News (Media Awareness Project) - US: 'Pot Clubs' to Defend Law at Supreme Court |
Title: | US: 'Pot Clubs' to Defend Law at Supreme Court |
Published On: | 2001-03-26 |
Source: | Tampa Tribune (FL) |
Fetched On: | 2008-09-01 15:30:55 |
'POT CLUBS' TO DEFEND LAW AT SUPREME COURT
Oakland, Calif. -- The Court Will Decide Whether "Medical Necessity"
Is a Defense For Using An Illegal Drug
A few years ago, an author writing about death asked ailing AIDS
patient Michael Alcalay how he was accepting dying. ``I'm not
accepting it,'' Alcalay retorted.
Alcalay is alive today thanks in part, he believes, to doses of
marijuana that helped him keep his medicines down and appetite up as
he fought the disease.
Wednesday, he will be at the U.S. Supreme Court as lawyers try to
convince justices that antidrug laws shouldn't prevent marijuana from
being given to seriously ill patients for pain relief.
``Once the justices recognize what's really at stake in this case, if
any semblance of justice prevails then so will we,'' said Robert
Raich, an attorney for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative.
The cooperative is a distribution club under California's Proposition
215, the voter-approved law that allows possession and use of
marijuana for medical purposes on a doctor's recommendation.
That's where Alcalay used to get his marijuana. But he's had to look
elsewhere since the federal government sued six California ``pot
clubs'' in 1998 to prevent them from distributing the drug.
A federal judge sided with the government. But last year, the 9th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that ``medical necessity'' is a
legal defense.
California officials argue the state has the right to enforce its
medical marijuana law, which voters approved in 1996. Distribution
clubs arose because Proposition 215 is silent on how patients will
get marijuana.
The Supreme Court is not looking directly at Proposition 215, but
rather at whether medical necessity can be used as a defense against
federal drug bans.
If the court says ``yes'' to the necessity, it could make it easier
to distribute medical marijuana in California and other states with
similar laws: Alaska, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Maine,
Nevada and Colorado.
Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer has recused himself because
he is the brother of Charles Breyer, the federal district judge who
ordered the club to stop distributing marijuana.
Justice Department lawyers argue that allowing clubs to hand out
marijuana compromises the government's ability to enforce federal
drug laws. But advocates say marijuana is a reliable, nontoxic
therapy that sometimes is the only relief for suffering people.
Oakland, Calif. -- The Court Will Decide Whether "Medical Necessity"
Is a Defense For Using An Illegal Drug
A few years ago, an author writing about death asked ailing AIDS
patient Michael Alcalay how he was accepting dying. ``I'm not
accepting it,'' Alcalay retorted.
Alcalay is alive today thanks in part, he believes, to doses of
marijuana that helped him keep his medicines down and appetite up as
he fought the disease.
Wednesday, he will be at the U.S. Supreme Court as lawyers try to
convince justices that antidrug laws shouldn't prevent marijuana from
being given to seriously ill patients for pain relief.
``Once the justices recognize what's really at stake in this case, if
any semblance of justice prevails then so will we,'' said Robert
Raich, an attorney for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative.
The cooperative is a distribution club under California's Proposition
215, the voter-approved law that allows possession and use of
marijuana for medical purposes on a doctor's recommendation.
That's where Alcalay used to get his marijuana. But he's had to look
elsewhere since the federal government sued six California ``pot
clubs'' in 1998 to prevent them from distributing the drug.
A federal judge sided with the government. But last year, the 9th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that ``medical necessity'' is a
legal defense.
California officials argue the state has the right to enforce its
medical marijuana law, which voters approved in 1996. Distribution
clubs arose because Proposition 215 is silent on how patients will
get marijuana.
The Supreme Court is not looking directly at Proposition 215, but
rather at whether medical necessity can be used as a defense against
federal drug bans.
If the court says ``yes'' to the necessity, it could make it easier
to distribute medical marijuana in California and other states with
similar laws: Alaska, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Maine,
Nevada and Colorado.
Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer has recused himself because
he is the brother of Charles Breyer, the federal district judge who
ordered the club to stop distributing marijuana.
Justice Department lawyers argue that allowing clubs to hand out
marijuana compromises the government's ability to enforce federal
drug laws. But advocates say marijuana is a reliable, nontoxic
therapy that sometimes is the only relief for suffering people.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...