cannabisnews.com: Court To Look At Marijuana Dispense 










  Court To Look At Marijuana Dispense 

Posted by FoM on March 27, 2001 at 23:32:11 PT
By Anne Gearan, Associated Press Writer 
Source: Los Angeles Times 

Seriously ill people who claim marijuana is nothing short of a miracle drug are watching anxiously as the Supreme Court examines whether the drug may be dispensed legally.   The court's watershed ruling, expected by June, likely will settle whether patients may get marijuana as a "medical necessity" even though it is an illegal drug under federal law. 
  A ruling for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Club would allow special marijuana clubs to resume distributing the drug in California, which passed one of the nation's first medical marijuana laws in 1996.   A ruling for the federal government would not negate the California voter initiative, but would effectively prevent clubs like Oakland's from distributing the drug.   A vocal assortment of interest groups and activists supporting the use of marijuana as medical treatment have mounted an energetic public relations campaign ahead of Tuesday's oral arguments.   "No matter what the Supreme Court does, the medical marijuana movement has won," said Kevin Zeese, president of Common Sense for Drug Policy, a group promoting medical marijuana use and reform of drug laws generally.   "There is no way the federal government can put this genie back in the bottle," Zeese said.   A ruling against the club would mean the government could prosecute distributors aggressively in federal court, regardless of whether states have approved medical marijuana use. That would force providers underground or out of business altogether, advocates of medical marijuana say.   Gerald Uelman, lawyer for the Oakland club, said he is optimistic the court will see the case not as a referendum on medical marijuana, but as a rather ordinary legal examination of whether lower federal courts used their powers correctly. That would leave aside grander constitutional challenges to a 1970 federal drug law that found no medical use for marijuana.   "We're trying to structure the argument as narrowly as possible in this case," Uelman said. "We want the court to render a very narrow decision."   California Attorney General Bill Lockyer is backing the Oakland club, arguing that the state has the right to enforce its law allowing seriously ill patients to use marijuana.   Some patients and doctors say the drug relieves nausea, improves energy levels and helps combat the symptoms of ailments ranging from cancer to AIDS to glaucoma and multiple sclerosis.   The Clinton administration sued the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Club and five other California distribution clubs in 1998, arguing that the clubs broke federal drug law by distributing, and in some cases growing, marijuana for medical use.   U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, brother of Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, sided with the government. All the clubs except for the Oakland group eventually closed down, and the Oakland club turned to registering potential marijuana recipients while it awaited a final ruling.   Last year, an appeals court revived the case by ruling that "medical necessity" is a legal defense.   Before leaving office, the Clinton administration appealed to the Supreme Court.   The government said the Oakland club flouted the law and continued to distribute marijuana after an order to stop. Then-Solicitor General Seth Waxman also rejected the notion that marijuana could be a medical necessity, and said Congress had spoken clearly on the issue in a broad 1970 law that regulated drug distribution.   A lower court "may not override those determinations by reweighing the scientific and medical data and social policies considered by Congress, the attorney general and the secretary of Health and Human Services, and concluding that the public interest supports the illegal distribution of marijuana," Waxman wrote in legal papers.   Another Justice Department attorney will argue Tuesday's case for the government. President Bush's choice to succeed Waxman, Theodore Olson, has not yet been confirmed by the Senate.   Justice Breyer will not hear the Supreme Court case nor participate as the other eight justices consider their ruling. Should the court divide 4/4, the appeals court ruling would stand and the marijuana club would be back in business.   Voters in Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington also have approved ballot initiatives allowing the use of medical marijuana. In Hawaii, a similar law was passed by the legislature and signed by the governor in June 2000.      The case is United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers Club, 00 -151 Source: Los Angeles Times (CA) Author: Anne Gearan, Associated Press WriterPublished: March 28, 2001Fax: (213) 237-7679 Copyright: 2001 Los Angeles Times Address: Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA 90053 Contact: letters latimes.com Website: http://www.latimes.com/ Forum: http://www.latimes.com/discuss/ Feedback: http://www.latimes.com/siteservices/talk_contacts.htm Related Articles & Web Sites:Common Sense For Drug Policy: http://www.csdp.org/Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Co-op: http://www.rxcbc.org/USA V. OCBC & Jeffrey Jones: http://www.druglibrary.org/ocbc/Court Weighs Exception To Marijuana Ban: http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9175.shtmlHigh Court To Hear Medical Marijuana Case: http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9174.shtml

END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help






 


Comment #2 posted by SuperStoner on March 28, 2001 at 07:04:01 PT:

Heads in asses = most americans
I think our problem is no gonna be easily solved. if these politcal tight wads cant even pass a damn limit to limt their ability to raise their pay or have term limits on congress maybe we are fighting the wrong way. We need to get rid of the members of congress that have been in office for a long time and have been come a staple of the federal system. If you have the same people in congress year after year nothing is gonna get done. they will vote the same way untill some lobbieing group (which should be abolished) comes along and pays more money for them to vote another way.I really think that there needs be a serious look at how money effects the vote of politions, and look at a way to stop it. The voice of the people is not green, nor should it ever be considers an option to give elected officals any more money than what they earn from the government. Money is the source of all greed. And greed is not the will of the people.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by Dave in Florida on March 28, 2001 at 04:11:07 PT

Unbelievable
A lower court "may not override those determinations by reweighing the scientific and medical data and social policies considered by Congress, the attorney general and the secretary of Health and Human Services, and concluding that the public interest supports the illegal distribution of marijuana," Waxman wrote in legal papers.translation- "It's my football and we are going to play by my rules" - We(the feds) wrote the rules and we are not going to let science or facts get in the way of what we think.
[ Post Comment ]





  Post Comment





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

Link URL: 
Link Title: