MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN OREGON: ADVOCATES SAY FEDERAL AUTHORITIES WILL
BE UNABLE TO ENFORCE THE BAN

Monday's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that federal law does not permit
marijuana to be distributed even for "medical necessity" will have no
effect on Oregon's ground-breaking medical marijuana law, legal
experts said.

State Attorney General Hardy Myers said the ruling, involving the
Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative, doesn't invalidate Oregon's 1998
voter-approved law, but he warned people who possess, grow or
distribute marijuana, even for medical purposes, may be found in
violation of federal law.

The ruling won't change how state and local police agencies enforce
the state law, said Kristen Grainger, a spokeswoman for Myers. But
she couldn't speak for federal agencies.

"So far, they have been pretty quiet in enforcing the (federal)
Controlled Substances Act," she said. "They could choose to continue
that posture or choose to proceed with prosecuting under federal law."

She speculated that federal authorities would choose not to prosecute
Oregon medical marijuana patients.

"They don't have the resources to go after it," she said. Officials
in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Portland were unavailable for
comment Monday.

Oregon is one of nine states - the others are Alaska, Washington,
California, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Hawaii and Maine - with laws
on the books permitting medical use of marijuana.

Oregon was the first state to establish a state-operated registry of
patients. To register, patients suffering from specified illnesses or
symptoms must obtain documentation from their doctor stating they
could benefit from marijuana, fill out a form, and pay a $150 fee to
the state Health Division.

Patients are then issued a laminated, wallet-size card, which permits
them to grow up to seven marijuana plants and possess up to three
dried ounces of marijuana. Patients who are unable or don't want to
grow their own plants may also designate a caregiver to grow for them.

As of Monday, 2,050 patients and caregivers are registered with the
state, and 562 physicians have issued documents for patients, said
Kelly Paige, who manages the medical marijuana program for the state
Health Division.

News of the Supreme Court ruling spread quickly Monday morning. Paige
said she had 62 messages when she checked her voice mail at 8:30 a.m.
Monday, and the calls kept coming all day, many from concerned
patients.

The Attorney General's opinion just confirmed what has been the case
since Oregon's law took effect, Paige said.

"This law has always been in conflict with federal law," she said.

Lee Berger, a Portland attorney who helped draft Oregon's law and
defends marijuana patients, agreed the ruling would not affect state
law, known as the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act.

"OMMA protects patients and caregivers from prosecution, arrest and
forfeiture under Oregon state laws," he said. "It did so before the
Supreme Court ruled and did so afterward."

Monday's ruling addressed a narrow issue: Whether the legal concept
of "medical necessity" provides an exemption from the federal
Controlled Substances Act, a 1970 law that classifies marijuana as a
drug with no legitimate medical use, akin to LSD and heroin.

The justices ruled that it's clear from the text of the law "that
Congress has made a determination that marijuana has no medical
benefits worthy of an exception."

The ruling means any change in federal policy will have to come from
Congress, not the courts, said Allen St. Pierre, executive director
of the NORML Foundation, a Washington, D.C., group that supports
legalization of marijuana. NORML stands for the National Organization
for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

"The court was signalling strongly that if society wants the laws to
change, don't come to us - we aren't going to make those changes," he
said. "You have to go to Congress."

Congress has shown little interest in liberalizing the nation's drug
laws, and some members are overtly hostile to the idea of medical
marijuana.

At a hearing in March, Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., called efforts to
legitimize medical marijuana "despicable" and nothing more than "an
effort by the druggies to legalize marijuana."

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., has introduced a bill (HR 1344) that
would reclassify marijuana so that doctors could prescribe it, and
bar federal law from interfering with state laws that permit medical
marijuana.

Oregon Reps. Peter DeFazio of Springfield and Earl Blumenauer of
Portland, both Democrats, are co-sponsors.

While the justices did not strike down any of the state marijuana
laws, neither did their ruling "rectify the confused state of the law
regarding medical marijuana," St. Pierre said.

He said marijuana cooperatives in Oregon that distribute marijuana
"are in peril of federal prosecution."

Todd Dalotto, a leader of the Eugene Cannabis Grow-Op, said he didn't
think the ruling would affect his organization.

The Grow-Op conducts monthly meetings, provides support to patients
and helps connect patients with caregivers who can grow marijuana
plants on their behalf.

"We're not engaged in the sale of marijuana," he said. "Our primary
focus is services - support services and providing education.

"We're going to continue to operate as we have been," Dalotto said.

St. Pierre predicted it's only a matter of time before Oregon
patients are caught in the conflict between state and federal law.

"If you're a patient with a state-issued card and caught with a
single marijuana joint on federal land or in a federal building, you
will not be able to make an argument before a jury why you were using
marijuana," he said.