FREE SPEECH VICTORY

IN ITS ZEAL to thwart the use of medical marijuana in states that
legalized it, the federal government overstepped its authority by
trampling on the First Amendment. That apparently is the view of the
U.S. Supreme Court, which rejected the Bush administration's appeal of
a ruling that held doctors have a free-speech right to advise sick
patients of the benefits of marijuana.

Under the Clinton administration, efforts by the federal government to
shut down cannabis clubs that distributed medical marijuana were
upheld by the Supreme Court. It ruled the federal government does have
the right to enforce its drug laws.

However, federal authorities took the additional step in 1997 of
threatening doctors who recommended marijuana with losing their right
to prescribe medicines if they violated the no-marijuana policy.

If a doctor were to lose his or her right to write prescriptions, his
or her career would be over. That is a harsh penalty in any
circumstance and certainly would have a negative impact on doctors who
favor medical marijuana

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the federal
government, explaining that doctors have a "core First Amendment
(right) to speak frankly and openly with their patients." It is a
freedom that cannot be infringed by the government, the court said.

We have had many quarrels with the 9th Circuit Court, but its ruling
on the constitutional rights of doctors was sound.

The U.S. Justice Department's efforts to punish doctors who
recommended marijuana threatened to erode the doctor-patient
relationship and ran counter to medical ethics. Free discussion of
health-care options should not be suppressed by any level of government.

It is uncommon in a major case for the Supreme Court to refuse to even
hear the federal government's appeal when it loses in the lower
courts. But abridging doctors' free speech, medical ethics and
doctor-patient relationship would be an egregious violation of basic
rights.

The high court's refusal to hear the appeal does not end the battle
between the federal government and states like California that allow
medical marijuana. However, it does give doctors the freedom they need
to give sound medical advice to their patients and to give them the
permission to use marijuana.

Marijuana eases pain and nausea in patents with AIDS, those undergoing
chemotherapy and is helpful in easing pain caused by spinal injuries
and for glaucoma sufferers.

We hope that the Supreme Court's rejection of Washington's attempt to
threaten doctors will put a damper on federal efforts to prevent the
use of medical marijuana. There are far more important and useful
things for the Justice Department to attend to.