SUPERVISORS ARE WRONG ON MEDICAL MARIJUANA

The San Diego County Board of Supervisors' decision to sue the state
of California in an attempt to overturn Proposition 215, the state's
medical marijuana law, is wrong in every possible sense: legally,
morally and politically. The American Civil Liberties Union intends
to immediately intervene in federal court to protect the many
patients who legally use medical marijuana and to uphold the will of
California voters who approved Proposition 215.

The supervisors are wrong morally because there is simply no doubt
that medical marijuana benefits many terribly ill patients 'Ai
patients who would suffer, and sometimes die, without it. Research
has shown unequivocally that marijuana relieves nausea and vomiting
caused by cancer chemotherapy and harsh anti-HIV drugs used to treat
AIDS. It stimulates appetite. It relieves certain kinds of pain that
do not respond well to conventional drugs, including the excruciating
neuropathic pain commonly suffered by those with multiple sclerosis.

In a 1999 study commissioned by the White House, the prestigious
Institute of Medicine concluded, "Nausea, appetite loss, pain and
anxiety 'Ai all can be mitigated by marijuana." The evidence has
continued to accumulate since then, with new studies documenting
benefit in patients with multiple sclerosis, HIV/AIDS and other
painful conditions.

The county's proposed suit is wrong legally as well, stemming from a
misunderstanding of the so-called "supremacy clause." Contrary to
popular misconception, it simply is not true that federal law always
trumps state law so as to require that state laws must march in
lockstep with federal statutes.

In fact, the U.S. Constitution set up a system of "dual sovereignty,"
which limits federal power over the states. This system has been
upheld in a long line of U.S. Supreme Court cases. In the 1997 case
of Printz v. United States, the high court stated, "The Federal
Government may not compel the States to implement, by legislation or
executive action, federal regulatory programs."

In plain English, this means that while the federal government can
ban medical use of marijuana if it chooses, it cannot force states to
do the same. And it cannot criminalize the actions of states such as
California that choose to allow medical marijuana under state law.

One source of confusion on this point may be last June's Supreme
Court decision in the medical marijuana case called Gonzales v.
Raich. While some have mistakenly suggested that Raich nullified
state medical marijuana laws, in fact, the court simply maintained
the status quo as it had been since Proposition 215 was passed by
voters in 1996: Proposition 215 protects medical marijuana patients
under state law, but does not give them immunity from possible
prosecution under federal marijuana laws.

While this situation is in some ways frustrating, one thing is beyond
argument: the Raich decision did not strike down Proposition 215 or
any other state medical marijuana law. That isn't just my opinion.
It's the conclusion drawn by attorneys general and other top
officials in all 10 medical marijuana states: Alaska, California,
Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and
Washington. For example, Montana Attorney General Mike McGrath stated
simply, "We still have a valid law." Nothing has happened to change
that conclusion.

Finally, the Board of Supervisors' decision to attempt to overturn
Proposition 215 is wrong politically. It will waste county resources
on a pointless and futile war on the sick that San Diego County
voters didn't ask for and do not want. County voters supported
Proposition 215 when it was on the ballot, and every indication is
that support has increased since then. Statewide, the measure
received 56 percent of the vote, and a January 2004 Field Poll found
that support had increased to a whopping 74 percent. In San Diego
County, a poll conducted by Evans/McDonough Company revealed that 67
percent of voters support Proposition 215, 70 percent said the county
"should follow state law and issue medical marijuana ID cards to
qualifying patients," and 78 percent agreed with the statement "The
San Diego County Board of Supervisors should not be spending taxpayer
money suing the state to try to overturn California's medical marijuana law."

The supervisors should immediately resume implementation of the
medical marijuana ID card program and drop its doomed lawsuit. They
have no mandate to pursue this wrongheaded action, nor to circumvent
the will of California voters. Their proposed suit can only make San
Diego a laughingstock once it is thrown out of court, as it inevitably will be.