LAW OVERTURNED BARRING MARIJUANA VOTE IN D.C.

A federal judge in Washington yesterday overturned a law prohibiting D.C.
residents from circulating or voting on a ballot initiative to legalize
marijuana for medical purposes, clearing the way for the measure to be put
on the ballot, possibly as early as November.

Proponents of the medical use of marijuana went to court in December
seeking an injunction barring enforcement of the federal law, which
effectively blocked D.C. residents from putting the issue before voters.
The ban was enacted by Congress in 1998 after an identical legalization
initiative was placed on the ballot and set off a home rule confrontation
with federal lawmakers.

If 16,000 valid signatures are collected and certified by July 5, the
medical marijuana initiative could be on the November ballot -- although
the timeline is tight. If D.C. voters support it as they have in the past,
the nation's capital would become the ninth U.S. jurisdiction to abolish
criminal sanctions for those who use marijuana for medicinal purposes.

The measure would legalize the cultivation, possession, use and
distribution of marijuana for seriously ill patients whose physicians
recommend its use.

The prohibition against letting D.C. voters consider legalizing marijuana
was known as the Barr Amendment. It was named after its sponsor, Rep.
Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.), who attached an annual rider to the District's
appropriation bill that prevented public funds from being used to put the
issue on any city ballot.

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan called the ban
unconstitutional, saying it attempted to permanently prohibit legalization
advocates, organized as the Marijuana Policy Project, from circulating a
petition to get the measure on the ballot.

"There can be no doubt that the Barr Amendment restricts plaintiff's First
Amendment right to engage in political speech," Sullivan wrote.

Initiative 59, the 1998 ballot measure, was approved by 69 percent of the
D.C. electorate, although proponents had to go to court before election
officials were allowed to count the vote nearly a year later. The measure
passed in every precinct of the city's eight wards.

Barr issued a statment yesterday vowing to continue his fight against
legalizing the drug in the District.

"Clearly, the court today has ignored the constitutional right and
responsibility of Congress to pass laws protecting citizens from dangerous
and addictive narcotics," he said. "This initiative was about opening the
door to drug legalization, and whether federal taxpayer dollars should be
used to support a drug legalization agenda."

A spokesman for the U.S. Department of Justice said government lawyers have
not decided whether they will appeal Sullivan's decision.

Robert Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project and a
plaintiff in the case, said the ruling "means that we will be placing a
question on the ballot this November to remove criminal penalties for
seriously ill people who use and grow their own medical marijuana in our
nation's capital." He said advocacy groups hope to begin the
signature-gathering process among registered voters by the end of April.

But Wayne Turner, who led the effort to get Initiative 59 on the ballot,
said the measure might not make the November ballot, because the D.C. Board
of Elections must hold a series of hearings on any proposed initiative and
settle on its exact language. He said the board, which meets once a month,
might not get the petition forms ready until July.

With a July 5 deadline, "I don't see it possible" to make the November
ballot, Turner said.

Alexei M. Silverman, an attorney for the Marijuana Policy Project, agreed
it would be a challenge. "But based on the results of the 1998 vote, we
have reason to be very optimistic that odds are that it will get on the
ballot," Silverman said.

Proponents of medicinal marijuana cite the drug's usefulness in alleviating
pain associated with AIDS, multiple sclerosis, cancer and other diseases.

But the White House's national drug policy office and several medical
associations say the evidence of those benefits is not conclusive enough to
merit a change in the law. Many members of Congress have said such use
sends a conflicting signal about the nation's war on drugs.

The elections board ruled in December that Barr's amendment prohibited the
panel from doing preliminary work toward putting another marijuana
initiative on this year's ballot. That decision prompted the lawsuit, which
named the U.S. and D.C. governments as defendants.

"Just because Congress has the authority to determine and overturn the laws
of the District doesn't mean that Congress can pass unconstitutional laws,"
Kampia said, praising the judge's ruling.