A POINT OF CLARIFICATION

Just a point of clarification to your May 6 editorial: You state that
"Colorado voters amended the state constitution in 2000 to allow the
buying, selling and use of medical marijuana."

The fact is that nothing in Amendment 20 allows for the commercial
sale or purchase of marijuana. The 2000 Blue Book underlines this
conspicuous fact, stating, "The proposal does not provide any legal
means by which a patient may obtain marijuana. Under state criminal
law, it will still be illegal to sell marijuana or marijuana plants to
another individual, including a patient on the state registry." If
there was any uncertainty in spite of the plain text of the Colorado
Constitution - which the editorial fails to quote from - the Colorado
Court of Appeals underlined the Blue Book's plain reading of Amendment
20 in an October 2009 ruling in People v. Clendenin, 232 P.3d 210
(cert denied by the Colorado Supreme Court). Dispensaries come to us
courtesy of the Colorado General Assembly, not the Colorado
Constitution.

Even the most ardent adherents of a living constitution would be hard
pressed to argue that the plain language of Amendment 20 means what
you suggest it does.

John W. Suthers, Attorney General of Colorado

Colorado
Springs

EDITOR'S NOTE: The editorial quoted a passage from Section 14(b) of
Amendment 20, which states: " 'Medical use' means the acquisition,
possession, production, use, or transportation of marijuana..." The
Gazette's editorial board asserts that one cannot acquire, possess,
produce, use and transport marijuana without the ability to buy and
sell it, and therefore commerce appears implicit in the law. The Ogden
memo instructed U.S. attorneys against focusing federal resources on
those who comply with existing state laws providing for the use of
medical marijuana. It did not instruct U.S. attorneys to comply with
Blue Book summaries of state laws.