OAKLAND POT COOPERATIVE HEADS BACK TO COURT

More than 11 months after the U.S. Supreme Court shot down part of its
case, the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative goes back before a federal
judge today with other arguments for why it should be allowed to resume
dispensing marijuana as medicine.

Lawyers for the cooperative and the federal government will flesh out
briefs they've filed during the past few months in a hearing this morning
before U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer of San Francisco, who issued the
1998 injunction that's keeping the cooperative shut down.

The cooperative is arguing that the federal government is overstepping its
control of interstate commerce by interfering with an issue completely
within California's borders.

"Our clients are engaged in wholly intrastate commerce ... and therefore
Congress has no power to reach this commerce," said Boston University law
professor Randy Barnett, a nationally renowned constitutional law expert
who has joined the cooperative's legal team after last May's Supreme Court
ruling.

The federal government hasn't even tried to show how distributing medical
marijuana within California could substantially affect interstate commerce
or Congress' control of such commerce, he said. In fact, he added, a
well-implemented state medical marijuana law would actually reduce illegal
intrastate marijuana smuggling.

The cooperative also argues the federal government is violating
California's power to enact public health and safety measures, and that
it's violating people's rights to have relief from pain, to prolong life
and to consult with and act upon a doctor's recommendation under the Fifth
and Ninth amendments.

These state and individual rights "are well-recognized," Barnett said.

The fact that a federal judge in Oregon issued a ruling Wednesday blocking
the federal government's attempt to interfere with that state's assisted
suicide law bodes well for the cooperative's case, he added.

In 1998, the U.S. Justice Department, which doesn't comment on the case,
persuaded Breyer to issue a preliminary injunction halting the
cooperative's distribution of marijuana to its 2,500 members. In 2000, the
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled thatthe Oakland cooperative could
claim an exception to the federal Controlled Substances Act -- which lists
marijuana on its most-restricted "schedule," meaning Congress believes it
has no valid medical use -- because its members have a medical necessity
for the drug.

But last May, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 8-0 to overturn the 9th Circuit
Court's ruling, finding there's no medical-necessity exception to the
federal drug law.

The case was sent back to the 9th Circuit, and the cooperative filed a
brief raising these constitutional issues in October. On Dec. 4, the
appellate court ordered Breyer to consider them.

Barnett and Robert Raich, the cooperative's longtime Oakland attorney, said
Thursday that they expect Breyer will take the matter under submission
today and issue a written ruling within a few weeks. Whichever side loses
will certainly appeal to the 9th Circuit Court, they said.

With a long road of appeals ahead, Barnett said he fears a loss before
Breyer only because it might embolden the Drug Enforcement Administration
to step up efforts against medical marijuana users.

Last year, the DEA raided a major Los Angeles medical marijuana club and,
in February, raided sites in Oakland and San Francisco.

Raich noted the governments of Oakland, Alameda County and California have
filed friend-of-the-court briefs on the cooperative's behalf, decrying the
federal government's intrusion into what they consider a state and local
issue. Their support is crucial, Raich said because nobody can claim those
governments are "some kind of drug-crazed hippies who are trying to harm
our children," as medical marijuana users and providers sometimes are
portrayed.