News (Media Awareness Project) - US CA: Editorial: Cypress Inhales |
Title: | US CA: Editorial: Cypress Inhales |
Published On: | 2006-09-03 |
Source: | Orange County Register, The (CA) |
Fetched On: | 2008-08-18 01:18:24 |
CYPRESS INHALES
What were city officials who banned medical marijuana dispensaries
smoking?
What the city of Cypress did Monday in changing its zoning laws to
prevent any medical marijuana dispensary from setting up shop within
Cypress' precincts may not have been illegal and might well have
little or no practical impact. But it was a foolish and unnecessary
decision rooted in ignorance and unsubstantiated scare tactics.
A disturbing aspect of the zoning law is that it was developed at the
behest of the city police department. Not so long ago, when police
officials visited with us, they assured us that "we don't make the
laws, our job is to e nforce them." Increasingly, police departments
seek to put in place the laws they want to enforce. Bad precedent.
The ostensible concern was that a medical marijuana dispensary which
nobody has even proposed in Cypress - might create problems like
illegal drug sales and robberies in the area. Experience in the rest
of California does not bear out this fear.
The most serious disruptions such facilities have been associated
with have been the occasional raids from federal drug enforcers.
For many officials the fact that California has legalized medical
marijuana while it is still illegal under federal law creates
confusion, but the law is actually rather clear. Under the
California constitution cities are subdivisions of the state and are
duty-bound to uphold state law.
California officials are required to do so even when there is an
apparent conflict with federal law, unless and until a federal court
invalidates the state law. No federal court has done so, although
opponents of Proposition 215, passed by the voters in 1996, wanted to
file a challenge until their lawyers convinced them it would fail.
The clear duty of elected officials in California, then, is to
uphold and facilitate the state's medical marijuana law rather than
trying to undermine it. Cypress failed that test.
What were city officials who banned medical marijuana dispensaries
smoking?
What the city of Cypress did Monday in changing its zoning laws to
prevent any medical marijuana dispensary from setting up shop within
Cypress' precincts may not have been illegal and might well have
little or no practical impact. But it was a foolish and unnecessary
decision rooted in ignorance and unsubstantiated scare tactics.
A disturbing aspect of the zoning law is that it was developed at the
behest of the city police department. Not so long ago, when police
officials visited with us, they assured us that "we don't make the
laws, our job is to e nforce them." Increasingly, police departments
seek to put in place the laws they want to enforce. Bad precedent.
The ostensible concern was that a medical marijuana dispensary which
nobody has even proposed in Cypress - might create problems like
illegal drug sales and robberies in the area. Experience in the rest
of California does not bear out this fear.
The most serious disruptions such facilities have been associated
with have been the occasional raids from federal drug enforcers.
For many officials the fact that California has legalized medical
marijuana while it is still illegal under federal law creates
confusion, but the law is actually rather clear. Under the
California constitution cities are subdivisions of the state and are
duty-bound to uphold state law.
California officials are required to do so even when there is an
apparent conflict with federal law, unless and until a federal court
invalidates the state law. No federal court has done so, although
opponents of Proposition 215, passed by the voters in 1996, wanted to
file a challenge until their lawyers convinced them it would fail.
The clear duty of elected officials in California, then, is to
uphold and facilitate the state's medical marijuana law rather than
trying to undermine it. Cypress failed that test.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...