SUPES VOTE TO PERSIST WITH MEDICAL MARIJUANA CHALLENGE

SAN DIEGO -- As expected, San Diego County supervisors voted Tuesday
to continue their controversial legal challenge to overturn
California's 10-year-old, voter-approved medical marijuana law.

Board Chairman Bill Horn said the board voted in closed session to
appeal Superior Court William R. Nevitt's week-old ruling that
dismissed the county's argument that California's Compassionate Use
Act should be pre-empted by federal law because federal law is "supreme."

The county's challenge has national implications, patients and
government officials say, because it marks the first time that any
county has sued to overturn any of the medical marijuana laws voters
have approved in 11 states.

California's Compassionate Use Act, approved by 56 percent of voters
statewide in 1996, says that seriously ill people who have a doctor's
recommendation can use marijuana to ease their pain and suffering.

The federal Controlled Substances Act says marijuana has no medicinal
value and is illegal in all cases -- even though it also says that
synthetically created tetrahydrocannibinol, the active ingredient in
marijuana, does have medicinal value and can be prescribed by doctors.

Despite the seeming conflict between California's law and the federal
law, Nevitt dismissed the county's pre-emption argument last week.
Nevitt ruled that there was no legal conflict because California's
law did not compel people to break the federal law and that federal
agents could still arrest marijuana users.

Nevitt also ruled that in some cases, state's laws are "supreme" over
federal law.

Horn, however, said Tuesday that the county supervisors believe in
their argument, and would file an appeal with the California's 4th
Appellate District.

"We feel that the judge skated (over) the entire (pre-emption)
issue," Horn said. "We've gone this far. It just behooves us to go
the next step."

San Diego County supervisors angered local medical marijuana patients
and state and national medical marijuana advocacy groups in December
2005, when they decided to file their lawsuit to try to overturn the
Compassionate Use Act, formerly known as Proposition 215.

Supervisors said the act was "bad law" and would promote drug abuse.

However, patients who say they use medical marijuana for a host of
serious problems, ranging from severe burns to crushed spines, cancer
and other ailments, have repeatedly told supervisors over the last
year that marijuana was the only drug that seemed to help them.

A number of those patients attended Tuesday's meeting to ask the
board not to appeal Nevitt's decision, and to instead follow state
legislation and create a medical marijuana identification card
program to help them.

Point Loma resident Ronald Little said marijuana was the only drug
that helped save his mother-in-law's eyesight, by reducing the
intraocular pressure in her eyes that was making her go blind.

Little suggested that supervisors were sacrificing patients "on the
altar of your drug-war ideology."

"I just think it's reprehensible," Little said.

However, a number of speakers from parent-teacher associations and
drug-prevention groups challenged the patients.

They urged supervisors to appeal and continue their fight to overturn
the Compassionate Use Act.

Kevin McClure of the San Diego Prevention Coalition said the law was
aiding drug trafficking and threatening California's youth.

"In our opinion, the true intention of Prop. 215 hides behind the
facade of terminally ill patients," McClure said. "And it has been
used as a smokescreen for ill-intentioned profiteers to make a case
for selling marijuana without criminal liability."

Horn, meanwhile, said Tuesday's testimony did not figure into the
county's vote to appeal and continue its fight.

"No, not at all," Horn said. "I think it's a bad law. I mean, as far
as the benefits, those are medical opinions. There are probably some
medical benefits, if you listen to the (patients). But that's not our
point. Our point is who has jurisdiction here (the state or federal
government).

"We didn't get that from this judge, so we're going to appeal it," he said.

Horn said the supervisor's closed-session vote was 4-1, but would not
say who opposed the appeal.

Despite the lack of unanimity, the board's appeal was no surprise.

All of the current supervisors opposed Prop. 215 when it was put on
the ballot in 1996.

Last week, John Sansone, the county's lead attorney, said he thought
Nevitt's ruling left room for an appeal.

Meanwhile, Vista resident Craig McClain, a longtime medical marijuana
patient, said he was not surprised by the news Tuesday night.

McClain says he uses marijuana to ease the severe spasms he suffers
from a construction-related accident that crushed his spine and left
him with six screws holding his pelvis together. He attended
Tuesday's board meeting but did not speak.

"Oh, I knew they were going to appeal," McClain said. "You could look
at their faces, and it was the same exact deal. They smile and they
look at you, but there's a coldness to that room that is just incredible.

"I mean, I don't want to speak ill," he said. "But there's a definite
coldness. I guess we're going to the Supreme Court."