Mrs.Z
08-26-2008, 03:15 PM
1. ASA's Victory in Medical Cannabis Employment Rights! After passing the CA Senate, AB2279 now heads to the Governor's desk!
ASA's medical cannabis employment rights bill, which would protect hundreds of thousands of patients in California from employment discrimination, passed the State Senate on Tuesday! Since the bill passed the California Assembly in May, this victory means the bill now heads to straight the Governor's desk in the next few weeks! Congratulations to all ASA our supporters who worked hard to ensure this bill passed. Special credit goes to ASA California Director Don Duncan, who led the legislative work and carried this bill through both Houses.
AB2279, introduced by Assemblymember Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), reverses a January California Supreme Court ruling (Ross v. RagingWire), which ruled that individuals could be fired by their employers simply due to their status as medical cannabis patients! Support for the bill has been widespread, coming from labor, business, and health groups at the local and national level.
Now that both houses of the California legislature have voted in favor of employment rights for patients, the onus is on Governor Schwarzenegger to sign the bill into law. The Governor has a chance to include medical cannabis patients as productive members of society, protecting the jobs of hundreds of thousands of Californians with serious illnesses. Citizens across the state were instrumental in the passage of this bill. You called and emailed your state legislators in large numbers to ensure they voted for this bill. While this victory is significant, it won't become law unless the Governor allows it. Your help will be absolutely critical in putting pressure on Gov. Schwarzeneggar to sign this bill into law - so keep watch for an upcoming ASA Action Alert to flood the Governor's office with calls!
The bill leaves intact existing state law prohibiting medical cannabis consumption at the workplace or during working hours and protects employers from liability by carving out an exception for safety-sensitive positions. It's about allowing patients who are able to work safely and who use their doctor-recommended medication in the privacy of their own home, to not be arbitrarily fired from their jobs. In the words of Assemblymember, Leno. "The voters who supported Proposition 215 did not intend for medical marijuana patients to be forced into unemployment in order to benefit from their medicine."
________________________________________
2. Federal Court Rules that DEA's Actions in California May be Unconstitutional
On Wednesday, a federal judge ruled that the DEA crackdown on medical cannabis in California may not be allowed under the 10th Amendment, saying that enforcement of U.S. drug laws can go too far if it seeks to interfere with state authority.
U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose denied a Bush administration request to dismiss the lawsuit by the ACLU, Santa Cruz city and county officials, and members of the Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM), a patient collective whose medical cannabis was seized by federal agents in a 2002 raid.
Since 1996, the DEA's aggression in California has included raids of locally regulated dispensaries and collectives, property seizure threats to landlords, attempts to intimidate and punish doctors, and prosecutions of patient caregivers. These tactics have come under fire for years by ASA and others as an attempt to undermine California's constitutional right to enact health care policies that protect patients within our state. This ruling in the United States District Court says that we may have been right all along.
The suit claims federal prosecutors have tried to disrupt the California law by targeting critical participants in the state system - doctors who approved their patients' cannabis use, local officials who issued state-approved identification cards to patients, local governments whose zoning allowed dispensaries, and medical cannabis dispensing collectives who cooperated with local governments. Federal authorities' goal, the plaintiffs alleged, is to make it impossible for the state to distinguish between medical and recreational use of cannabis and render the state law unenforceable, interfering with California's constitutional power to enact its own laws.
Although the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the federal actions in the past (except for the government's attempt to strip licenses from doctors simply for talking about medical cannabis), Fogel said the plaintiffs in this case may be able to show that the federal government exceeded its constitutional authority by trying to force California to repeal its medical cannabis law. This case addresses the fundamental underlying problem with California's ability to perfect its law: federal interference and undermining of that law. It could be an exciting end to the DEA's attacks on medical cannabis patients in California and across the country!
________________________________________
CA Medical Marijuana Patients Busted for Less Than 8 oz. & 6 plants? Fight It & Get Your Medicine Back!
To fight your citation, you should:
• Be a qualified patient with an up-to-date recommendation during the incident;
• Be charged with (Health & Safety Code) marijuana possession, possession with intent to distribute, cultivation, transportation, or (Vehicle Code) possession in a vehicle;
• Be charged with possessing less than 8 oz. and 6 plants (unless your county guidelines allow more). While you are allowed 12 immature plants, they may mature at different rates, which may complicate matters.
If so, you were acting legally under California law, and should fight your citation until it is dismissed, and demand return of your confiscated property. At your first court hearing, bring copies of your recommendation and explain that, based on your up-to-date recommendation, you acted legally in possessing/cultivating/ transporting your medicine, and then present your materials to your attorney and/or the D.A. and judge, and ask that the case be dismissed. Unfortunately, several unfriendly California jurisdictions have forced some patients to take these cases to trial, but otherwise, it may only take 3-5 court appearances. After your arraignment, you and your Public Defender should use the materials on www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org/Legal FAQ-Criminal1 to assert your affirmative medical marijuana defense in a Motion to Dismiss.
Also, visit www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org/returnofproperty, to complete a Motion for Return of Property. When your criminal case is dismissed, politely ask the judge to consider your Motion for Return of Property.
Our next story comes to us from MPP (Marijuana Policy Project)
We just got some encouraging news from Massachusetts: 71% of Massachusetts residents support a landmark ballot initiative to decriminalize marijuana possession in the state, according to a new statewide poll from Boston's Suffolk University and the local NBC affiliate.
The initiative will be on Massachusetts' ballot this November 4. If it passes, it would remove the threat of arrest or jail for possessing an ounce or less of marijuana, replacing it with a $100 fine — which could be paid through the mail without lawyers or court appearances, just like a speeding ticket.
71% support eclipses what we've seen in all previous polling — support has generally remained in the 60% range — and so these newest numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. Nevertheless, these results clearly point to widespread support for marijuana law reform in Massachusetts and bode well for the initiative's chances this November
Powerful, well-financed organizations within the state — including the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association and the Massachusetts Family Institute — have publicly announced their plans to work against the initiative, and both are already marshalling their forces to prevent it from passing. So this encouraging poll is a double-edged sword: While it reveals the initiative to be enormously popular in Massachusetts, it will also motivate prohibitionist opponents to an even greater degree.
ASA's medical cannabis employment rights bill, which would protect hundreds of thousands of patients in California from employment discrimination, passed the State Senate on Tuesday! Since the bill passed the California Assembly in May, this victory means the bill now heads to straight the Governor's desk in the next few weeks! Congratulations to all ASA our supporters who worked hard to ensure this bill passed. Special credit goes to ASA California Director Don Duncan, who led the legislative work and carried this bill through both Houses.
AB2279, introduced by Assemblymember Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), reverses a January California Supreme Court ruling (Ross v. RagingWire), which ruled that individuals could be fired by their employers simply due to their status as medical cannabis patients! Support for the bill has been widespread, coming from labor, business, and health groups at the local and national level.
Now that both houses of the California legislature have voted in favor of employment rights for patients, the onus is on Governor Schwarzenegger to sign the bill into law. The Governor has a chance to include medical cannabis patients as productive members of society, protecting the jobs of hundreds of thousands of Californians with serious illnesses. Citizens across the state were instrumental in the passage of this bill. You called and emailed your state legislators in large numbers to ensure they voted for this bill. While this victory is significant, it won't become law unless the Governor allows it. Your help will be absolutely critical in putting pressure on Gov. Schwarzeneggar to sign this bill into law - so keep watch for an upcoming ASA Action Alert to flood the Governor's office with calls!
The bill leaves intact existing state law prohibiting medical cannabis consumption at the workplace or during working hours and protects employers from liability by carving out an exception for safety-sensitive positions. It's about allowing patients who are able to work safely and who use their doctor-recommended medication in the privacy of their own home, to not be arbitrarily fired from their jobs. In the words of Assemblymember, Leno. "The voters who supported Proposition 215 did not intend for medical marijuana patients to be forced into unemployment in order to benefit from their medicine."
________________________________________
2. Federal Court Rules that DEA's Actions in California May be Unconstitutional
On Wednesday, a federal judge ruled that the DEA crackdown on medical cannabis in California may not be allowed under the 10th Amendment, saying that enforcement of U.S. drug laws can go too far if it seeks to interfere with state authority.
U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose denied a Bush administration request to dismiss the lawsuit by the ACLU, Santa Cruz city and county officials, and members of the Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM), a patient collective whose medical cannabis was seized by federal agents in a 2002 raid.
Since 1996, the DEA's aggression in California has included raids of locally regulated dispensaries and collectives, property seizure threats to landlords, attempts to intimidate and punish doctors, and prosecutions of patient caregivers. These tactics have come under fire for years by ASA and others as an attempt to undermine California's constitutional right to enact health care policies that protect patients within our state. This ruling in the United States District Court says that we may have been right all along.
The suit claims federal prosecutors have tried to disrupt the California law by targeting critical participants in the state system - doctors who approved their patients' cannabis use, local officials who issued state-approved identification cards to patients, local governments whose zoning allowed dispensaries, and medical cannabis dispensing collectives who cooperated with local governments. Federal authorities' goal, the plaintiffs alleged, is to make it impossible for the state to distinguish between medical and recreational use of cannabis and render the state law unenforceable, interfering with California's constitutional power to enact its own laws.
Although the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the federal actions in the past (except for the government's attempt to strip licenses from doctors simply for talking about medical cannabis), Fogel said the plaintiffs in this case may be able to show that the federal government exceeded its constitutional authority by trying to force California to repeal its medical cannabis law. This case addresses the fundamental underlying problem with California's ability to perfect its law: federal interference and undermining of that law. It could be an exciting end to the DEA's attacks on medical cannabis patients in California and across the country!
________________________________________
CA Medical Marijuana Patients Busted for Less Than 8 oz. & 6 plants? Fight It & Get Your Medicine Back!
To fight your citation, you should:
• Be a qualified patient with an up-to-date recommendation during the incident;
• Be charged with (Health & Safety Code) marijuana possession, possession with intent to distribute, cultivation, transportation, or (Vehicle Code) possession in a vehicle;
• Be charged with possessing less than 8 oz. and 6 plants (unless your county guidelines allow more). While you are allowed 12 immature plants, they may mature at different rates, which may complicate matters.
If so, you were acting legally under California law, and should fight your citation until it is dismissed, and demand return of your confiscated property. At your first court hearing, bring copies of your recommendation and explain that, based on your up-to-date recommendation, you acted legally in possessing/cultivating/ transporting your medicine, and then present your materials to your attorney and/or the D.A. and judge, and ask that the case be dismissed. Unfortunately, several unfriendly California jurisdictions have forced some patients to take these cases to trial, but otherwise, it may only take 3-5 court appearances. After your arraignment, you and your Public Defender should use the materials on www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org/Legal FAQ-Criminal1 to assert your affirmative medical marijuana defense in a Motion to Dismiss.
Also, visit www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org/returnofproperty, to complete a Motion for Return of Property. When your criminal case is dismissed, politely ask the judge to consider your Motion for Return of Property.
Our next story comes to us from MPP (Marijuana Policy Project)
We just got some encouraging news from Massachusetts: 71% of Massachusetts residents support a landmark ballot initiative to decriminalize marijuana possession in the state, according to a new statewide poll from Boston's Suffolk University and the local NBC affiliate.
The initiative will be on Massachusetts' ballot this November 4. If it passes, it would remove the threat of arrest or jail for possessing an ounce or less of marijuana, replacing it with a $100 fine — which could be paid through the mail without lawyers or court appearances, just like a speeding ticket.
71% support eclipses what we've seen in all previous polling — support has generally remained in the 60% range — and so these newest numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. Nevertheless, these results clearly point to widespread support for marijuana law reform in Massachusetts and bode well for the initiative's chances this November
Powerful, well-financed organizations within the state — including the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association and the Massachusetts Family Institute — have publicly announced their plans to work against the initiative, and both are already marshalling their forces to prevent it from passing. So this encouraging poll is a double-edged sword: While it reveals the initiative to be enormously popular in Massachusetts, it will also motivate prohibitionist opponents to an even greater degree.