cannabisnews.com: Court Weighs Challenge To Medical Marijuana Court Weighs Challenge To Medical Marijuana Posted by CN Staff on November 29, 2004 at 13:51:40 PT By David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer Source: Los Angeles Times Washington -- The Supreme Court today confronted a dispute between a liberal state's rights and a zero-tolerance federal anti-drug policy, as a top Bush administration lawyer argued that a federal ban on the use of marijuana trumped California's medical marijuana law."Smoked marijuana really doesn't have any future in medicine," acting Solicitor Gen. Paul Clement told the court. If thousands of Californians were entitled to smoke marijuana to relieve their pain, he added, the federal ban on this illegal drug could collapse. Eight years ago, California's voters approved a limited exception to the drug laws. Seriously ill people were given the right to use marijuana for medical purposes if they had a doctor's recommendation.But federal authorities have all but ignored the state's law — and 10 others like it — and insisted that they retain the power to raid the homes of Californians who grow marijuana for their own use.The Supreme Court took up the dispute not to decide whether marijuana is a good medicine, but to rule on whether the federal authority to "regulate commerce" extends to seizing homegrown drugs.In the past decade, the high court's conservative majority, led by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, has insisted that the federal power to regulate commerce does not mean the federal government can regulate everything. In 1995, for example, the Rehnquist majority struck down a federal gun control law and said "mere gun possession" is not part of interstate commerce.In the medical marijuana case, the ideological tables were turned. Liberal advocates used Rehnquist's words to challenge the federal authority to seize homegrown marijuana."This is non-economic activity and wholly intrastate," said Boston University Law Professor Randy Barnett, who represents the two northern California women who say marijuana has been uniquely effective in relieving their pain."They are not buying or selling" drugs, and therefore, should be exempted from the federal regulation of commerce, he argued.Snipped:Complete Article: http://freedomtoexhale.com/courtweighs.htmSource: Los Angeles Times (CA) Author: David G. Savage, Times Staff WriterPublished: November 29, 2004Copyright: 2004 Los Angeles TimesContact: letters latimes.comWebsite: http://www.latimes.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:Raich vs. Ashcroft http://www.angeljustice.org/Angel Raich v. Ashcroft Newshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/raich.htmHigh Court Considers Medical Marijuana Case http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19903.shtmlWary Court Considers Medical Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19901.shtmlHigh Court To Hear Medical Marijuana Casehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19899.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #19 posted by breeze on November 29, 2004 at 20:45:19 PT Sukoi- earns title of MASTER Linker I watched as Sukoi posted links all over Kerry's "townmeeting."BUT, I don't think I have ever seen someone (phil!!!) post SPAM in a post before- RIB,RIB--- keep your sense of humor, it may be what we will all need to survive!!! After all, Readers Digest has a section called "laughter is great medicine"- and post's jokes and stories in it monthly. There is truth that laughter can heal. Even when it hurts... [ Post Comment ] Comment #18 posted by phil_debowl on November 29, 2004 at 20:45:08 PT thanks, sorry, and it's ok :) ^^^Thanks for trying to get rid of it FOM. Just had a bunch going on at once at the moment.No problem sukoi. Our constitutional protections are shrinking fast.And no problem at all dongenero. I can completely understand :). I do a lot more reading than talking :). I love listening to all of your discussions! [ Post Comment ] Comment #17 posted by FoM on November 29, 2004 at 17:03:25 PT Sukoi Thanks again. You sure know how to find good links. [ Post Comment ] Comment #16 posted by Sukoi on November 29, 2004 at 16:51:09 PT FoM, here's more: Ashcroft v. Raich oral argumenthttp://federalism.typepad.com/ashcroft_v_raich/2004/11/the_oral_argume.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by Sukoi on November 29, 2004 at 16:00:54 PT FoM I hope that he does too; he does an excellent job on his site. I'm still reading the transcript - it is indeed interesting!!! [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by FoM on November 29, 2004 at 15:52:19 PT Sukoi Thank you. The other day Pete Guither registered to post on CNews. I hope he finds time and posts here. [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by Sukoi on November 29, 2004 at 15:36:14 PT FoM - This just in... Courtesy of Pete Guither:Legal Theory BlogAshcroft v. Raichhttp://lsolum.blogspot.com/archives/2004_11_01_lsolum_archive.html#110176341608722107 [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by dongenero on November 29, 2004 at 15:28:03 PT sorry phil Sorry 'bout that phil. I'm getting so fed up with being spammed everywhere I turn online. I didn't recognize your name and thought my last bastion of freedom from spam had fallen. My apologies for the tone.....and yes...must be time to head home and relax a bit. [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by global_warming on November 29, 2004 at 15:16:51 PT They need a letter I sure wish someone could send these people a letter, they seem to have an exagerated and out of date fear of marijuana.They seem to site only the earlier research/studies and totally ignore current findings, such as the gateway theory which was largely found to be untrue..http://www.dfaf.org/ Drug Free America Foundation, Inc. [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by FoM on November 29, 2004 at 15:07:39 PT Phil I tried to remove it but it messed up the comment section so I un-editied it. Please don't worry about it. [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by FoM on November 29, 2004 at 15:01:48 PT Hi Guys Please don't fight. We need each other more then ever. You are all great. [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by Sukoi on November 29, 2004 at 14:56:06 PT Thanks Phil I just posted that here: http://www.whistlestopper.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23206 [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by phil_debowl on November 29, 2004 at 14:54:16 PT sorry about that Sorry about that, it must have copied from cnn's site. The phone was ringing when i was posting so i just pasted and sent. If you read past the loan stuff, you'll see the beginning of the story, with a link to the rest.Again, my apologies. If it's not too difficult, please remove the loan stuff from the post.Also, i realized after i posted that it's not a new story, but i read this site almost everyday, and haven't seen mention of it. My apologies if it has already been discussed.Dong, c'mon man, you coulda just pointed it out without the smartass overtone. I understand though, i haven't smoked yet today either :). [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by dongenero on November 29, 2004 at 14:33:39 PT spam posting? Gee, nice ad there phil-debowl. Thanks sooo much for sharing. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by phil_debowl on November 29, 2004 at 14:24:07 PT Hair samples not protected by constitution Inderectly related to marijuana, and very scary!http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/11/19/colb.scalp/ Hair lacks constitutional protectionBy Sherry F. Colb FindLawexternal link Columnist Special to CNN.com Friday, November 19, 2004 Posted: 1:34 PM EST (1834 GMT) What's this? $160,000 Mortgage for $667/Month Refinance while rates are low. Compare rates and save $1000s on your... www.lowermybills.com Compare Mortgage Offers Get up to 4 free mortgage/refinance quotes or home equity loan offers now from 1... www2.nextag.com LendingTree.com - Official Site Lendingtree - Find a mortgage, refinance, home equity or auto loan now. Receive... www.lendingtree.com Find an Online Degree Bachelor, Master, Postgrad degrees or Certificates online from accredited... www.classesusa.com FOR THE PUBLIC External site icon Legal commentary from FindLaw's Writ External site icon LAW DICTIONARY External site icon (FindLaw) -- At the end of last month, in the case of Coddington v. Evanko, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that police officers may constitutionally shave large amounts of hair from a suspect's head, neck, and shoulders, without a warrant, probable cause, or any basis for suspecting that the hair would provide evidence of crime. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Taylor121 on November 29, 2004 at 14:15:51 PT: CNN POLL Should the states or the federal government regulate the use of marijuana for medical purposes? States Federal government http://www.cnn.com/ [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Taylor121 on November 29, 2004 at 14:07:24 PT Vote on this Poll and Another Link On the court Should the Federal government legalize marijuana for medical purposes? Vote here: http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/CNBCTV/Promos/P101639.aspBloomberg gives a slightly more detailed account of what happened in court. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aPqTaGu8ag10&refer=us [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Sam Adams on November 29, 2004 at 13:59:40 PT Such BS Justice David H. Souter wondered how the federal ban could survive if hundreds of thousands of Californians said they had a right to use marijuana."This whole argument boils down to how many people are involved," he said.OK, let me get this straight: there are 100,000 people on chemo in California, therefore, the feds are justified in making them suffer.If only a few people were suffering, then the feds wouldn't have to persecute them.Great country!It's interesting that while they're on the subject of chemo, Rehnquist is actually undergoing chemo. That tie-in was not mentioned in any of these articles. He could be sitting there getting infused with chemo poisons as he reads these arguments. Well Mr. Rehnquist, it's your bed. Sleep well. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Taylor121 on November 29, 2004 at 13:54:15 PT: Here we go The case is there. Regardless of it being heard, we still have months till we know their decision. In the meantime EVERYONE here needs to get the word around and send a clear message to the senate on how we feel about medical pot.http://www.mpp.org/trials [ Post Comment ] Post Comment