STOMPING ON THE STATES:

SUPREME COURT CLOUDS MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAWS

Despite what he accurately called "the troubling facts of this case,"
Justice John Paul Stevens joined the majority Monday in an equally
troubling 6-3 Supreme Court ruling upholding federal prosecution of
patients who legally use doctor-approved marijuana to treat their illnesses.

Confusion abounds about the practical implications of the ruling, but the
court's larger message is clear: Unless Congress acts to change national
drug policy, federal law trumps state law when it comes to marijuana use,
even in the 11 states - including Oregon - that allow the use of medical
marijuana.

Though it will continue to process applications, Oregon's Department of
Human Services immediately stopped issuing medical marijuana cards until it
receives an opinion from the state attorney general clarifying the effects
of the ruling. That action alone underscores the problems that this
misguided intrusion into the prerogatives of the states will cause for more
than 10,000 Oregonians participating in the state's medical marijuana program.

What's worse is that Oregonians newly diagnosed with cancer, HIV/AIDS,
severe chronic pain, glaucoma or any of the other debilitating conditions
covered by the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program will not be allowed to
enter the program. Among that group will be patients who will suffer
needlessly because no other drug or combination of drugs effectively
relieves their symptoms as well as marijuana.

Angel Raich, one of the plaintiffs in the case decided Monday, is such a
patient. Raich has an inoperable brain tumor that causes seizures and makes
it hard for her to maintain a healthy weight. In a detailed affidavit
enumerating a staggering list of painful diseases, Raich's doctor testified
that she had tried 35 alternative medicines without success. If she is
forced to stop using the marijuana she consumes every two hours, she "may
suffer rapid death," her doctor said.

Monday's ruling was narrowly focused on the issue of federal vs. state
authority and not on the legitimacy of marijuana as medicine. Writing for
the majority, Justice Stevens said the federal government's legitimate
interest in extinguishing the market for illegal marijuana made it
necessary to prohibit even locally cultivated medical marijuana that is
never sold.

White House drug czar John Walters went way overboard in saying, "Today's
decision marks the end of medical marijuana as a political issue." It does
no such thing.

The decision weakens but doesn't overturn Oregon's medical marijuana law.
Though it allows federal agents and prosecutors to arrest and try
Oregonians who grow and use marijuana under the state program, it does not
require local police to participate. As a practical matter, most drug
enforcement is carried out by local law enforcement agencies, and they will
continue to be guided by state law.

Three of the court's more conservative members dissented: Chief Justice
William Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Clarence Thomas. In
her dissenting opinion, O'Connor said the case "exemplifies the role of
states as laboratories." Voters in the individual states should be given
the freedom to set their own laws regarding "the health, safety and welfare
of their citizens," she said.

More than 100,000 Oregonians who voted in 1998 to allow the medical use of
marijuana agree with O'Connor. They and their counterparts in California,
Arizona, Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Vermont and
Washington now need Congress to call a truce in this cruel and
counterproductive battle in the war on drugs.