cannabisnews.com: Supreme Court Looks at Medical Marijuana Supreme Court Looks at Medical Marijuana Posted by CN Staff on December 02, 2004 at 10:13:09 PT By Barb Kromphardt, BCR Staff Source: Bureau County Republican Washington, D.C. -- Can states allow residents to use marijuana for medical reasons when the federal government says no?That is the question being currently debated by the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Ashcroft v. Raich. Angel Raich has tumors in her brain and uterus, and suffers from seizures, spasms and nausea. Her doctor prescribed 35 drugs before he found one that worked -- marijuana. Raich is joined in her lawsuit by Diane Monson, who first decided to file suit after federal agents raided her home in August 2002 to destroy the marijuana she uses for chronic back pain and spasms.The two women sought an injunction to prevent further raids on their homes. This was denied by a federal judge, but an appeals court reversed the decision.The appeals court ruled marijuana used for medical purposes was different from drug trafficking and said states could adopt medical marijuana laws, as long as the marijuana was not sold, transported across state lines or used for non-medicinal purposes.That's when the federal government stepped in, and the case moved to the Supreme Court.The merits of medicinal marijuana are not being debated by the justices. Studies by the Institute of Medicine, the American Medical Association, New England Journal of Medicine, the AIDS Action Council, the American Academy of Family Physicians and other organizations have concluded the use of marijuana can relieve pain and nausea associated with illnesses, such as cancer, multiple sclerosis and AIDS.The argument is whether the federal government has the right to trump state law in the case of medicinal marijuana.The federal government argues it has the power to prosecute or take other action against patients who use home-grown marijuana in states with laws allowing medical use. California voters legalized medicinal marijuana, as have 10 other states, but it remains illegal under federal law.The argument is based on Congress' right to control interstate commerce. The 10th Amendment says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."Since medicinal drug usage is not mentioned in the Constitution, the government uses the Constitution's commerce clause to regulate its usage, based on the notion that almost any activity affects interstate commerce.In Ashcroft v. Raich, the justice department is arguing that federal law gives it the power to destroy medical marijuana, even when the grower does not take it across state lines.In response, lawyer Randy Barnett argued on behalf of the two women that medical use of marijuana was a non-economic activity that falls outside the power of Congress to regulate trade among the states. He said the drug in this case was home-grown, provided for free, and did not cross state borders, and therefore, did not have enough effect on interstate commerce to permit Congressional regulation.A ruling in the case is due by the end of June.Local doctors declined to comment on the case, but one area woman has a personal interest in the case.Kathy Jo Lindner of LaSalle has been volunteering at the chemotherapy room at St. Margaret's Hospital for several years, following her treatment there for breast cancer.Lindner has some concern about possible abuse of medical marijuana."Who's to prevent a spouse or the children from access to the marijuana?" she said.She said the government would need to make restrictions tight enough so that only those in need would receive the marijuana.But those restrictions would be a small price to pay to help those suffering from cancer, said Lindner."With the contact I've had with cancer patients, anything that would ease their pain would be beneficial," she said.Source: Bureau County Republican (IL)Author: Barb Kromphardt, BCR StaffPublished: December 02, 2004Copyright: 2004 Bureau County RepublicanContact: opinion bcrnews.comWebsite: http://www.bcrnews.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Angel Raich v. Ashcroft Newshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/raich.htmMedical Marijuana Case Tests Limits of Federalismhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19951.shtmlTesting The Limits of Big Governmenthttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19949.shtmlSupreme Court Hears Oral Argument on MMJhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19948.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #18 posted by The GCW on December 03, 2004 at 12:41:22 PT Poll on their front page http://www.bcrnews.com/ 65% to 35%…POLL [ Post Comment ] Comment #17 posted by siege on December 02, 2004 at 14:42:19 PT /// Kathy Jo LindnerIf some one wants something they get it it don't have to be at home It Like the man next to me they just jail him out in his horse field there where 6 Opium Poppys there where just nice flowers and onone even looked TWICE at them. except DEA.TH>>> they have been there going on 14 years that I know of. and he just bough it last may 04. [ Post Comment ] Comment #16 posted by FoM on December 02, 2004 at 13:54:37 PT Druid What happened to the rights of families to do things their way? When I was growing up my parents has a Liquor cabinet. It was full of bottles of all kinds of alcohol. I was told this is off limits until I was 21. I said fine and never even took a sip. It wasn't mine to have. [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by Hope on December 02, 2004 at 13:47:33 PT they've been driven hysterical by propaganda "Why do people insist on thinking that Medical Cannabis is any different than any other prescription drug?"If it's illegal because it's a "poisonous" dangerous plant...why isn't Oleander illegal?Freedom, personal responsibility, and honest education are the keys...not prohibition, big brothering, and silencing of honest education. [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by Hope on December 02, 2004 at 13:40:44 PT odd...but good...I think Drudge took down the link to the brain damage story.These "studies" resulted in nothing but "theories"...not hard facts. Media and scientists used to openly admit when a theory was just a theory...now you have to be on the lookout for words like "may", to know if they are presenting a theory or facts.Blatant honesty doesn't seem to be part of their criteria for their announcements and pronouncements. [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by Druid on December 02, 2004 at 13:37:25 PT I don't get it.... The end of the article there is a comment that confuses me. Lindner has some concern about possible abuse of medical marijuana."Who's to prevent a spouse or the children from access to the marijuana?" she said.She said the government would need to make restrictions tight enough so that only those in need would receive the marijuana. Why do people insist on thinking that Medical Cannabis is any different than any other prescription drug? I mean come one now! Why would it be any different than say OxyContin or Valium or any other heavy duty tranquilizer or narcotic that is prescribed by a doctor? They want to imply that given the chance for access to Cannabis then people will become fiends and nobody will be protected from the evil plant. What a load. [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by Hope on December 02, 2004 at 13:19:36 PT new "animals"...bred of prohibition "We did it for your own good, Lord! and for society's good!"Yeah, right. I have it on good word that God, as I know him, is heavy NOT into us being "self righteousness" or serving as other people's consciences... or wholesale prohibition of any substance. As I know of the Creator, the one who is the Great "I Am", he who I call “Father” and “Brother”, he is heavy into love, honesty, humility, and mercy and all that stuff we get called "bleeding hearts" or "soft" for.Anti's and fascists seem like poisonous reptilian beings. It's hard for me to feel sympathy for them...and their ignorance, arrogance, and cruelty. They are conscienceless killers. They deceive themselves on self examination and blame any problems they cause on someone else. I get so angry at them and the wickedness, death, and corruption that their manmade laws and traditions breed. It's astounding and dismaying from a spiritual point of view, how they walk around with their eyes wide closed. They have turned relative “mole hills” into mountains of grief. That mountain must go.Somehow, they must be made to realize the societal harms of the of the unrealistic societal ideals they pursue. I’m thinking it will have to be miraculous epiphanies for these people to ever see. They didn’t see when innocent people have been murdered and terrorized in the name of their cause…prohibition of drugs. They force themselves to not realize what they are doing. They see the dead bodies of people who had nothing to do with drugs and the dead bodies of those who didn’t know what they were doing and couldn’t ask for help when they got in trouble…without fear of reprisal and they keep backing it all and telling themselves, regardless of the facts, how righteous they are being in the name of the imagined righteousness of prohibition.Lovers of drug prohibition can also say, “When did we shoot you out of the sky cause we thought you might have something to do with someone getting high somewhere?” or “When did we shoot you in the back at close range with a shot gun, where you lay early one morning in terror on your childhood bedroom floor, because we thought your daddy might be involved in drugs?” Or how about, “When did we scare you to death in your home one morning when you were getting ready to go to work?”“When, Lord?”Prohibition is not the way to help people. How can they continue in their ignorance and blindness? I’m ashamed of them.It may be a form of the dreaded “magical thinking” to believe in a Creator…but it’s definitely magical thinking and convoluted thinking when antis can imagine that the deaths and tragedies they’ve caused in the name of prohibition are actually caused because someone somewhere might use a drug. It makes a lot of sense to antis…that,"Yeah…it’s your fault I clobbered you with this here baseball bat because you had that dangerous ole cig in your hand." [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by FoM on December 02, 2004 at 12:47:40 PT Newsday: Feds Overreach on Medical Marijuana December 2, 2004Time was when marijuana use prompted easy political stereotypes - liberals for, conservatives against. Not anymore. Conservatives of different stripes are likely to have warring views on the case the Supreme Court considered this week asking whether a federal law prohibiting marijuana possession can constitutionally trump laws in 11 states that allow marijuana use for medicinal purposes. The court should rule in favor of the states.Cultural conservatives won't like the idea of legal drug use. Ditto for conservatives who favor states rights, but they'd like it even less if the court allowed Washington to overrule voters in states who approved the use of medical marijuana.Justices don't rely on political views to decide such things. Federal drug laws are rooted in the Constitution's commerce clause, which authorizes regulation of interstate trade. But the court has said that authority doesn't cover local, non-economic acts unless there's a commercial impact. That should apply to two California women whose marijuana wasn't commercially traded or shipped across state lines. There are plenty of legitimate fronts in the war on drugs. Sick people using marijuana with their doctors' blessings isn't one of them. Copyright: 2004, Newsday, Inc. http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpmar024061783dec02,0,373587.story [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by FoM on December 02, 2004 at 11:54:38 PT More Articles from Google The laws against Cannabis are enough to make a sane person more then a little crazy!http://news.google.com/news?ned=us&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&ncl=http://www.webindia123.com/news/showdetails.asp%3Fid%3D53979%26cat%3DWorld [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by observer on December 02, 2004 at 11:49:59 PT cannabis / psychosis breaking news I've been tracking that news, here: http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/index.cgi?q=psychosis&concept=cannabisThe news items that have come out are all very vague as to the strength and qualities of this "psychosis". They are all sure to make the point, however, that they are all very convinced that cannabis is the cause of the effect. This seems more political and less scientific. Standard schizophrenia and schizo-like diagnosis categories include an axis that measures "magical thinking." I can't help but wonder if the current reefer madness moral panic boils down to people admitting to a slightly greater openness to the possibilities of so-called paranormal or psychic phenomena. It is an ugly area where the inquisitors' and alienists' witch and heresy tests of old are cloaked in modern, scientific garb. So pot smokers may be more sympathetic to ideas which do not earn the strict approcal of skeptical enquirer and csicop. This is spun into "you smoke pot, you're going crazy!" [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by Hope on December 02, 2004 at 11:27:54 PT I can almost hear it now... The anti's all having to say, "When Lord, did we see you in pain and deny you relief?" [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by Hope on December 02, 2004 at 11:23:45 PT Drudge I check it out fairly often simply because I know so many others are checking it out...and I'm curious as to what so many are "consuming". [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by FoM on December 02, 2004 at 11:16:02 PT Hope I never hear anything about him. He reminds me of a gossip columnist. Always looking for dirt and it takes away from what is important like the war that Bush took us into. Maybe he does news about the invasion of Iraq but I never look. The psychosis articles are all over google too and it is because of our good news on how people feel about Angel's case. They do it every time. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by Hope on December 02, 2004 at 11:12:45 PT Thanks, FoM You mentioned Google news a week or so ago. It's in my daily list. It is a good news site.Thanks for the tip. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Hope on December 02, 2004 at 11:11:11 PT also has article about Dutch study Drudge has also got that http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6629828/ piece on his site today...Marijuana may increase risk of psychosis.Pols are into Drudge, I've heard. [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on December 02, 2004 at 11:09:56 PT Hope Here is where I get my news. This is a really good news source. It covers so much.http://news.google.com/ [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by FoM on December 02, 2004 at 11:06:07 PT Hi Hope I never go to Drudge. When he did that to Clinton years ago I decided not to read what he says. He's a very strange person to me. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Hope on December 02, 2004 at 11:03:27 PT big splash over at Drudge Report http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041202/D86NJPOG0.html40 Percent in U.S. Use Prescription Drugs [ Post Comment ] Post Comment