CITY OF BERKELEY PONDERS HOW TO REACT TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA RULING

(U-WIRE) BERKELEY, Calif. -- With this week's U.S. Supreme Court
ruling barring distribution of medical marijuana, Berkeley officials
are wondering what to do with the city's new policies regarding the
drug.

The unanimous decision in the federal government's case against the
Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative affirms that marijuana growers
and distributors are subject to federal prosecution even though state
law allows the drug to be handed out for medical reasons.

Berkeley Mayor Shirley Dean, who was surprised by the court's
opinion, said the city will have to wait and see what the practical
effects of the ruling are.

She said the city's recently-passed medical marijuana ordinance,
which allows patients to grow 10 marijuana plants, will remain in
effect, though she was not sure if plans to establish zoning for
co-ops in Berkeley are appropriate.

"I don't know if the city should clarify zoning for an 'illegal
activity,'" Dean said.

She said the city attorney, who could not be reached for comment
Thursday afternoon, will play an active role in determining the
city's response to the ruling.

"It puts the city in an extremely difficult position because the city
cannot knowingly violate federal law," Dean said. "I don't think the
city can ignore federal law, but I also don't think it has to enforce
it."

The city may not have a large role to play in enforcing the law, said
Jesse Choper, a professor of public law at University of
California-Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law.

Choper said the local police have no responsibility to enforce the
federal law, though he cautioned that the city might send the wrong
message to residents if it does not take an appropriate stance on the
issue.

"If the city is going to encourage people to distribute marijuana,
they are encouraging people to break the law," Choper said.

While the city is unsure of how to proceed after the Supreme Court
decision, Choper said the opinion is straightforward.

The federal law banning marijuana supercedes California's Proposition
215. Under California law, it is still legal to grow marijuana for
medical reasons, but as Choper said, "the Feds" can prosecute people
for violating the federal law.

Officials from medical marijuana co-ops, however, said the decision
is not the final word on the matter.

Jeff Jones, who directs the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative,
said the court created an unenforceable policy.

"It is frustrating that the battle ended with such a narrow
interpretation and intolerance," he said.

The battle began on May 19, 1998, when a U.S. District Court Judge
ordered the co-op to stop distributing marijuana. The co-op appealed
that ruling and won, but the case finally made its way to the
nation's highest court in March.

The co-op argued that the necessity for medical marijuana warrants an
exception to the Controlled Substances Act. But as Justice Clarence
Thomas asserted in the majority opinion, no exception was intended by
Congress.

"For marijuana, and other drugs that have been classified as
'schedule I' controlled substances, there is but one express
exception, and it is available only for government-approved research
projects," Thomas wrote.

Jones said a movement to reclassify the drug as a less-restricted
drug is under way, with one bill before Congress.

The cooperative has stopped distributing marijuana and instead
focuses on teaching patients how to grow their own plants.

Kevin Sabet, president of Citizens for a Drug Free Berkeley, said his
organization is considering legal options in case the city does not
enforce the federal law. He said the medical marijuana movement is a
front for advocates wanting to make the drug legal.

"Patients are just the puppets for those who want to legalize the
drug," he said, adding that city officials will be unlikely to
enforce the law as they pursue the votes of those who use marijuana.
"People are worried about political careers, not terminally ill
people."