MEDICAL MARIJUANA CASE REALLY ABOUT FEDERAL OVERREACH

Californians Angel Raich and Diane Monson have found that marijuana use is
the only way they can come close to living normal lives.

Raich has an inoperable brain tumor and scoliosis; Monson has chronic back
pain and muscle spasms. Both women tried prescription drugs before their
doctors recommended marijuana, which can be legally obtained for medical
use under California law.

But the Justice Department claims a federal law that restricts marijuana
use to government-approved research overrides California's voter-approved
policy of allowing its limited medical use.

Recently the U.S. Supreme Court heard from the women, who want a ruling
that says the federal Controlled Substances Act does not prevent them from
using medical marijuana. But the Bush administration claims Congress is
authorized under the commerce power to stop it.

Our sympathies are with the ladies because their need for relief is
apparently so real, but their sicknesses are not why we think the
administration is wrong. This is a case about states' rights and the
limited powers afforded the federal government under the Constitution.

For decades lawmakers assumed the most casual linkage to the commerce
clause gave them the right to subject states to their political whims, and
the high court went along with them. But under Chief Justice William
Rehnquist, the court has properly scaled back Congress' power to pass laws
in matters traditionally handled by the states.

We don't deny that the policy of the federal government is to curtail the
growth, distribution, sale and usage of marijuana. We agree with it.

When drug czar John P. Walters visited us recently, he acknowledged that
some components of marijuana provide relief to certain patients, but he
pointed out there is no evidence the drug cures anything or is a preferred
method of treatment. That's why both federal and state criminal laws - even
in California - make the casual possession of marijuana illegal.

But to uphold the federal law as applied to these women, or to declare that
the noncommercial use of marijuana for medical reasons has an indirect
effect on interstate commerce, would return to Congress the power to
legislate on almost every single subject.

The Bush administration argues that because marijuana has a market, albeit
an illegal one, even its medicinal use affects interstate commerce.

But in the case of these women, there is no commercial motive. They have no
economic interest. Their marijuana was grown in and used in California and
is clearly distinct from an illicit drug market.

Whether one believes the California law is courageous or misguided is not
the point of this medical marijuana case. The states are entitled to make
these tough policy choices without interference from the federal government.