THE POINT IN THE ROSENTHAL CASE

To the Editor:

A May 31 editorial recommends that Ed Rosenthal, who was convicted by a
federal jury in California of growing marijuana, not receive any prison time.
But marijuana has been banned by federal law since 1937. Several states
have passed so-called medical marijuana laws that allow desperately ill
patients to grow, distribute and possess small quantities of the drug. The
"approved" indications have often been expanded to include people with
relatively common conditions for which many other F.D.A.-approved drugs are
available.

The point in the Rosenthal case is not the drug but the law itself. State
laws allowing medical marijuana are in direct conflict with Article VI of
the United States Constitution, which states that federal law "shall be the
supreme law of the land."

In reaching its verdict, the Rosenthal jury properly considered the
evidence presented at trial that Mr. Rosenthal committed the crimes as
charged. To introduce California's law and its facially unconstitutional
provisions would have been improper and irrelevant, since the law itself
was not at issue.

John J. Coleman,

Clifton, Va.

Note: The writer is a retired assistant administrator of the
United States Drug Enforcement Administration.