cannabisnews.com: MAPS - MPP US Supreme Court Amicus Curiae Brief MAPS - MPP US Supreme Court Amicus Curiae Brief Posted by FoM on February 22, 2001 at 10:42:15 PT US v. OCBC - Medical Marijuana Case Source: MAPS MAPS and the Marijuana Policy Project worked together to prepare this Amicus Curiae (Friend of the Court) brief. Amicus Curiae briefs are filed by parties who are not directly involved in the litigation but have an interest in the outcome. The Court does not have to take these briefs into consideration but can do so if they wish. To help prepare the brief, MAPS obtained the pro-bono services of Cheryl Flax-Davidson, an attorney with extensive experience preparing Amicus Curiae briefs for the U.S. Supreme Court. Amicus Curiae briefs are submitted at the pleasure of the parties, so the MAPS/MPP brief was reviewed and approved by the lawyers for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative. At the last minute, the lawyers for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative decided that they didn't want the brief to have MAPS listed as a party, since that would have meant that the word "psychedelic" would have appeared on the cover page of the brief. That seemed like a reasonable request, so the brief was changed to be from Rick Doblin personally, and not MAPS, with MPP being listed first since organizations often carry more weight than individuals. MPP's Rob Kampia and Chuck Thomas both made major contributions to the text. The brief is also signed by Dr. Ethan Russo, with whom MAPS worked for years in an unsuccessful effort to obtain permission to conduct FDA-approved research into the use of marijuana in treatment-resistant migraine patients. FDA approved Dr. Russo's protocol but NIDA refused to supply the marijuana. As a result, Dr. Russo's study never took place. We have tried to turn our frustrating experience with NIDA to the advantage of medical marijuana patients but letting the U.S. Supreme Court know that the FDA drug development process is politically obstructed, thus creating more of a need for the medical necessity defense for patients who ran into conflict with the police over their use of marijuana as medicine. We will update this page once the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court is announced. Note: US v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative - Medical Marijuana CaseRead The Amicus Curiae Brief (in PDF) http://www.maps.org/mmj/maps-mppbrief.pdfSubmitted By Ethan Russo, MDRelease Date: February 21, 2001Office:Montana Neurobehavioral Specialists900 North Orange StreetMissoula, MT 59802, USAVoice: (406) 327-3372FAX: (406) 327-3355E-mail (secondary): erusso mtneuro.comMultidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studieshttp://www.maps.org/Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Oakland Cannabis Buyer's Cooperativehttp://www.rxcbc.org/CannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #6 posted by CannabisMythsExposed on February 22, 2001 at 15:59:35 PT: Well done doc. I look forward to reading the briefing later at my leisure. Cannabis Myths Exposed [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by Morgan on February 22, 2001 at 12:43:41 PT Alright Doc! I find precious few people to admire in this life. And you're one of the few, Doc. Way to go!********************************************************** [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by TroutMask on February 22, 2001 at 12:38:30 PT Question Thank You Doctor Russo!!!Does anyone know of a site that's following this case? I'd like info on when it will be presented and when a decision is expected, at least.Thanks!-TM [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by QuietCrusader on February 22, 2001 at 12:09:22 PT: Hooray for Dr. Russo!! Give 'em hell Doc! Dr. Lester Grispoon's Medical Marijuana Site [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by FoM on February 22, 2001 at 11:31:57 PT We Sure Are Lucky We really are lucky to have Dr. Russo working so hard for our efforts. I don't want to embarass him but I had to say that. I'm also happy that we have many good and intelligent and compassionate people commenting here too.We might just win this insane war against people's rights. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Kevin Hebert on February 22, 2001 at 11:24:43 PT: Congratulations Dr. Russo Glad to see you were involved in such an important case. This could be the big one. It's likely that the court will uphold state's rights over a federal power (the constitution doesn't give drug regulatory control to the federal government), and if so, then we will have a major goal accomplished. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: