LAYING DOWN (ON) THE LAW

Last Tuesday a group of medical marijuana activists led by Proposition
215 co-author and registered nurse Anna Boyce presented the Orange
County Board of Supervisors a petition asking it to begin implementing
the medical marijuana law California voters approved three years ago.

The supervisors greeted the petition with stony silence. Afterward,
however, Assistant Sheriff George Jaramillo told reporters that the
matter is "significantly more complicated than that." The problem, he
said, is that Prop. 215 contradicts federal law.

Mr. Jaramillo told us on Friday that it isn't that potential conflict
that's so important as the fact that there's no clear policy for the
Sheriff's Department to follow. He is aware of the following, for example.

Article III, Section 3.5 of the California Constitution (adopted in
1978) states that "An administrative agency, including an
administrative agency created by the Constitution or an initiative
statute, has no power: ... (c) to declare a statute unenforceable, or
to refuse to enforce a statute, on the basis that federal law or
federal regulations prohibit the enforcement of such statute unless an
appellate court has made a determination that the enforcement of such
a statute is prohibited by federal law or federal regulations."

No appellate court has done so in regard to Prop. 215. In fact, no
legal challenge has been filed seeking to invalidate the law on the
basis of a conflict with federal laws or regulations — or for any reason.

This country has gone a long way in the last 70 years or so in the
direction of completely centralized power, with the national
government calling all the shots. But it hasn't gone all the way yet.
The attitude of state officials, when a potential conflict between
state and federal laws is perceived, still should be to enforce state
law and let the national government use the courts to change the
situation if necessary.

And it turns out the California Constitution (in a provision adopted
in 1978) explicitly requires that course of action. Our conclusion?
Government officials are required by the California Constitution to
enforce and implement Prop. 215 unless and until an appellate court
orders them not to do so.

Because of a threatened gubernatorial veto the Legislature couldn't
come up with guidelines. The state attorney general could issue
guidelines but he hasn't. In Orange County the Board of Supervisors
should act and act quickly.