UNFETTERED MEDICAL ADVICE

The U.S. Supreme Court pulled a shocker Tuesday when it let stand a
controversial appeals court ruling that effectively lifts the federal
threat against doctors who recommend marijuana in states where the practice
is legal. The high court's decision not to accept an appeal of the U.S. 9th
Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling is an important victory for the 1st
Amendment free speech rights of doctors, whom the Justice Department had
threatened to punish for speaking about, much less prescribing, marijuana.

Though the decision itself is a surprise, it is hard to imagine how
Congress or the executive branch could have any constitutional right to
dictate the advice that physicians give their patients.

The medical marijuana battle stems from the fact that the Drug Enforcement
Administration still nonsensically lists marijuana as a Schedule I
controlled substance having no "accepted medical use." Legally, it is on a
par with heroin and crack cocaine.

Tuesday's ruling, even if it fails to budge the DEA on the Schedule I
classification, should end the Bush administration's intimidation campaign.
That includes threats to yank federal prescription privileges from doctors
recommending marijuana in the nine states that allow the practice.

Ideally, the ruling would prompt the administration to respect Proposition
215, the measure passed by California voters in 1996 allowing limited
medical use of marijuana, for instance in quelling nausea from chemotherapy
and in helping AIDS patients regain appetite. However, the DEA could also
decide that because the court has undermined its ability to prosecute
doctors, it should escalate its crackdowns on cannabis clubs, the chief
suppliers of medical marijuana. Earlier this year, DEA officials closed
several clubs in California, raided some growers and arrested activists.

It is reasonable for federal law enforcement officials to worry that
medical legalization could lead the public to see marijuana as safe. Polls
show that some teenagers are unaware that driving while stoned can
seriously impair their abilities behind the wheel, and many Americans don't
realize that marijuana smoke contains carcinogens.

If the DEA honestly wants to rein in casual use, it should help California
enforce the terms of Proposition 215 by monitoring cannabis clubs and
cracking down on any that allow recreational use. Though Proposition 215
was not as tightly worded as this editorial page would have liked, the
measure by no means sanctions nonmedical uses. If the administration has
ideas about how to tighten implementation of Proposition 215, it should be
working with rather than against California law enforcement agencies.