many people enjoy its psychological and physical effects. Instead of a glass of wine, they rather would have a joint. But as long as they aren't causing harm, what business is it of the federal government? To justify federal law-enforcement intervention in such cases under the guise of regulating interstate commerce is stretching it, to say the least.Regardless of what they think about federal marijuana laws in general, the vast majority of Americans believe that if a doctor recommends medical marijuana, then a patient shouldn't be made a federal criminal for following his or her doctor's advice. A Pew Research poll conducted in 2001 found that 73 percent of Americans support permitting doctors to prescribe marijuana for their patients.Arresting and terrorizing patients like Raich in the name of the war on drugs is like arresting Vicodin-taking cancer patients because other people, like Rush Limbaugh, use it for non-medical purposes. It turns logic on its head.The 9th Circuit's decision speaks loud and clear: Enough is enough. Like in its decision last year upholding the First Amendment right of doctors to talk about medical marijuana with their patients (Conant v. Walters (9th Cir 2002) 309 F.3d 629, cert denied Oct. 14, 2003), the court in Raich is sending a message to the executive and legislative branches: There are limits on federal power.Waging war on sick people who are following their doctor's recommendation in accordance with state law is one of those limits. This not only is reasonable, but also is just and compassionate - virtues that the federal government's all-encompassing war on drugs is lamentably lacking.The federal government is supposed to have only the limited powers granted to it by the Constitution. The federal government's power to create criminal laws is strictly limited to regulating activities that cross state lines or that have a substantial economic affect on interstate commerce. (United States v. Morrison (2000) 529 U.S. 598.)Neither Raich nor Monson were engaged in interstate commerce when they smoked marijuana to lessen their suffering. The marijuana that they used came entirely from within California.In fact, no "commerce" was involved. Raich's marijuana was given to her for free, and Monson grew her own. The cultivation, possession, and use of marijuana for medicinal purposes and not for exchange or distribution is not properly characterized as commercial or economic activity. Lacking sale, exchange or distribution, the activity does not possess the essential elements of commerce. Likewise, their personal medical use of marijuana in no way produced a "substantial effect on interstate commerce."Although it's shameful to continue harassing Raich and Monson, the Justice Department nonetheless is expected to appeal the 9th Circuit decision. It likely will reach the U.S. Supreme Court next year.Note: Daily Journal is California's largest daily legal newspaper, read by the state's 135,000 lawyers, judges, and legal professionals.Richard Glen Boire is legal counsel for the -- http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/ -- Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics in Davis, a public education, law and policy center working to defend and promote the rights of the mind.Source: Los Angeles Daily Journal (CA)Author: Richard Glen Boire, California Daily JournalPublished: Wednesday, December 24, 2003Copyright: 2003 Daily JournalsWebsite: http://www.dailyjournal.com/Contact: don_debenedictis dailyjournal.comRelated Articles & Web Sites:Raich v. Ashcroft.comhttp://raich-v-ashcroft.com/Raich v. Ashcroft in PDFhttp://freedomtoexhale.com/ruling.pdfConant Vs Walters in PDFhttp://freedomtoexhale.com/walters.pdfWhere’s The Compassion?http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread18003.shtmlFederalism Wins - National Reviewhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread18002.shtmlA Landmark Victory - Ann Harrison http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17996.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #9 posted by jose melendez on December 25, 2003 at 11:06:30 PT
amnesty is not surrender
I've mentioned that I think drug warriors ought to be allowed an amnesty period, after which we shall categorize drug war as treason, and enforce due process.Here is an article that migght be seasonal food for thought in this regard, from:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3321125.stmMy grandad's WWI Christmas truce            
    Reader Andy Callan tells how his grandad was one of the first to greet his German counterpart in a WWI Christmas Day truce. Let us know what your grandad or grandma did, using the form at the bottom of the page.         
    WHAT MY GRANDAD DID  My grandfather was one of the first British soldiers to leave the trenches and fraternise with a German on the Christmas Day truce in 1914. My grandfather never spoke of the war, but two years ago, I came across a book in the local Oxfam - The War the Infantry Knew, by J C Dunn, a minor classic, which chronicles in great detail the doings of this battalion from 1914 to 1919. So I looked up his name in the index, and there he was. One entry for Private Ike Sawyer: "December 25, 1914. Our pioneer sergeant, Nobby Hall, made a screen and painted on it 'A Merry Christmas', which we hoisted on Christmas morning. No shots were fired.     
                                
                                 
Ike Sawyer (left) back from the front at his brother's wedding                        
                        "On the left we could see that our fellows were carrying their breakfast in the open, and everything was quiet. Both sides got a bit venturous and looked over the top. "Then a German started to walk down the towpath towards our lines and Ike Sawyer went to meet him. The German handed over a box of cigars." For you quiet antis out there, merry Christmas, and thanks for the cigars. Be grateful the only nuking you get from us stoners is the PHP type. Repent now by rescheduling cannabis, and you'll be able to retire gracefully, without applying existing U.S. law that recommends hemp for your necks.wage drug peace
Drug War Logic Test: Judge, jury . . . what's next? Anyone? I can't hear you! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by jose melendez on December 25, 2003 at 10:21:33 PT
86 that
if possible, please delete my last post
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by jose melendez on December 25, 2003 at 10:20:04 PT
he's offering #1 up for deletion
FoM, I think Virgil's saying he wanted to save us some deja vu and retain only the corrected version of his post. It's possible that my typing skills might be giving me some perceptional bias about this issue, if I'm wrong please correct me . . .Also Virgil, I think the red cross headline is alluding to the sometimes ignored rules of engagement that in wartime, medics are not supposed to be targets. 
target ONDCP for elimination
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by FoM on December 25, 2003 at 08:33:06 PT
Virgil
I wish for peace on earth and good will to mankind. I wish that everyday. I believe in love, hope and I still have a wide eyed wonder of what could be just around the corner. That is what keeps us young and I really try to take a good time with me in everything I do. I can't change the world but I try hard to make a little portion of the world smile and you do too!Merry Christmas!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Virgil on December 25, 2003 at 08:26:39 PT
Merry Christmas, Fom
I wish every day could be merry and would settle for days that just are not bummers. A lot of people will not have a happy New Year's day because of hangovers. Someone should do something to change that.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by CorvallisEric on December 25, 2003 at 02:31:06 PT
Amusement for political junkies
Summaries of many Democrat polls. For a surprise, search the page for Clinton: http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04dem.htmSee what geeks think of Kucinich: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/12/23/171559/76
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on December 24, 2003 at 22:48:18 PT
Virgil
I'm not sure what you want me to do. I want to say Merry Christmas to you. I know you don't like to be fussed over but I wanted to say thank you. No more fussing.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Virgil on December 24, 2003 at 22:39:11 PT
I corrected the p$me in comment1
I hzte to bore the old-timers, so you might want to void the repetition that follow for the benefit of the new readers. They may want to compose something better given a seed.http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread15241.shtml#4 - Todays test ask you to use your language in how you would answer to your son or daughter if asked, "What is the Schedule One Lie." Here is a starting point. The drug laws in this country were obscenely punitive, so punative a joint of cannabis could get you life imprisonment in Texas in 1970. The government figured that something had to change so they whipped up some guidelines in the Controlled Substances Act of 197 and put things into categories except for the four most important things. The greatest dangers of T&A were not even put on the list. Neither was caffiene. Political forces had already corrupted the process and then ignorance of grand scale came in. There was not enough research on cannabis so that crazy Nixon had cannabis put on schedule 1 temporarily until a study could be done. Nixon stacked the commission and when it reported that cannabis should not be anything to get arrested over he dismissed it. When states like North Carolina saw the studies they made cannabis legal for some conditions like glaucoma and even the federal government started a program to deliver federally grown cannabis to some sick people. Then the conservatives came and they wanted to roll back progress to 1620 and they would seek to destroy the image of cannabis as medicine and they began shouting "Dangerous drug" like they were rehearsing for the part of Chicken Litte. "Marijuana has no medical value" is the Schedule One Lie. There are three things that have to be met to be a Schedule One Substance. Marijuana is innocent of all three. It is just that the prohibitionists tell the same Lie over and over and that is that marijuana has no medical value. The lie is told over and over so many times we know it by name- The Schedule One Lie. Norml began the attack on the Schedule One Lie back in 19xx and it took until 1988 to get a ruling from Judge Joe Young that cannabis is a highly safe medicine. They ignored that too and began a policy of carrot and stick to control the media so that all the lies and studies could be buried. All you have to do is read a paper today and see that they can never mention the words "Schedule One Lie." The jig may be about up though as the words jury nullification have now been in a major newspaper. I never say that before this year, 2003. The jig is about up alright. When will the press break the story of the Schedule One Lie to the American people? When will the term come to address the big problem? If cannabis were properly classified there would not be a problem sith state and federal law over this valuable medicine. But what makes it valuable for the peasants is that it can be grown in the back yard. The plutocracy care about profits and not peasants and a lie is just a political tool to funnel money upward so they can buy Congress and a President every now and then and right many judges and laws. To tell Americans about corruption on a grand scale all you have to do is tell them about the Schedule One Lie. And if someone could explain the extent of the Schedule One Lies, I sure wish they would post it. Tonight the CBS Evening News will have a segment on pushing the Canadian Pill companies out of the US market. We don't want no stinking competition and we don't want no GD lower prices. Profits, man. Don't you want us to be able to do research and make miracle drugs? Frankly, I want the strangehold the medical community has to the pharmacy broken and I sure as hell want the best herbal remedy known to mankind to be returned to the peasant class. Fifty states need tombstones to mark the death of the Schedule One Lie. SOL - RIP. 1970-2003 http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread13469.shtml#11 - n response to comment8, this is the link to the CSA of 1970: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/agency/csa.htm About a sixth of the way down in Title 21, Section 13 it says this:" (b) Placement on schedules; findings required. Except where control is required by United States obligations under an international treaty, convention, or protocol, in effect on the effective date of this part, and except in the case of an immediate precursor, a drug or other substance may not be placed in any schedule unless the findings required for such schedule are made with respect to such drug or other substance. The findings required for each of the schedules are as follows: (1) SCHEDULE I. (A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse. (B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. (C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision." Now this is one big reason to call the classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 Narcotic a lie- it has to met the criteria of A and B and C. I would not respect the opinion of anyone that said MJ meets the criteria for either B or C , either of which would disqualify it from Schedule 1 status. So even if there is an argument over A, it is all but moot. When is some reporter going to come out and say that the present classification of marijuana that blocks its use as medicine is a lie and actually call it the Schedule 1 Lie. Did Richard Cowan just say bad journalism. That's right, even Dick Cowan does not address the pole that holds up the DEA circus tent as the Schedule One Lie.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Virgil on December 24, 2003 at 22:03:55 PT
LTE
Subject: Your story is like a Greek hero with a fatal flaw.I read your article titled, "Court Plaants Red Cross in the War on Marijuana" at http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread18047.shtmlI really do not get the heading, not that it is a big deal. I could not be in more agreement with your conclusions and outlook and it is refreshing to hear someone reflect the thoughts of most and not blast us with more officialdom from some trained mouthpiece paid at public expense.You gave the federal position a left and a right and a swift kick and at least send an opposing thought to the brains targeted with continued taxpayer funded propaganda. It does remind me of the Greek portrayal of a hero with a fatal flaw in the vein of Hercules heel. You know you could make a name for yourself if you would explain the Schedule One Lie and introduce your readers to the term. All of this stuff about the states not being able to use medical marijuana is bogus. The federal classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance does not meet their own guidelines. It was a conclusion of the Vermont commission that studied it last year and the Oregon study made when they passed their MMj laws.If cannabis were classified properly it would be no higher than a Schedule 3 Narcotic. If it were properly classified, the states could legally have MMJ laws without federal interference, even while they are walking all over the states rights using the commerce clause.The states rights issue is more important than the schedule of cannabis being misclassified. The misclassification shows the malice with which the total prohibition of marijuana was and is conducted. It is an insight unto itself. I have written several writers on the subject. My opinion is that you either have intellectual curiosity on the subject or you do not. You can do an advanced search at Google with the words "p$me, Controlled, Substance, Act" and the exact phrase "Schedule One Lie" and see what I mean.Then there is Dr. Russo that is an expert on the subject of clinical cannabis as he prefers to call it that says it is a lie - http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread17966.shtml#2I appreciate your article. I wish you would at some time address the Schedule One Lie and the malice and the corruption that keep cannabis welded in the one place that denies the states the rights to use it and for that matter allow it to be sold and researched even in respect to the recent ruling.Sincerely, 
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment