STATE AWAITS DECISION ON MEDICINAL MARIJUANA

Supreme Court Case Could Clarify Local Issues

A highly anticipated Supreme Court decision on the future of medicinal
marijuana, expected any day, could provide definitive guidance on an
issue that has been anything but straightforward.

The decision in Ashcroft v. Raich could aid California, embroiled in
conflicting opinion over whether federal or state law should dictate
the use of medicinal marijuana.

At the center of the California's controversy is state Attorney
General Bill Lockyer. Advocacy groups for medicinal marijuana like
Oakland's Americans for Safe Access allege that Lockyer has failed to
protect citizens' rights under the Compassionate Use Act. That
initiative, passed in 1996, allowed Californians to obtain and use
medicinal marijuana with the recommendation of a physician for
ailments like cancer, AIDS, anorexia, glaucoma and arthritis.

"We would like to see a legal opinion [from Lockyer] issued clarifying
law enforcement's obligation to follow state over federal law," said
Steph Sherer, Executive Director of ASA. "Elected officials [in
California] have written Lockyer and asked him to clarify the issue of
state's obligation to follow state law and he has refused to do so."

While some pro-medicinal marijuana advocates would like to see
individual county law enforcement following state law under Lockyer's
orders, his office says it is out of their hands.

"Where we really need to go is to change federal law, that's where the
problem is," said Teresa Schilling, spokesperson for Lockyer. "The
conflict is with [former U.S. Attorney General] John Ashcroft, not
Bill Lockyer."

Ashcroft's opposition to California's law, along with Drug Enforcement
Administration Administrator Karen Tandy, brought a lawsuit from Angel
McClary Raich of Oakland in 2002, charging that Ashcroft and the
federal government had "unconstitutionally exceeded their authority"
by seizing her privately grown medicinal marijuana and then allegedly
arresting, prosecuting, and harassing California medicinal marijuana
patients and caregivers.

Sherer called those actions scare tactics against people trying to
utilize medicinal marijuana, and argued that even in the aftermath of
a possible Supreme Court ruling in favor of Raich, a culture of
resistance from law enforcement against medicinal marijuana could remain.

According to Schilling, Lockyer wants to uphold California's law to
its fullest potential, but also wants to give local county law
enforcement the discretion to enforce this law as they wish.
Conflicting legal opinions coming from different levels of government
have made this difficult.

"As long as [medicinal marijuana] is fully illegal at a federal level
it will be difficult for local law enforcement and puts pressure on
them to interpret the law," said Schilling.

Schilling suggested that especially until there is a clarification of
law, there should be a statewide identification system that will prove
to law enforcement throughout the state when a citizen is a legitimate
user of medicinal marijuana. This could help decrease complaints from
patients who feel they are unjustly treated when they leave their home
counties and show unfamiliar identification.

Davis Police Department spokesperson Lt. Colleen Turay says if there
is any doubt of the legitimacy of using marijuana for medicinal
purposes, cases are deferred to the Yolo District Attorney's office.

"If the use seems reasonable we won't do anything," said Turay. "If
there is no suspicion that this isn't somebody selling or using it
inappropriately and there's a medical card, we won't have any problems
if it's within the home."

Turay noted that if someone is found with marijuana for any usage in a
vehicle, police will make an arrest and seize the drugs as a case of
driving under the influence.

"If you need to use marijuana, you need to do it at home," Turay
said.

California continues to wait for a Supreme Court decision that could
serve as the clarification needed for a highly controversial issue.

"If we win, this changes everything," said Sherer. "If not, it changes
nothing."