U.S. FILES SUIT TO SHUT 6 POT CLUBS

FEDERAL DRUG LAWS, STATE INITIATIVE ARE AT ODDS

SAN FRANCISCO -- Putting its weight for the first time behind efforts to
undercut California's voter-approved Proposition 215, the Clinton
administration Friday filed a flurry of lawsuits seeking to shut down six
Northern California marijuana clubs.

The U.S. Justice Department filed the lawsuits in federal courts in San
Francisco, Oakland and San Jose, attempting to finally resolve a conflict
between federal drug laws and the state ballot initiative voters approved
in November 1996 allowing sales of marijuana for medicinal purposes.

Federal officials did not move to close San Jose's Cannabis Center,
although word of the Justice Department's offensive created some panic
among the club's operators and patrons. ``I'm relieved (we were not sued),
but I know we're not out of the woods,'' said Peter Baez, the center's
executive director. ``The federal government will do everything it takes.
I'm sure our time will come.''

The lawsuits name two clubs in San Francisco, including the Cannabis Club
owned by Proposition 215 author Dennis Peron. Also named are the Oakland
Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, the Santa Cruz Cannabis Buyers Club and
operations in Marin County and Ukiah.

Justice Department officials are asking the courts to issue injunctions
that would force the clubs to stop selling pot, which presumably would put
them out of business.

Once decided, the lawsuits are expected to have implications for marijuana
clubs throughout California, as well as other states that have enacted
similar laws, such as Arizona.

In announcing the lawsuits, U.S. Attorney Michael Yamaguchi did not explain
what led to the decision to target certain clubs, or why federal officials
elected to confine the initiative mostly to the Bay Area.

Other law enforcement officials said Friday, however, that Northern
California has been the focal point of the medical marijuana debate and was
a logical battleground for determining whether the pot clubs can survive
under federal law.

Prop. 215's weak spot

The lawsuits hinge on what has always been seen as the most vulnerable
aspect of Proposition 215: that marijuana is illegal under federal law,
trumping any state laws permitting its use or sale. ``The issue is not the
medical use of marijuana, it is the persistent violation of federal law,''
Yamaguchi said.

Despite that potential conflict, California voters approved Proposition
215, which allows the possession and cultivation of marijuana if its use is
recommended by a doctor. Since then, medicinal marijuana clubs have opened
in more than a dozen cities throughout the state.

Even though Peron and other club owners vowed Friday to fight the federal
government, most officials familiar with the issue say the Clinton
administration is certain to prevail in court.

``We've known all along that if the feds wanted to come in, there is a
conflict of law between California and the feds, and the feds rule,'' said
Santa Clara County Assistant District Attorney Karyn Sinunu, who supervises
the office's policy on the issue. ``It's first-year law student stuff.''

Since the passage of Proposition 215, federal law enforcement officials had
for the most part remained on the sidelines while California Attorney
General Dan Lungren led the charge against the clubs, particularly against
Peron and his operation. In fact, Lungren's efforts were given a boost just
a few weeks ago, when a state appellate court in San Francisco ruled that
clubs like Peron's cannot sell the drug to patients.

Peron, who plans to appeal that state ruling next week to the California
Supreme Court, defiantly called Friday's federal action a ``show of
contempt for states' rights.''

Lungren, meanwhile, said through a spokesman Friday that he welcomed the
Clinton administration's decision to move against pot clubs.

Earlier this week, Lungren also backed off from earlier pledges to shut
down all pot clubs in the state. Instead, he said he would take a selective
approach. ``The media has made Dan Lungren the czar against illegal
marijuana,'' he said. ``That's just crazy. I don't have the resources to do
that.''

Until now, the Clinton administration appeared unsure of how and whether to
back Lungren. Federal law enforcers have been locked in an internal
struggle over how to proceed against California's pot clubs since at least
this spring, when Drug Enforcement Administration agents raided San
Francisco's Flower Therapy Medical Marijuana Club.

Federal sources say that raid provoked heated debate within the Justice
Department. There was disagreement among various agencies over the best
way to enforce federal drug laws without appearing to trample on the
state's voters, who had enacted Proposition 215.

In May, a San Francisco federal judge described the Clinton
administration's drug policy as ``fickle'' when she blocked federal
officials from prosecuting California doctors for recommending marijuana to
their patients. But that ruling had no effect on how the federal government
approached the clubs' sale of the marijuana.

DEA operation

Court papers filed in connection with the lawsuits demonstrate that, at
about the same time, DEA agents began a five-month undercover investigation
to gather evidence that the clubs were violating drug laws by selling
marijuana. Yamaguchi said the ultimate decision to file civil lawsuits, as
opposed to charging club owners with criminal violations, was a ``measured
approach'' to the marijuana sales.

According to the government's court papers, DEA agents found that marijuana
was being cultivated in some of the clubs and smoked on the premises of
others, in addition to being sold. Like Lungren, federal officials allege
that the clubs have lax standards in distributing marijuana. Under
Proposition 215, it is supposed to be sold only to patients with medical
conditions such as pain and nausea associated with AIDS and cancer.

Operators such as San Jose's Baez say their clubs are set up like medical
clinics. In fact, the DA's office and San Jose City Attorney Joan Gallo
have closely regulated the club and found it to be in compliance with
Proposition 215. That, officials said Friday, was one reason they believe
the Justice Department decided against including Baez's club in its court
fight.

But even those club operators who must now square off against the Justice
Department say they have been wrongly targeted. And they are hoping groups
such as the American Civil Liberties Union come to their defense.

``I thought we were one of the tightest-run facilities in the state,'' said
Jeffrey Jones, head of the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative. ``We've
abided by all the local resolutions and have had no problems. I don't know
where this came from, but I thought it could happen.''

There is no timetable for the courts to review the Justice Department's
lawsuits. The first step in the process may involve consolidating the six
cases before the same federal judge.