cannabisnews.com: Fed. Judge Says Government Cannot Penalize Doctors





Fed. Judge Says Government Cannot Penalize Doctors
Posted by FoM on September 07, 2000 at 19:35:56 PT
By David Kravets, Associated Press Writer 
Source: Sacramento Bee
A federal judge Thursday told the government it cannot penalize doctors who recommend marijuana by revoking their licenses to dispense medication. The order by U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup came a month after the federal government said it would resist Proposition 215, California's voter-approved medical marijuana law. The decision has broad implications for several states with similar laws.
Measures similar Proposition 215, which voters approved in 1996, have passed in Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington state."We really cannot comment this evening," Department of Justice spokeswoman Gretchen Michael said. "We haven't seen the judge's order yet."Alsup wrote that the Department of Justice is permanently prohibited from revoking licenses to dispense medication "merely because the doctor recommends medical marijuana to a patient based on a sincere medical judgment and from initiating any investigation solely on that ground."Even so, the U.S. Supreme Court last week barred an Oakland marijuana club from distributing cannabis to sick patients until it decides whether that practice is lawful.Pending how the court rules, a decision could close dozens of such clubs still operating. The high court's decision does not hamper Californians, for example, who want to grow small amounts of marijuana if they have a doctor's recommendation to use it.The American Civil Liberties Union, which brought the suit, contended that the government's position violates doctors' free speech rights, and that many doctors were resisting recommending pot for fear of losing their federal right to prescribe medication."This is important because doctors and patients can feel free to discuss marijuana as an option," said Graham Boyd, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union.Alsup wrote that his order applies even if "the physician anticipates that the recommendation will, in turn, be used by the patient to obtain marijuana in violation of federal law."At a hearing before Alsup last month, Department of Justice lawyer Joseph W. Lobue told the judge that the government doesn't care whether California voters approved the so-called Compassionate Use Act, which allows patients to grow and possess marijuana for medical use with a doctor's recommendation."It doesn't matter what California says," Lobue argued.Arguing that federal law applies to the country no matter how states may have voted, Lobue said the government would take the same position "in Oklahoma if they had that law." He said marijuana has no proven medical benefits and that the Federal Drug Administration has not authorized doctors to even recommend it.Legal jockeying in California began three years ago when White House drug policy chief Barry McCaffrey said that doctors who recommended marijuana would lose their federal licenses to prescribe controlled substances. He said the doctors would be excluded from Medicare and Medicaid and could face criminal charges.The 10 doctors and five of their patients involved in the suit say marijuana can be beneficial to patients with AIDS, HIV, cancer, glaucoma, and seizures or muscle spasms associated with chronic, debilitating conditions.The case is Conant vs. McCaffrey, C97-00139WHA.Published: September 7, 2000Copyright © The Sacramento BeeRelated Articles & Web Site:ACLUhttp://www.aclu.org/Smoky Battleground Renewed in Federal Courthttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6684.shtmlThe Federal Jihad Against Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6665.shtmlFighting Cheech & Chong Medicinehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6533.shtmlCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archives:http://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml 
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on September 08, 2000 at 13:02:43 PT:
Rubber-band time
Everybody's played with a rubber-band. Mainly, you pulled it to see how far it would stretch before it broke. Sometimes you'd pull it just to the breaking point, and then let go to watch it shoot off in an opposite direction. But a not-too- bright child would pull and snap, pull and snap, pull and snap, all day long, breaking rubber-band after rubber-band. Without figuring out why it breaks.The Government is playing such a game. It has taken on the role of that mentally-challenged child. The bad part is, the rubber band is your Constitutional rights. It just doesn't seem to get the idea that some things are fragile, and don't take too well to manhandling. Indeed, it's quite dangerous to go about attempting to revoke the sovereign frachise - the vote - of the citizens of the States of this country bt fiat Supreme Court rulings. (You see, the antis and their allies in the Supremes think they are safe in doing so because they did it to the citizens residing in the District of Columbia; they figured that since they *got away with it there*, they can get away with it by doing it to the *rest of the country*. Deny democracy to one group, no matter what the reason, and you make it inevitable that an even greater attempt will be made to deny it to *all*. IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT TECHNICAL STANCE THE GOVERNMENT TAKES REGARDING D.C.'S 'SPECIAL POSITION'; THE RIGHTS OF THE CITIZENS OF D.C. HAVE BEEN TRAMPLED! Nobody is safe now. Nobody.) Do it once, and you might get away with it. Do it twice, and more grumble, but the blades will probably stay sheathed. But do it three times, and you invite howling, bloody chaos; why abide by the rules when the big boys keep changing them to suit themselves?Nations have vanished in pools of their own blood for forgetting such historical lessons. I am not being rhetorical; how many groups of people out there actually believe the government is plotting to do just that, and are making *their* plans accordingly? Such actions as what the antis and the Supremes have made play right into the hands of such groups, providing all they need in the way of justification. In short, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Waco and Ruby Ridge were perfect examples of that; can the Guv learn...or is it just too stupid?It's time to gently but firmly remove this idiot childs' hands from our rights and put them out of its' reach. Lest we be left with nothing but sad memories of a country we once had... but now 'has' us. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by Dr. Ganj on September 08, 2000 at 09:25:04 PT
District Court Judge William Alsup Ruling
Here's another federal judge that ruled honestly, and correctly. Now, I wonder if the DoJ will appeal THIS? No matter-as the truth is finally getting mainstream coverage, and it's also showing the world what a heartless government we have. Think about it, here we have federal judges ruling patients should have their choice of medicine, and another federal judge ruling that doctors should be able to discuss cannabis therapy without fear of losing their licenses, but our own government is doing everything in their power to stop this! What is wrong here? Dying people can get cocaine and morphine, but can't use marijuana to ease their suffering? This is only breeding contempt for our government officials, and it's starting to backfire on them. The 63 year lie is over. In 2 months even more states will allow medical marijuana. The feds can't stop the will of a country. To deny beneficial medicine to sick people is despicable. What truly evil people we have in this world. I pray they suffer too, and beg for medical marijuana as they writhe in pain. Dr. Ganj
http://www.gov.state.ak.us/ltgov/elections/petitions/99hemp.htm
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo, MD on September 08, 2000 at 05:30:49 PT:
Sanity Prevails, Now Will the Government Wise Up?
Thank God for the wisdom and courage of a few sane District Court judges to do what is right and proper. Did the government really think that they could bully us into silence on the issue of clinical cannabis? I'd recommend cyanide to a patient if there were a manner in which it would safely help treat their illness. Lest anyone despair that Judge Alsup is a lone voice in the wilderness, this would not be the case. Robert Sweet, a republican former deputy mayor of New York City, and current District Court Judge said this of one dissenter against the dominant paradigm on drug policy, "but isn't it a marvelous thing that there are people, even if they are as far away as Montana, who are struggling against the system, to bring reality and honesty into the debate?" I am proud to say that person was me. Does anyone think that I would desist after that kind of endorsement from a man of that kind of moral stature? The answer is a resounding "no!" The challenges must mount, and edifice of repression will fall.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: