HELP FROM MY FRIENDS

The High Court's Marijuana Ruling Won't Play In Mendocino

UKIAH, CALIF.--A neat row of bright-green seedlings basks in the sunlight
on Patrick's window sill. Together with the 20 full-grown plants sitting in
plastic kiddie pools under fluorescent lights in his basement, these plants
supply the stout, white-bearded Californian and a handful of other locals
with medicine. And though part of his tiny marijuana crop is clearly
visible from the driveway, he's unconcerned about the law. "I feel totally
legal," he says. "I have searched my soul and feel like finally we got the
law changed to a level where we can comply."

Others disagree. In a unanimous decision last week, the U.S. Supreme Court
rejected the idea that the medical need for marijuana can be used as a
defense in federal courts. Although it's a fairly narrow ruling--very few
small-time growers or users ever end up in federal court--it could
effectively end open, large-scale distribution of medical marijuana. But
here in rural Mendocino County, 100 miles north of San Francisco, the
ruling is more of an inconvenience than anything else. In response to
California's Proposition 215, which decriminalized marijuana for medical
use in 1996, county law enforcement officials have set up a registration
program for patients and their growers. And last year local Mendocino
voters approved Measure G, a symbolic call to legalize "personal medical or
recreational use."

It's no surprise that this would happen here. Mendocino is at the southern
tip of California's famed "Emerald Triangle," where for decades marijuana
cultivation has been a cottage industry in the area's rugged gullies and
canyons. But lately even local politicians and police seem to have made
their peace with the drug. "We deal with it fine," says Mendocino District
Attorney Norm Vroman. "It's the rest of the country that's all screwed up."

While Mendocino is more progressive on this issue than most regions, it's
not alone. Eight states now have laws making marijuana legally available
for people using it to curb disease-related nausea, pain, or muscle spasms
and to increase appetite. More state ballot initiatives are on their way,
and Canada plans to implement medical-use laws this summer.

But federal law remains unchanged since the Controlled Substances Act of
1970--the law addressed by the Supreme Court--classified marijuana as a
Schedule I drug, meaning it has "no currently accepted medical use" and "a
high potential for abuse." That's a stricter classification than even
cocaine and methamphetamine, yet there is great resistance to easing the
sanctions. "We already have alcohol and tobacco, two pretty bad legal
drugs," says Robert Maginnis of the Family Research Council. "If we go down
the path of legalizing [marijuana], drug use will go into orbit. Medical
marijuana is just about buying sympathy and eroding the public stance on
changing the laws." As a result of the fear of appearing soft on drugs,
many states, even those with medical marijuana laws, still maintain harsh
potential penalties for offenders.

The result is that state and local law enforcement is increasingly torn
between the punitive federal position and the increasingly progressive will
of the community. Since only about 1 in 100 marijuana arrests is made by
federal agents, local authorities are playing a larger and larger part in
shaping the actual patterns of marijuana use in the country. These
circumstances result in large part from the AIDS crisis in San Francisco a
decade ago. Recalls Dennis Peron, a longtime activist who opened a cannabis
club in 1991: "That 'munchies' thing you always used to laugh about isn't a
joke when an AIDS patient is eating again after throwing up for two days."
Public sympathy for such suffering persuaded most city officials to look
the other way, and soon San Franciscans made it official, with 80 percent
voting for a proposition urging the city not to penalize doctors or
patients using or prescribing marijuana.

As public support for medical use grew, Peron and his allies drafted
California's Proposition 215, also known as the Compassionate Use Act of
1996. The vaguely worded proposition guarantees Californians the right to
use marijuana for medical reasons if a physician recommends it; it lists
several diseases, including AIDS, but adds "any other illness for which
marijuana provides relief." The proposition passed easily in 1996, with 56
percent of voters supporting it.

Prop. 215 made it easier for California legislators, prosecutors, and
sheriffs to look the other way. "Prosecutors don't want to prosecute these
people. It's not in their interest to take someone who's deathly ill and
put them in a jail cell," says National Organization for the Reform of
Marijuana Law's Allen St. Pierre. Indeed, since Prop. 215, a string of
California juries have acquitted growers and users. One district attorney
is even facing a recall because citizens feel she has prosecuted marijuana
offenders too vigorously.

Lives vs. laws. The emotional case for medical use is gripping. When San
Franciscan Clifford Braun was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis 23 years
ago, his doctor recommended he smoke marijuana to treat the condition's
painful muscle spasms. Braun smokes three or four joints a day, which he
says leaves him feeling better than the high doses of Valium and other
tranquilizers he would otherwise have to use: "This isn't drug abuse. It's
medicine."

The medical evidence is more ambiguous (box, Page 41). Indeed, opponents of
medical marijuana laws accuse proponents of hiding behind sick people in an
effort to get marijuana legalized for everyone. Advocates deny this, though
many do support legalization. "We don't think sick people or healthy people
should be put in prison for smoking marijuana," says Chuck Thomas of the
Marijuana Policy Project. "We focus on sick people because they need it now."

The murky legal situation puts the police in a bind, too. Mendocino County
Sheriff Tony Craver's solution has been to work with county health
officials to register medical marijuana users--and growers like Patrick who
provide them with pot. But he says this is mainly a convenience, providing
patients with official ID in case they are stopped.

And so, in this case at least, few in Mendocino are listening to the
Supreme Court's opinion. "Very frankly, I'm hard pressed to prosecute
anybody for any amount of marijuana," says Vroman. "If the federal
government wants to come up here and arrest people, I suppose they can. . .
. Luckily, I don't take direction from the federal government. I take
direction from the local voters."

Where's the pot?

Eight states protect patients who possess and grow their own marijuana with
a doctor's approval.
(Map included in original article)
Maine
Washington
Oregon
Nevada
California
Colorado
Alaska
Hawaii
Source: Marijuana Policy Project