Hudsonrulez
08-23-2008, 01:12 PM
Friday, August 22, 2008
Feds' medical pot challenge tossed
Jennifer Squires
The Santa Cruz Sentinel
A federal court ruling handed down Wednesday has lifted the hopes of medical marijuana users by denying a Bush administration request to toss a lawsuit brought by Santa Cruz city and county officials and Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana members.
WAMM co-founder Valerie Corral called the ruling "hopeful." WAMM had its medical marijuana seized by federal agents in a 2002 raid.
"Our lawsuit is really much more of an appeal than a lawsuit. It's an appeal for mercy from the federal government," Corral said. "We're not asking to break the law. We're asking to have another avenue for relief."
The plaintiffs in the case contend that the federal government is deliberately interfering with how the state makes the distinction between legal and illegal marijuana use: the recommendation of a state-licensed physician to recommend medical marijuana to a sick patient. The plaintiffs say the federal government is seeking to disrupt California's medical marijuana law by targeting doctors who approve their patients' medical marijuana use and local governments that issue state-approved medical pot cards, among other things. That, the plaintiffs say, interferes with California's Constitutional right to make its own laws.
U.S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel ruled Wednesday that that portion of the case can go forward because if the plaintiffs prove their claims "they may be able to show that the federal government deliberately is seeking to frustrate the state's ability to determine whether an individual's use of marijuana is permissible under California law."
"The federal government can enforce its own laws but it can't tell the states what laws they can enact," said Graham Boyd, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney representing WAMM. "If they can't do that, they also can't use their law enforcement to sabotage the state laws they don't like."
California voters in 1996 approved Proposition 215, which gave ill people with a doctor's recommendation the right to use marijuana as a medication. In the years since, federal drug agents have targeted medicinal marijuana dispensaries and the doctors who prescribe marijuana.
"Those steps all make it impossible for California and its government to enforce state laws," Boyd said.
Past lawsuits filed against the federal government have reached the Supreme Court, but all have failed.
Boyd called this case "novel," explaining that the core claim by the plaintiffs is that it's chosen to make marijuana illegal for everyone except for patients and that it has set up mechanisms to distinguish the two, such as requiring a prescription from a doctor.
"It's an unusual legal claim," Boyd said.
He said he expects the federal government will appeal the ruling, but that it could also lead to a change in federal drug enforcement efforts.
santacruzsentinel
Feds' medical pot challenge tossed
Jennifer Squires
The Santa Cruz Sentinel
A federal court ruling handed down Wednesday has lifted the hopes of medical marijuana users by denying a Bush administration request to toss a lawsuit brought by Santa Cruz city and county officials and Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana members.
WAMM co-founder Valerie Corral called the ruling "hopeful." WAMM had its medical marijuana seized by federal agents in a 2002 raid.
"Our lawsuit is really much more of an appeal than a lawsuit. It's an appeal for mercy from the federal government," Corral said. "We're not asking to break the law. We're asking to have another avenue for relief."
The plaintiffs in the case contend that the federal government is deliberately interfering with how the state makes the distinction between legal and illegal marijuana use: the recommendation of a state-licensed physician to recommend medical marijuana to a sick patient. The plaintiffs say the federal government is seeking to disrupt California's medical marijuana law by targeting doctors who approve their patients' medical marijuana use and local governments that issue state-approved medical pot cards, among other things. That, the plaintiffs say, interferes with California's Constitutional right to make its own laws.
U.S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel ruled Wednesday that that portion of the case can go forward because if the plaintiffs prove their claims "they may be able to show that the federal government deliberately is seeking to frustrate the state's ability to determine whether an individual's use of marijuana is permissible under California law."
"The federal government can enforce its own laws but it can't tell the states what laws they can enact," said Graham Boyd, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney representing WAMM. "If they can't do that, they also can't use their law enforcement to sabotage the state laws they don't like."
California voters in 1996 approved Proposition 215, which gave ill people with a doctor's recommendation the right to use marijuana as a medication. In the years since, federal drug agents have targeted medicinal marijuana dispensaries and the doctors who prescribe marijuana.
"Those steps all make it impossible for California and its government to enforce state laws," Boyd said.
Past lawsuits filed against the federal government have reached the Supreme Court, but all have failed.
Boyd called this case "novel," explaining that the core claim by the plaintiffs is that it's chosen to make marijuana illegal for everyone except for patients and that it has set up mechanisms to distinguish the two, such as requiring a prescription from a doctor.
"It's an unusual legal claim," Boyd said.
He said he expects the federal government will appeal the ruling, but that it could also lead to a change in federal drug enforcement efforts.
santacruzsentinel