cannabisnews.com: Supreme Court To Hear Challenge To Pot Ban Supreme Court To Hear Challenge To Pot Ban Posted by CN Staff on June 28, 2004 at 18:38:16 PT By David Kravets, Associated Press Source: Associated Press The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday it would decide whether the government has the authority to prevent sick patients from using marijuana with a doctor's recommendation. The California case tests whether the federal government -- which maintains there is no medical benefit to marijuana -- can block sick patients from using cannabis and prosecute them or their suppliers. The case affects Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington state. They have medical marijuana laws similar to California's allowing patients to grow, use or receive marijuana if they have a doctor's recommendation. The case began after several raids on California medical marijuana clubs and individual growers over the past few years. Two ill medical marijuana patients, fearing their supplies might dry up, sued Attorney General John Ashcroft and ultimately won injunctions barring the Justice Department from prosecuting them or their suppliers. "I'm real excited and I'm real nervous and real afraid because my life is on the line here," said Angel Raich, the 38-year-old Oakland woman who brought the case. She suffers from scoliosis, a brain tumor, chronic nausea, fatigue and pain. She and her doctor say marijuana, which she uses every few hours, is the only thing that keeps her alive after prescription drugs failed. After the Bush administration lost the Raich case, it appealed to the justices, arguing that state laws making exceptions for medical marijuana are trumped by federal drug laws. Solicitor General Theodore Olson told the court that Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act to control "all manufacturing, possession and distribution of any" drug it lists, including marijuana. But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in placing an injunction against prosecuting Raich and another woman for using marijuana, ruled in December that the federal law outlawing marijuana does not apply to patients whose doctors have recommended the drug. Judge Harry Pregerson wrote that states are free to adopt medical marijuana laws so long as the marijuana is not sold, transported across state lines or used for nonmedicinal purposes. Pregerson wrote that using marijuana on a doctor's advice is "different in kind from drug trafficking." The court added that "this limited use is clearly distinct from the broader illicit drug market." But Olson told the justices that the states are not free to regulate controlled substances "without any federal regulation." The high court will hear the case sometime next winter. Patients' rights groups immediately weighed in on the issue. "The Supreme Court has a chance to protect the rights of patients everywhere who need medical cannabis to treat their afflictions," said Steph Sherer, executive director of Americans for Safe Access. Doctors are already free to recommend marijuana. The high court last fall refused to hear a separate Bush administration appeal of an order blocking the Justice Department from punishing physicians for discussing marijuana with patients who use it to help them eat, relieve pain and to limit seizures. The case the justices agreed to review is an outgrowth of their 2001 decision, in which the court said that medical marijuana clubs could not dole out medical marijuana based on the so-called "medical necessity" of patients, even if they have a doctor's recommendation. The justices only addressed the issue of a so-called "medical necessity defense" being at odds with the Controlled Substances Act, which says marijuana, like heroin and LSD, has no medical benefits and cannot be dispensed or prescribed by doctors. In that decision, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court left several questions unresolved, including whether the government could interfere with the states to make their own medical marijuana laws. Gerald Uelmen, a scholar at the Santa Clara University School of Law, said Thomas' opinion invited new challenges. "The court opened this door," he said. The case is Ashcroft v. Raich, 03-1454. Complete Title: Supreme Court To Hear Challenge To Pot Ban for Patients Source: Associated Press Author: David Kravets, Associated PressPublished: Monday, June 28, 2004Copyright: 2004 The Associated Press Related Articles & Web Sites:Raich vs. Ashcroft http://www.angeljustice.org/Americans for Safe Accesshttp://www.safeaccessnow.org/Supreme Court To Hear Medical Pot Case http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19083.shtmlMarijuana Dispute Gets Supreme Court Hearinghttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19082.shtmlSupreme Court To Decide Medical Marijuana Casehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19080.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #10 posted by John Markes on June 29, 2004 at 06:47:33 PT Feds screwed up... The feds argument is easily set aside. The CSA, the federal drug laws are not written to control the use of drugs and dangerous drugs. As the preface to the CSA states, it is for the purpose o preventing recreational drug use. Angel and Diane are clearly using it for medical purposes. Someone pass this on to Angel and tell her I said hello... [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by OverwhelmSam on June 29, 2004 at 05:08:25 PT While The Supreme Court Considers Medical MJ... The US house of representatives will be voting on a bill to prohibit the Justice Department (which includes the DEA) from arresting and prosecuting medical marijuana growers and users in those states where medical marijuana is legal.If you want to help, go to http://www.mpp.org/DD/action.html and send a letter to your representative telling him to wupport this bill when it comes up for a vote.Wonder how the supreme court's decision will pan out if the US House and Senate vote to ban medical marijuana raids? [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by TroutMask on June 28, 2004 at 21:58:59 PT Supreme Court To Hear Challenge To Pot Ban????? The Supreme Court is hearing a challenge to UPHOLD the pot ban. The 9th Circuit already struck it down. The challenge was already lost. We are on the offense. Nice spin.-TM [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by FoM on June 28, 2004 at 21:20:55 PT Dankhank We really are going to try to go see the movie soon. Hopefully over the 4th or the following week. I want to see it on the big screen. I really like the way Michael Moore does what he does. [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by Dankhank on June 28, 2004 at 21:11:36 PT Good day, today ... Just saw F9/11 and it was magnificent ...Only six theatres in OK are showing it ... three in Tulsa and three in OKC.Just added a comment to the 161 pages at Boston forum.Peace ... resist [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by FoM on June 28, 2004 at 20:15:51 PT Thanks Virgil! That's been busy. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Virgil on June 28, 2004 at 20:11:11 PT Comment3 The website ask people for their opinions on MMJ. There are 161 pages of comments- http://forums.ibsys.com/viewmessages.cfm?sitekey=bos&Forum=79&Topic=3081 [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on June 28, 2004 at 19:55:24 PT Poll: Should Medical Marijuana Be Legal? Should Prescription Medical Marijuana Be Legal? Current Results: Percentage of 6779 Votes Yes -- 5732 -- 85% No -- 1047 -- 15% Please Vote: http://www.thebostonchannel.com/health/3468204/detail.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Virgil on June 28, 2004 at 19:23:07 PT Berlusconi won't be pushing the hard line The Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi suffered one of the worst setbacks of his political career yesterday when he was badly defeated in local elections, including in his provincial stronghold around Milan. - http://tinyurl.com/372ayThe hard line on cannabis by Berlusconi is another failed attempt to stop Free Cannabis For Everyone. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Virgil on June 28, 2004 at 19:03:22 PT Kind of limited thinking The case affects Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington state. It affects all states, not that the media whores at AP would detail the importance. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment