MEDICAL POT GETS BOOST IN COURT

A U.S. District Court judge yesterday declared unconstitutional a federal
law that barred D.C. residents from legalizing the use of marijuana for
medicinal purposes.

"The United States' suggestion that this Court should ignore the clear
constitutional concerns raised by the [federal law] in deference to
Congress' plenary power to legislate is wholly without merit," U.S. District
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said in his 52-page ruling.

The U.S. Department of Justice, which is handling the case, has 60 days to
appeal to the Supreme Court. "We are reviewing the decision, and we have
made no determination on further steps," said Justice spokesman Mark
Corallo.

The law -- known as the Barr Amendment, after U.S. Rep. Bob Barr, Georgia
Republican and chief sponsor of the legislation -- was enacted in 1998 and
renewed each year since. The law banned the District from spending federal
funds on any law that reduced criminal penalties for possession or use of
marijuana and other controlled substances.

The Barr Amendment blocked the implementation of a 1998 D.C. referendum that
legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes. About 69 percent of D.C. voters
had voted for the legalization.

Opponents of the law -- including the Marijuana Policy Project, which
brought the lawsuit -- argued the Barr Amendment was unconstitutional and
violated D.C. residents' rights to petition the government for change and
allow for referendums.

"We are delighted, but we are not surprised," said Bruce Mirken, director of
communications for the Marijuana Policy Project. "We have believed all along
that it was an outrageous violation of the First Amendment, and we feel
completely vindicated."

Mr. Barr called the ruling "misguided." He said he would continue the fight
against the legalization of marijuana for any reason, and said he has asked
U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft to appeal the ruling.

"Clearly the court today has ignored the constitutional right and
responsibility of Congress to pass laws protecting citizens from dangerous
and addictive narcotics, and the right of Congress to exert legislative
control over the District of Columbia as the nation's capital," Mr. Barr
said. "This backdoor effort to usurp federal law, endanger the health and
safety of citizens, and to use hard-earned tax dollars to do so will not
succeed."

Judge Sullivan said the Barr Amendment violated the basic tenets of the
Constitution.

"The Barr Amendment effectively prohibits plaintiffs from circulating a
board-approved petition for signatures in an attempt to submit an initiative
for placement on the ballot at the next general election," the judge said.
"There can be no doubt that the Barr Amendment restricts plaintiffs' First
Amendment right to engage in political speech."

The office of Mayor Anthony A. Williams praised the decision.

"We are elated by the court's ruling because it supports the basic principle
of home rule," said Tony Bullock, Mr. Williams' spokesman. "We're trying to
get Congress to stop trying to micromanage the District. Congressman Barr
seems to have a special penchant for inserting his personal and political
views on our District-elected officials, and frankly we're tired of this.
It's grotesquely un-American."

Eight states -- Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon
and Washington -- allow terminally ill residents to grow their own marijuana
for private use with prior approval from a physician.

Supporters of the D.C. law are planning to hold another referendum in
November to give D.C. residents similar privileges should Judge Sullivan's
decision stand.