cannabisnews.com: Cannabis Fight Enters U.S. High Court Cannabis Fight Enters U.S. High Court Posted by CN Staff on November 23, 2004 at 08:54:15 PT By Guy Ashley, Contra Costa Times Source: Contra Costa Times Oakland -- Angel Raich has fought for more than three years for the right to consume the fragrant, fluffy bunches of marijuana she keeps in jars in her home. On Nov. 29, her claim that marijuana is life-sustaining medicine will face the ultimate legal test when it goes before the U.S. Supreme Court for oral arguments. "My entire life is at stake, said Raich, 39, a mother of two who has been left rail-thin by chronic nausea that appears to be caused by an inoperable brain tumor. "If we don't win, the federal government could raid my home and put me in prison, which I think would probably kill me."Raich and the federal government have been destined for a Supreme Court clash ever since she sued Attorney General John Ashcroft in 2002 for the right to keep using the doctor-prescribed marijuana she says is the only thing that allows her to develop an appetite, and thus keep up her strength and weight.While Raich and her lawyers say public sentiment is on their side -- they cite one recent survey suggesting as many as 80 percent of Americans support the rights of patients to use doctor-prescribed marijuana -- the federal government is taking an aggressive stand opposing their claims.Papers filed by the U.S. Department of Justice wave aside the fundamental assertions of the past decade's medical marijuana movement, reaching back further in history to cite the Nixon-era Controlled Substances Act, which lists marijuana as a Schedule 1 controlled substance "with a high potential for abuse" and "no currently accepted medical use."In doing so, the Department of Justice gently reminds the high court of its own 2001 decision that rejected claims by the Oakland Cannabis Buyer's Cooperative that it was entitled to distribute medical marijuana under state Proposition 215. The dispensary was once used by Raich; her husband, lawyer Robert Raich, represented it in that action.This time, Raich and her lawyers hope new legal arguments will score a major victory for marijuana as medicine.The case involves Raich, a second patient, Diane Monson of Butte County, and two unidentified Oakland men who grow marijuana and supply it to Raich and Monson for free as the two patients' "caregivers" under Prop. 215, the medical marijuana law passed by California voters in 1996.Departing from the "medical necessity" defense cited in the Oakland cooperative case three years ago, the current case argues that since the women's marijuana is distributed, grown and used in California, federal rules do not apply.Historically, Raich's lawyers note, the federal government has cited the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution for the power to regulate the distribution of medicine.Raich and the three others won a major victory late last year when a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled federal authorities had overstepped their authority under the commerce clause in a crackdown that included seizing six marijuana plants from Monson's back yard.The court issued an injunction barring the U.S. Justice Department from prosecuting Raich, Monson or their suppliers, an order that in the past 11 months has allowed Raich to be supplied with the 21/2 ounces of marijuana she uses weekly.She smokes the dried marijuana in a pipe, inhales it with a vaporizer or infuses cooking oil with it that she uses in baked goods.Robert Raich said he continues to be astounded each morning when he helps his wife from bed and watches the transformation marijuana triggers in her."The life returns to her body," he said. "She's able to talk and smile again."The case found its way to the U.S. Supreme Court after the Bush administration appealed last year's decision, arguing federal drug laws trump the state's medical marijuana law.U.S. attorney's offices did not return phone calls for this story, but Solicitor General Theodore Olson, in a brief to the high court, cites the same 1970 federal law used to turn back the Oakland cooperative case, underscoring sections this time that suggest even intrastate marijuana transactions boost the illegal drug trade Congress seeks to prohibit."Local distribution and possession of controlled substances contribute to swelling the interstate traffic in such substances," Olson wrote.But Randy Barnett, a former federal prosecutor who will make oral arguments on behalf of Raich and Monson next week, said the government's position runs counter to the concept of "federalism," which holds that individual states have the right to regulate activities within their borders. It's a concept several of the justices have supported in other cases, Barnett said."This case stands for the proposition that federalism is not just for conservatives," he said.Following the arguments next week, the high court is expected to issue its decision sometime in spring. Source: Contra Costa Times (CA)Author: Guy Ashley, Contra Costa TimesPublished: Tuesday, November 23, 2004Copyright: 2004 Knight RidderContact: letters cctimes.comWebsite: http://www.contracostatimes.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:Raich vs. Ashcroft http://www.angeljustice.org/Angel Raich v. Ashcroft Newshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/raich.htmOakland Woman Battles for Medical Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19863.shtmlThe Fate of Medical Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19862.shtmlFederal Government, Butt Out of Med Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19843.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #3 posted by CannabisMark on November 23, 2004 at 15:05:22 PT: Support our Bud Robert Raich said he continues to be astounded each morning when he helps his wife from bed and watches the transformation marijuana triggers in her."The life returns to her body," he said. "She's able to talk and smile again."Makes me laugh. Wouldnt be surprised if Rob does it with her every morning.Another quintessential example of how the governemnt ruins poeples lives just because they smoke weed. Tisk Tisk...what a shame :( [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by FoM on November 23, 2004 at 14:39:27 PT Press Release from MPP Supreme Court Medical Marijuana Case Could End Raids; Cannot Overturn State Laws Medical Marijuana Laws Now Protect 57 Million People in 10 States November 23, 2004 WASHINGTON, D.C. -- With the U.S. Supreme Court preparing to hear a case that could sharply limit the federal government's ability to arrest medical marijuana patients whose activities are legal under state law, medical marijuana advocates see their cause moving forward no matter what the court decides.Ashcroft v. Raich, which will be heard by the high court on November 29, could end federal raids on patients who are obeying state medical marijuana laws. Significantly, the case cannot overturn the laws now protecting the right of 57 million Americans living in Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington to use medical marijuana, officials of the Marijuana Policy Project noted. MPP, whose grants program provided funding for the litigation, also led the campaigns that passed medical marijuana laws in Vermont and Montana this year."The most important thing to know is that this case will not impact the right of states to enact their own medical marijuana laws," said Rob Kampia, executive director of MPP, which is based in Washington, D.C. "If the Supreme Court rules our way, the federal government's war on patients will come to an abrupt end in the 10 states with medical marijuana laws, On the other hand, if the Court rules against us, then we're back to where we started -- patients will be protected from arrest under state law, but not under federal law."According to annual statistics released by the FBI and the U.S. Sentencing Commission, 99 percent of all marijuana arrests are made by state and local authorities under state law; only 1 percent of marijuana arrests are made by the DEA and other federal authorities under federal law. "Because 99 percent of all marijuana arrests are made under state law and not federal law, we will continue to focus on making medical marijuana legal from state to state, just as we did this year in Montana and Vermont, regardless of what the Supreme Court says about federal law," said Kampia.In the president's home state of Texas, a Scripps Howard poll released earlier this month showed 75 percent approval for legalizing the medical use of marijuana, with support cutting across all parties and age groups. "Rather than appealing this case to the Supreme Court, the Bush administration should have listened to the American people and dropped the case," said Kampia. "In Montana, a solidly Republican state, the medical marijuana initiative there received more votes than President Bush on Election Day, just as the first medical marijuana initiative in California received more votes than President Clinton back in 1996."Legal documents in the case are available at: http://www.angeljustice.org/With more than 17,000 members and 150,000 e-mail subscribers nationwide, the Marijuana Policy Project is the largest marijuana policy reform organization in the United States. MPP works to minimize the harm associated with marijuana -- both the consumption of marijuana and the laws that are intended to prohibit such use. MPP believes that the greatest harm associated with marijuana is imprisonment. For more information, please visit: http://www.MarijuanaPolicy.org/FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASENOVEMBER 23, 2004CONTACT: MarijuanaPolicy.orgBruce Mirken, MPP director of communications, 202-543-7972 or 415-668-6403 http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/1123-14.htm [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by FoM on November 23, 2004 at 12:43:28 PT Press Release from AScribe ADVISORY for Monday, November 29, 2004 Ashcroft v. Raich, Press Conference: Federal v. State Power, Compassion for Sick, at Heart of Supreme Court Medical Cannabis Case Involving Severely Ill Mother Persecuted by Federal Government WASHINGTON, Nov. 23 (AScribe Newswire) -- Angel Raich, the plaintiff in the closely watched medical cannabis case before the Supreme Court and her legal team will speak briefly on the Court steps immediately following the hearing on her case on November 29, followed by a more in-depth press conference directly across the street from the Court. The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to review last year's 9th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in Ashcroft v. Raich to decide whether the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 is unconstitutional as it applies to a patient's or caregiver's right to cultivate and possess cannabis to treat medical conditions as recommended by the patient's doctor. Raich, 38, a former bookkeeper and lumber mill worker, is a seriously ill, disabled mother of two who suffers from an inoperable brain tumor, life-threatening wasting syndrome, seizures, and chronic pain. At the center of the case is whether the federal government, in persecuting Raich and co-plaintiff Diane Monson, overstepped its authority under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. At the press event, Raich and her legal team will share their impressions and analysis of the hearing. They will discuss the Supreme Court's record of supporting federalism and how state and local medical cannabis laws will remain valid regardless of the high court's decision. WHAT: Press conference following Supreme Court argument in Ashcroft v. Raich WHEN: Monday, November 29, 2004, Noon EST (Please note the press conference time indicated in an earlier release has been changed to Noon.) WHERE: Stewart Mott House, 122 Maryland Avenue N.E., btwn 1st and 2nd Streets Note: This event is not open to the public; press are asked to RSVP or present credentials. Refreshments will be served. WHO: Rob Kampia, Executive Director, Marijuana Policy Project Randy E. Barnett, Boston University professor of law, legal team member Angel Raich, Plaintiff Dr. Frank Lucido, MD, Angel Raich's primary physician Julie Carpenter, Attorney, California Nurses Association CONTACT: For more information or to RSVP, contact Simon Aronoff, 202-822-5200, cell 415-425-1565, or Anne Purdy, 415-901-0111, cell 415-317-4207. http://www.ascribe.org/cgi-bin/behold.pl?ascribeid=20041123.095635&time=10%2040%20PST&year=2004&public=1 [ Post Comment ] Post Comment