cannabisnews.com: Doctor Rights Backed Under Pot Law





Doctor Rights Backed Under Pot Law
Posted by FoM on September 08, 2000 at 08:07:10 PT
By Harriet Chiang, Chronicle Legal Affairs Writer 
Source: San Francisco Chronicle 
 The Clinton administration suffered a defeat in its assault on California's medical marijuana law when a judge barred the federal government from punishing doctors who recommend the drug to their patients. U.S. District Judge William Alsup of San Francisco ruled yesterday that federal authorities cannot strip doctors of their license to prescribe medicine if the physicians advise their patients to use marijuana. 
The Clinton administration has fiercely attacked Proposition 215, the 1996 voter-approved initiative that allows marijuana to be prescribed for medicinal use. The government argues that marijuana is an illegal substance under federal drug laws. Last month, in response to a White House request, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an emergency ruling temporarily preventing an Oakland medicinal marijuana club from opening for business. In his opinion yesterday, Alsup issued a permanent injunction against the federal government, suggesting that to allow it to punish doctors might violate the physicians' First Amendment rights. In California and seven other states with similar laws -- Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington -- ``recommending marijuana to treat certain debilitating illnesses is recognized as legitimate in medically appropriate circumstances,'' the judge wrote in his 24-page opinion. In some cases, Alsup said, ``it will be the professional opinion of doctors that marijuana is the best therapy or at least should be tried. ``If such recommendations could not be communicated,'' he concluded, ``then the physician-patient relationship would be seriously impaired.'' Alsup's decision follows a 1997 ruling by U.S. District Judge Fern Smith, who issued a preliminary injunction barring the federal government from taking action against the doctors. ``My hope is that this ruling effectively puts an end to the fear that physicians have been experiencing,'' said Graham Boyd, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents a statewide class of doctors and patients suing the federal government. Gretchen Michael, spokeswoman for the Justice Department, said officials were not ready to comment on the opinion. ``We'll obviously review the decision and determine what we'll do next,'' she said. Proposition 215 allows patients to use marijuana if they have the recommendation of a doctor. But the Clinton administration has insisted that federal drug regulations take precedence over state laws. A month after voters approved the measure, the Clinton administration's drug czar, Barry McCaffrey, announced that doctors who recommend marijuana faced losing their federal license to prescribe drugs. He also suggested that they risk criminal prosecution and exclusion from Medicare and Medi-Cal. In January 1997, a group of doctors and patients filed a statewide class action, saying the federal government was violating its free speech rights. In his decision, Alsup said it wasn't clear that the federal drug agents intended to criminally prosecute the doctors or exclude them from Medicare and Medi-Cal. However, Boyd said, the decision ``puts the federal government on notice that if they do threaten doctors, they'll be back in court and they'll lose.'' E-mail Harriet Chiang at: hchiang sfchronicle.comPublished: Wednesday, September 8, 2000 Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)Copyright: 2000 San Francisco ChronicleContact: chronletters sfgate.com Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/Forum: http://www.sfgate.com/conferences/Related Articles & Web Site:ACLUhttp://www.aclu.org/Fed. Judge Says Government Cannot Penalize Doctors http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6968.shtmlSmoky Battleground Renewed in Federal Courthttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6684.shtmlCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archives:http://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml 
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #5 posted by Tim Stone on September 08, 2000 at 17:48:58 PT
We can hope...
kaptinemo said:"Well, we won one. When things were looking bleak, a judge has earned his pay, and ruled on whatshould *never have been a matter for the courts to deal with, anyway*. But the sad thing is that it gotthat far."I would imagine that the DoJ might possibly appeal this, and to paraphrase the old line, it ain't over until the fat Supremes sing. If Justice doesn't appeal - and the might well at this point just gunk it until the new administration comes in - if Justice doesn't appeal, it will be out of fear of treading on too many corns, this being a clear 1st Amendment, free speech issue. Inotherwords, the Feds might run into too much sympathetic opposition from powerful entities who don't give a damn about medpot per se, but give one walloping large damn about overt Fed threats to free speech, especially in the medical area. Heck, the Supremes don't even blink when they stayed the Oakland medpot distribution - no powerful entities' corns trod on there - but they may well take a more measured view on this, because it transcends "mere" medpot issues.Inotherwords, if the issue is viewed as solely a medpot, "doper" issue, the appeals courts will tend to take a dim view. But if the issue is larger, and in the appellate minds transcends just "doper" issues, then they will be much more sympathetic. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by Dan Hillman on September 08, 2000 at 14:51:57 PT
warm and fuzzy
What a warm and fuzzy feeling from Judge Alsup! And right on the heels of the Supreme's stay. Alsup's legal opinions have strength because they state the obvious.This case makes me more optomistic than ever that medical marijuana is here to stay.  Funny how the government always sees the solution as dictating what one's doctor can say to a patient, i.e. abortion('91) and now medical marijuana. On that particular point the courts have turned the tide.  And the government is beaten back. Maybe the system works, sometimes.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on September 08, 2000 at 14:44:23 PT:
CRACK! across the knuckles with a ruler.
Well, we won one. When things were looking bleak, a judge has earned his pay, and ruled on what should *never have been a matter for the courts to deal with, anyway*. But the sad thing is that it got that far.The Feds have gotten so used to having their own way in the WoSD, that this is no small victory; it was the Four Horseman of Reno, Shalala, McCaffrey, and Klinton hiding behind all three of them (yeah, I know; Reno. Horse*men*. But can you blame me?) who started this travesty of justice in trying to trample the 1st Amendment immediately after the people of California and Arizona made history(!) with their ballots. Evidently, scoring high in reading comprehension has never been their strong suits; maybe it's not a requirement for Cabinet level positions? (Two years ago, I could not spell 'Politician'. Now I are one! Duh-huh!)The problem with this judge rapping them across the metacarpals is that these modern day Neanderthals are so used to dragging their knuckles across the ground that they have developed callouses on them.With jackasses like these, repeated applications of a 2X4 to their barely perceptible craniums is more applicable.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by FoM on September 08, 2000 at 09:37:50 PT
Related Article
Judge Bans Government From Pursuing Doctors Who Recommend Marijuana for TreatmentSource: CNN.com (US Web)Web Posted: September 8, 2000Copyright: 2000 Cable News Network, Inc.Contact: cnn.feedback cnn.comFeedback: http://cnn.com/feedback/Website: http://www.cnn.com/Forum: http://community.cnn.com/San Francisco (CNN) -- The federal government can't prosecute doctors who recommend marijuana as a medical treatment for patients, a federal judge ruled Thursday in California. U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup, sitting on the bench in San Francisco, issued an injunction permanently banning the government from revoking a physician's license to prescribe medicine "merely because the doctor recommends medical marijuana to a patient based on a sincere medical judgment." Click the link to read the complete article.http://www.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/alternative/09/08/medical.marijuana/
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Frank S. World on September 08, 2000 at 09:17:34 PT
Great News!
It's so good to see the federal judge did not cave in to the immense pressure from the feds and did the right thing. It is cruel enough that the federal government has known of cannabis' medicinal properties for so many years, yet suppressed this medicine, causing untold suffering and harm, but trying to get in the middle of the doctor-patient relationship and attack freedom of speech is evil too.Al Gore keeps saying the HMOs are playing God and getting in the way of the doctor-patient relatiuonships.The Clinton-Gore Administration was trying again to do that here. Thanks, Judge Alsup, a true defender of freedom!
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


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