cannabisnews.com: Court vs Voters Court vs Voters Posted by FoM on April 09, 2001 at 09:28:45 PT By Russell Sadler Source: Medford Mail Tribune As Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden continues his valiant fight against efforts to weaken or abolish the state’s physician-assisted-suicide law, another voter-approved law is headed for a showdown with an adversary more powerful than Congress. The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments last week in a case that could overturn laws in Oregon and eight other states that allow seriously ill people to use marijuana as a medicine. The justices’ remarks made it clear they will likely side with federal authorities who want to shut down California’s "cannabis clubs" that were formed to distribute the drug to patients. Oregon voters passed a medical marijuana initiative in 1998. We supported the concept of a workable law to allow medical use of marijuana, but opposed the initiative on the grounds that it contained too many flaws. We now consider the federal government’s attempts to overrule state medical marijuana laws in the same light as congressional moves against the assisted-suicide statute. This is an arena where the federal government has no business. Opponents of medical marijuana laws call them the first step toward legalization of all illegal drugs, and argue that such laws fly in the face of federal anti-drug efforts on all levels. Supporters point to scientific research concluding that marijuana can be effective in controlling the nausea brought on by chemotherapy and the pain associated with terminal illness. We are not advocating the wholesale legalization of marijuana or any other illegal substance. We do respect the judgment of voters who decided that terminally ill people should have the right to end their own lives and the right to use a substance that eases the pain and suffering their illnesses cause. The Clinton administration threatened to revoke the prescription licenses of California doctors who recommended marijuana. That was the same tactic threatened against Oregon physicians who prescribed lethal doses of medication under the assisted-suicide law. In either case, it was a heavy-handed use of federal power. We now have an administration supposedly run by conservative Republicans. A Supreme Court dominated by conservatives — and a White House dedicated to Republican values — should adhere to those principles, which include the rights of states to govern themselves without interference from Washington. But we are not confident that will happen in this case. Note: Feds have no business regulating medical marijuana. Veteran columnist Russell Sadler teaches journalism and environmental studies at Southern Oregon University in Ashland. Source: Medford Mail Tribune (OR) Author: Russell SadlerPublished: April 8, 2001Copyright: 2001 The Mail Tribune Contact: letters mailtribune.com Website: http://www.mailtribune.com/ CannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #1 posted by Dan B on April 09, 2001 at 09:51:01 PT: Get it right How many times do numerous people have to say it: the Spureme Court is not deciding whether to verturn the states' laws regarding medical marijuana. They are deciding whether co-op groups, like the Oakland Cannabis Club, have the right to distribute marijuana to patients. The article is right about one thing though: "A Supreme Court dominated by conservatives — and a White House dedicated to Republican values — should adhere to those principles, which include the rights of states to govern themselves without interference from Washington. But we are not confident that will happen in this case."Me neither. It seems that the Supreme court would rather have seriously ill medical marijuana patients buy their medicine from an illegal drug dealer than have them buy it from a safe and compassionate club devoted to the welfare of seriously ill patients. So much for compassion.Dan B [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: