JUSTICES HEAR MEDICAL POT CASE

WASHINGTON - Angel Raich smokes marijuana every two hours to control pain
from an inoperable brain tumor and other ailments, and she sees only one
outcome if the Supreme Court allows federal agents to prosecute medical
marijuana users.

"If they decide against me, it means they will be giving me a death
sentence," Raich, a 39-year-old mother of two from Oakland, Calif., said
after her lawsuit against Attorney General John Ashcroft got a hearing
Monday before a skeptical Supreme Court.

During arguments, several justices questioned whether creating a loophole
in federal drug policy for medical marijuana would simply add to the
nation's illegal drug woes.

"Everybody will say 'Mine is medical,' " said Justice Stephen Breyer, who
also questioned why advocates for medical marijuana use had not pressed
federal regulators for a change in the drug's classification before taking
their fight to the courts.

"That would seem to me the obvious way to get what they want," Breyer said.

At issue, however, is not whether marijuana should be considered a
legitimate drug. Instead, the justices must decide whether marijuana that
is grown and possessed within a single state - and for which no money
trades hands - should be subject to the commerce clause of the U.S.
Constitution, which regulates interstate trade.

That central issue of state's rights means the outcome of the case is hard
to predict.

Several of the court's most conservative, law-and-order judges - including
Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence
Thomas - also strongly support giving states more power to make and enforce
their own laws.