'MEDICAL MARIJUANA' FANS LOSE A ROUND

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal law bars
the distribution of marijuana even to people who say they must have it to
alleviate symptoms of serious illness.

The issue came before the court because voters in seven states have
approved the medicinal use of marijuana, but Washington warned physicians
against abiding by the referendums because federal drug laws prohibit the
cultivation, possession or distribution of the-plant. And according to
Justice Clarence Thomas, the federal law "reflects a determination that
marijuana has no medical benefits worthy of an exception."

In the aftermath of the ruling, supporters of "prescription pot" have
painted a dismal picture of those who suffer from certain ailments. They
have long claimed the drug is useful in treating glaucoma, mitigating the
side effects of cancer chemotherapy and preventing the "wasting" associated
with AIDS.

While in Tampa last month, former White House drug policy czar Barry
McCaffrey acknowledged that some components of marijuana can provide relief
to patients with pain, such as cancer sufferers, but said there is no
evidence it cures anything or is a preferred method of treatment.
Additionally, there are other, approved drugs that provide the same medical
benefits - minus the "buzz" that the weed offers, of course. So there are
legitimate and effective ways to ease pain and illness-induced depression.

The court didn't deal with the idea that some supporters of prescription
pot see it as an opportunity to smoke the illegal substance without fear of
criminal prosecution. That is a matter for the states. This ruling simply
dealt with whether use of the plant for medicinal purposes violates federal
law. It does. If the law is to be changed, that's a job for Congress.