SUPREME COURT DECISION: U.S. CAN PROSECUTE USERS OF MEDICAL POT

Oregon's ground-breaking medical marijuana law was placed in legal limbo
Monday after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a California case that people
who use the drug for medical reasons can be prosecuted by federal drug agents.

Oregon's seven-year-old, voter-approved law remains in effect, as do
similar laws in 10 other states. But Oregon officials said they would stop
issuing new medical marijuana cards temporarily, while awaiting a formal
legal opinion from state Attorney General Hardy Myers. The cards allow
people to smoke marijuana as a medical treatment.

The 10,696 Oregonians who hold the state-issued cards, including 1,381 in
Lane County, face at least a theoretical risk of federal prosecution, but
that's been the case since the law took effect in 1998.

Unlike California, a battleground state for medical marijuana since voters
there approved the Compassionate Use Act in 1996, Oregon has been under the
radar of federal authorities in medical marijuana cases.

"We're unaware of any instances when federal authorities have arrested or
prosecuted a card holder who was complying with state law," said Kevin
Neely, spokesman for the Oregon Justice Department.

A typical hydroponic marijuana-growing operation in a Eugene apartment is
shown in this 2001 photo. The grower was a medical marijuana user.

Photo: Brian Davies " The Register-Guard

What remains unknown is whether Monday's ruling will embolden the Bush
administration to prosecute people who smoke medical marijuana under
authority of state law.

"It's truly a concern," said Steve Fox, a lobbyist for the Marijuana Policy
Project. "Now that this case has been decided, the Bush administration may
feel it needs to show California who's boss and take some action."

In Portland, U.S. Attorney Karin Immergut's office referred inquiries to
the U.S. Justice Department in Washington, D.C. Justice Department
spokesman John Nowacki would not say whether prosecutors would pursue cases
against individual users.

Even if it did, that wouldn't stop Angel Raich, an Oakland, Calif., woman
and the namesake plaintiff in the case.

"I do not have a choice but to use cannabis as a medicine," the 39-year-old
mother of two told reporters in a conference call. "If I stop, I would die."

Raich has an inoperable brain tumor and scoliosis, and also suffers from
wasting disease, seizures and severe chronic pain. She said that she smokes
marijuana every two hours, using about 3 ounces a week, to ease her pain
and to stimulate her appetite so that she can keep weight on her 5-foot-4,
100-pound frame.

Her co-plaintiff, Diane Monson, an Oroville, Calif., accountant with a
degenerative spine disease who grows her own plants, said: "I'm going to
have to be prepared to be arrested."

Raich said she doesn't like using the drug, and that it does not give her a
"high." She said she tried Marinol, which contains marijuana's active
ingredient in pill form, but she suffered bad side effects.

Raich and Monson had argued that because their marijuana was home-grown,
not taken over state lines, and distributed without charge, federal drug
agents didn't have the authority to regulate its use. The Constitution's
Commerce Clause gives the federal government the right to regulate
interstate commerce.

In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution gives the
federal government authority to prohibit the cultivation and use of
marijuana as interstate commerce.

Justice John Paul Stevens, an 85-year-old cancer survivor, wrote the
majority opinion, joined by Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader
Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer; Antonin Scalia filed his own concurring
opinion. Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the dissenting opinion, joined by Chief
Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Clarence Thomas, who generally
support states' rights.

Stevens' decision was filled with sympathy for the plaintiffs, and said the
court was not passing judgment on the potential medical benefits of
marijuana. He suggested that Congress is the best venue for resolving legal
issues concerning medical marijuana.

In her dissent, O'Connor wrote that the court's "overreaching stifles an
express choice by some states, concerned for the lives and liberties of
their people, to regulate medical marijuana differently."

For a person to qualify for a card in Oregon, a doctor must confirm that
marijuana could provide some relief from one of the qualifying medical
conditions, such as cancer, HIV, glaucoma or Alzheimer's disease, or from a
disease that causes severe pain, nausea, muscle spasms or wasting disease.

Card holders are allowed to grow up to seven plants, of which three can be
"mature," and possess up to 3 ounces of dried marijuana.

Shortly after the ruling, officials in the Oregon Department of Human
Services said they would stop issuing medical marijuana cards temporarily.

"We need to proceed cautiously until we understand the ramifications of
this ruling," said Dr. Grant Higginson, state public health officer, adding
that he has requested a formal legal opinion on the issue from the state
Justice Department.

DHS will continue to receive and process card applications, but no cards
will be issued until state attorneys offer their advice.

In response, the Marijuana Policy Project threatened to sue the state
unless it resumes issuing cards to qualified patients and care givers.

Rob Kampia, the group's executive director, said that any effort to subvert
the state's existing program is unwarranted and could be more harmful than
the relatively small threat of federal interference.

"Oregon is alone in its overreaction - and legally incorrect reaction - to
today's Supreme Court decision," he said.

Medical marijuana advocates said that the Monday ruling, while a setback,
is unlikely to bring federal prosecution on people who comply with Oregon's
law.

"The federal government for the most part has not been interested in
prosecuting sick and dying Oregonians who are cultivating small quantities,
and staying in compliance with state law," said Leland Berger, a Portland
attorney who helped draft Oregon's law and who represents patients around
the state.

The state law has never provided protection from federal prosecution, he said.

David Fidanque, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of
Oregon, agreed that it's unlikely that federal agents will begin going
after Oregon medical marijuana card holders.

"The protection for Oregonians who are part of the medical marijuana
program is in their numbers," he said.

Ultimately, Congress needs to place marijuana in a lesser category of
controlled substances, rather than prosecute as if it were more dangerous
and addictive, Fidanque said.

"Sooner or later, Congress is going to wake up and realize that the current
policies make no sense," he said. "Until then, individuals will be at risk
of prosecution by the federal government."

Opponents of medical marijuana, meanwhile, hailed Monday's ruling. John
Walters, director of national drug control policy, defended the
government's ban.

"Science and research have not determined that smoking marijuana is safe or
effective," he said.

Drug Watch International, a volunteer group in Omaha, declared, "The
marijuana debate is over!" on its Web page.

"All along the so-called medical marijuana movement has been a hoax on
mankind," the group's president, Ron Godbey, said in an interview.

He wants federal agents to "crack down" on marijuana patients, people who
grow the plants for them, and doctors who recommend the drug.

"I want to put an end to it," he said.

Register-Guard reporter Jeff Wright and The Associated Press contributed to
this report

WHAT IT MEANS FOR OREGONIANS

Oregon's law remains in effect, but state officials said Monday they would
stop issuing new medical marijuana cards temporarily, pending advice from
the state Justice Department. Oregon's 10,696 current cardholders are at
risk for federal prosecution - as they've always been - although advocates
say a federal crackdown on individuals who comply with state law is unlikely.

WHAT THE COURT RULING SAYS

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday in a California case that federal
agents have the authority to prosecute people who use medical marijuana in
accordance with state laws. Eleven states, including Oregon, permit the
medical use of marijuana.