cannabisnews.com: The Marijuana Ruling 





The Marijuana Ruling 
Posted by FoM on May 16, 2001 at 07:58:49 PT
Editorial
Source: Christian Science Monitor 
The Supreme Court used narrow reasoning this week to uphold a federal law that would prevent commercial "clubs" from distributing marijuana to ease the symptoms of various illnesses. On the face of it, this is a worthwhile victory against the use of an illicit drug.In its reasoning, however, the court seemed to tacitly approve government authority over the type of healthcare that people can use. Given the basic facts of the case before it, the unanimous ruling makes legal sense. 
The United States government had sued a California cannabis cooperative to keep it from distributing marijuana in violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act. The cooperative had argued, and a federal appeals court had agreed, that an exception to the law could be made because of "medical necessity."Many scientific studies have found marijuana to relieve suffering and, like the common use of morphine in the 19th century, such use does not easily lead to addiction when properly administered or regulated.But Congress has ruled out any use of marijuana except in research. The Supreme Court decided that it would not interpret Congress's intent or support the argument for "medical necessity."Case closed? Hardly.Justice John Paul Stevens, while agreeing with the decision, wrote a separate opinion supported by two other justices that hints at a direction for future legal action.He suggested that there is a public interest in letting individuals find their own relief from suffering, and that might prevail over any federal law that limits a claim to "medical necessity."In its decision, the court upheld, indirectly, federal authority over the use of marijuana. California and a number of other states have laws that legalize marijuana use when a doctor prescribes it. Should the will of the states, as voiced by their voters, be accorded no weight in this matter?While some states are willing to respond to public sentiment in this area, there's no sign that Congress is. Many lawmakers worry that legalization of marijuana for medical use could open the door to legalization of other now-illegal drugs. Theoretically, a medical rationale might be found for more addictive substances, like cocaine or heroin.America is edging toward new ground on drug issues. Laws like the Controlled Substances Act will keep legalization at bay. But attitudes are changing, and politicians sense that. More studies to assess marijuana as a painkiller are inevitable. Meanwhile, legal maneuvering will continue. The eventual outcome could well be a loosened proscription on the regulated use of marijuana as a painkiller. But that needn't set the stage for a general move toward legalization of other drugs. The public is wise enough to know that's a door best kept closed.In this policy arena, the interests of society in restricting the use of drugs deemed harmful may clash with the interest of society in letting individuals choose their healthcare.The high court was probably right to avoid solving this conflict.Now it's up to Congress.Source: Christian Science Monitor (US)Published: May 16, 2001Copyright: 2001 The Christian Science Publishing Society.Contact: oped csps.comWebsite: http://www.csmonitor.com/O.C.B.C. Versus The U.S. Government News http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/mj.htmCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #3 posted by dddd on May 16, 2001 at 10:40:43 PT
rulings
Ethan observes;>"Oh!? I thought it was their task to clarify the law, not perpetuate ignorance and neglect. They could have done a great deal more by addressing the inherent contraditions of the Controlled Substances Act, or ruling that the Interstate Commerce Clause does not apply to in-state cultivation and medical use."Which brings to mind the nebulous logic of this pompous group of pontificating,priggish professionals.This decision has been meted out by the same five justices (and joined by three others) who otherwise routinely overrule that same Congress with respect to states' rights on matters of much broader import. They have ruled recently, for example,that Congress cannot infringe on states' rights to provide access laws as they see fit for the disabled -- are not these patients' needs every bit as legitimate for states to address? I still maintain that,as Ethan suggests,that the SC has tiptoed around making a meaningful and responsible decision here,because they know what a political "hot potato"they are dealing with.They may have acted properly in the strict world of legal definitions,but they could have done more than they did...dddd
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Ethan Russo, MD on May 16, 2001 at 08:57:12 PT:
Right On, Dankhawk
We're thinking alike, and many others will likewise to point out that the CSM's opinion is muddled on the issue of legal and illegal drugs. Congress is totally clueless. Another statement rankles:"The high court was probably right to avoid solving this conflict."Oh!? I thought it was their task to clarify the law, not perpetuate ignorance and neglect. They could have done a great deal more by addressing the inherent contraditions of the Controlled Substances Act, or ruling that the Interstate Commerce Clause does not apply to in-state cultivation and medical use. The only good part is that the paths to legal attack on the status quo are somewhat more evident. I have little hope for Congress. They are most effective at self-aggrandizement and clinical cannabis will not stoke their egos or fill their wallets fast enough to warrant their attention.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Dankhank on May 16, 2001 at 08:42:55 PT:
Stupidity or Evil?
So this learned publication is worried that legalization of marijuana would promote a search for medical cocaine or heroin?Listen up!!There are ALREADY medical uses for Cocaine here in the USA, and England, for years, used and still may, Heroin as a pain killer for Cancer patients.This article smacks of reason and care, yet continues to promulgate the same old tired line of bullfeathers.
HEMP n STUFF
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment


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