SUPREME COURT JUSTICES TO DECIDE MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPUTE

Seven months ago, a federal appeals court ruled that patients could
smoke marijuana with their doctor's recommendation in states that
allow for medical use of the drug. Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court
said it would reconsider that decision. A ruling is not expected until
next year, but whatever the decision, the outcome will likely have
ramifications from coast to coast.

"This provides the (opening) for patients throughout the country to
use their medicine free from interference from the federal
government," Robert Raich said.

Raich's wife, Angel, is one of two seriously ill Northern California
women who sued the federal government in 2002 for the legal right to
grow and smoke marijuana without fear of prosecution.

Late last year, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals ruled in favor of Angel Raich and Diane Monson of Butte
County, saying the federal government can't prosecute patients who use
marijuana in states that have adopted medical marijuana laws.

Among others things, two of the three judges declared, those patients
who grow their own medicine, and do not sell it or move it across
state lines, are not violating the interstate commerce clause of the
Controlled Substance Act of 1970.

For years, federal agents and prosecutors relied on that portion of
the drug law to combat trafficking.

The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to review the 9th
Circuit ruling this year. There was no comment yesterday from the
Justice Department, a spokesman in Washington, D.C., said. Similarly,
no one from the Drug Enforcement Administration returned calls for
comment yesterday.

Supporters of medical marijuana, meanwhile, crossed their fingers that
the gains they have made in recent years would not be reversed once
the Supreme Court hears the case this coming winter.

"We have very mixed emotions about it, but I guess it's something that
has to move forward," said Claudia Little, a retired nurse from Point
Loma who smokes marijuana to reduce the chronic pain she gets from
osteoarthritis.

"The way things are right now, we're in a pretty good spot," she said.
"But it has to be decided one way or another."

Jerry Meier, chairman of San Diego's medical marijuana task force,
which helped write the city's guidelines under the state's
Compassionate Use Act of 1996, said he hopes the Supreme Court uses
this case to make a definitive ruling on the issue.

Twice in recent years, the high court has considered the medical use
of marijuana, but both of those opinions were limited to narrow legal
issues.

"I wish it would just end and people could just go on about the
business of treating their illnesses," Meier said. "This just keeps
dragging on and on and on."

The Supreme Court ruled in October that the federal government could
not punish doctors who recommend marijuana to AIDS, cancer and other
patients. Three years ago, however, the same court decided that
medical necessity was not a legal defense for breaking drug laws.