REEFER MADNESS

DEA RAIDS WEST HOLLYWOOD CANNABIS CLUB

Patients With HIV/AIDS, Cancer Outraged

During a time of war, acts of heroism by ordinary people can easily go
unnoticed. But wheelchair-bound Marlene Rasnick's friends knew what it
took for her to attend the Nov. 6 candlelight vigil protesting the
Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) raid on the Los Angeles
Cannabis Resource Center (LACRC). During that bust at dusk on Oct. 25,
scores of DEA agents executed a search warrant and seized computers,
medical records, bank accounts, gardening equipment and 400 marijuana
plants. As LACRC's board co-chair, Rasnick valiantly defied the
ravages of end-stage ovarian cancer to make the demonstration. "It's
my fight-back instinct," Rasnick told Frontiers, "my desire to live."

Like a captain who is the last to leave the ship, Rasnick and LACRC
President Scott Imler brought up the rear of a seven-minute,
single-file procession of members carrying triangle-folded American
flags from LACRC headquarters across Santa Monica Boulevard to the
rally. About 250 supporters listened to music and firebrand speeches
as Imler officially announced the center's closure. Helped to the
stage, Rasnick stood unaided expressing her grief "at what the DEA has
done" and thanking the staff. Supported by her husband, Lee Boek,
Rasnick lit a memorial candle honoring members who've passed away.

Rasnick appeared oddly comfortable. These were her people. Eleven days
earlier, she had been their spokesperson during a news conference at
West Hollywood City Hall after the surprise DEA raid. In fact, the
57-year-old actress and teacher with Boek in their Public Works
Improvisational Theatre company had come directly from teaching a
"theatre games" class. Three months ago she had been well enough to
improvise a performance piece at Studio A in Silverlake. "It was a
medical and emotional struggle to do it, but it was such a powerful
experience," she said. Since the raid, her friends have shared their
marijuana, "medicine" she's taken for four years to help her eat,
drink, and ease the wrenching pain of post-chemotherapy nausea.
Nonethe-less, like others now bereft of the drug they depend upon to
ease the pain from cancer, AIDS, or other serious illness, Rasnick's
prepared to go to MacArthur Park to find a drug dealer if she must.

"If you have some spirit of rebellion or denial or hope or some kind
of life-affirming thing, [marijuana] makes it easier to literally get
out of bed in the morning. I don't know what the hell we are going to
do now," she said.

LACRC supporters say the center was cultivating medical marijuana with
the full knowledge and consent of the California attorney general, the
Los Angeles district attorney, the Sheriff's Department and the city
of West Hollywood under the aegis of the state's voter-approved
medical marijuana initiative, Proposition 215. Rasnick and others at
the vigil outside LACRC headquarters on Santa Monica Boulevard are
particularly shocked and outraged that the DEA decided to raid the
center at a time when the U.S. Justice Department, President Bush and
Gov. Gray Davis warn of the possibility of more terrorist attacks.

"You would think in a time of war, bio-terrorism, anthrax, national
security alerts--the whole world changing--that there would be higher
priorities for the federal government," West Hollywood City Councilman
John Duran said at the news conference. Duran, who is also LACRC's
attorney, noted that the DEA got a 70- year-old federal judge in
Florida to sign the search warrant.

Imler is also concerned about what the DEA might do with the seized
medical records of the 960 currently active members, as well as the
names of nonactive members, those who applied but were rejected under
the center's strict guidelines, and the 450 participating physicians.

"I think there are some real legal and confidentiality concerns about
what is going to happen to those records," he said.

Designer and LACRC member Tony Elder, 40, witnessed the raid, which he
described as "overkill."

"They have my medical records. I dose medical marijuana daily. Are
they going to now come to my home? Do I need to live in fear?"

No, said Duran. "It is highly unlikely that the DEA would go after
individuals who grow marijuana plants for their own use. That would
fall to the local district attorney who is bound by state law, and
Prop. 215 still stands.

"There is a reason we're the last surviving club--because we did it
right. We had full disclosure with the state attorney general and all
local law enforcement agencies in order to operate within the bonds of
state law," he said.

In fact, one year ago, the city of West Hollywood and Wells Fargo Bank
helped buy the building in which the LACRC operated. One of the
conditions was that the center be open for inspection without notice.

The raid raises "all sorts of legal questions," said Duran, not the
least of which is the question of states' rights versus federal law.
The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 ranks marijuana as a "Schedule
1" drug, a narcotic classification worse than heroin (a "Schedule 2"
drug), cocaine and crystal methamphetamine. Essentially, the
classification means marijuana has "no currently accepted medical
use," has "a high potential for abuse," and cannot be used for
anything other than government approved research projects.
Nonethe-less, compassion for people with AIDS and those with other
life-threatening or serious illnesses has spurred a "Medical Marijuana
Movement" to decriminalize the drug and make it readily available with
a doctor's prescription. Since Prop. 215 (or the Compassionate Use
Act) passed in California and a similar measure passed in Arizona in
November of 1996, Alaska, Oregon, Washington, Maine, Colorado, Nevada,
Hawaii and the District of Columbia have passed medical marijuana
initiatives or laws. Favorable bills are pending in Connecticut, Iowa,
Massachusetts, Min-nesota, New York, Rhode Island, Texas and Vermont,
with bills soon to be introduced in Delaware, Louisiana, Michigan,
Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Meanwhile, with nearly 99% of marijuana arrests made by state and
local police, not federal agents, juries have increasingly acquitted
growers and users in numerous medical marijuana-related trials. In a
Pew Research Center nationwide poll last March, 73% of respondents
said they supported allowing doctors to prescribe marijuana.

But two recent events have propelled the issue into sharp relief. Last
July, former Congressman Asa Hutchinson told senators considering his
confirmation as DEA head that he would declare war on marijuana and
cannabis clubs.

Perhaps more important, though, is the controversial U.S. Supreme
Court ruling on May 14, 2001, in the case of the United States v.
Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative. While the DEA cited the ruling as
the justification for the LACRC and other raids, Capt. Lynda Castro of
the West Hollywood Sheriff's station said that local law enforcement
has been given no direction "to follow that course of action. So,
until the law is more clearly defined and the state and federal courts
are in concert together, it's going to be as confusing." Meanwhile,
the department, sensitive to the community's needs, recognizes that
"marijuana is an effective treatment for people who are sick and need
it for medicinal purposes and we're not going to step in the middle or
take any action on a local level unless we're directed to do that by
our state attorney general and/or specific direction from the court."

Indeed, Castro said she's sent deputy sheriffs into LACRC "to see that
it's an operation about helping sick people. It's not about dopeheads
smoking marijuana or dealing drugs." Given the mission of the center,
the raid "blows your mind away from the human perspective," she said.

The action against the Oakland Cooperative that prompted the Supreme
Court hearing began under the Clinton administration, which decided to
get federal Judge Charles Breyer to issue an injunction closing the
club in 1998 instead of prosecuting a criminal trial. Incidentally,
that judge is the brother of Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer,
who recused himself from hearing the case.

The cooperative appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals,
which, on Sept. 13, 1999, ordered Breyer to reissue his order giving
the cooperative permission to continue distributing marijuana to those
who could prove a "medical necessity." The Clinton administration
appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the order could
create a loophole in federal drug laws and the Justice Department
ordered that the cooperative remain closed until the high court ruled.

In the meantime, a slew of health care and medical marijuana
activists, joined by 33 members of Congress, asked then-Health and
Human Services Department Secretary Donna Shalala to intervene. Citing
several medical re-ports, the congressmembers wrote in a Nov. 30,
1999, letter, "The need to make marijuana available for research is
underscored by the hard reality of federal law, which confers a
one-year prison sentence and a $10,000 fine for possessing a 'personal
use' amount of marijuana--even for people with AIDS, cancer, or
multiple sclerosis who are using marijuana for medicinal purposes with
their doctors' approval. These federal penalties threaten the tens of
thousands of patients who are already using medicinal marijuana."

Finally, on May 14 of this year, the Supreme Court ruled, narrowly
focusing on whether the cooperative violated the Controlled Substance
Act's prohibition on selling or growing marijuana. They ruled 8-0 that
the club itself could not claim the "medical necessity" exception
defense traditionally afforded individual defendants.

Federal law "reflects a determination that marijuana has no medical
benefits worthy of an exception," wrote Justice Clarence Thomas. The
court upheld the federal government's authority to close the club with
a court order as a large distribution center. "There is no medical
necessity exception to the prohibition at issue, even when the patient
is seriously ill and lacks alternative avenues for relief." The one
"express exception" Congress allowed for, Thomas wrote, was making
marijuana available for government-approved research projects. But he
pointedly noted that the court was not deciding numerous
constitutional issues in this decision. It's the court's job to
interpret the federal criminal code, "not rewrite it," he wrote, "nor
are we passing today on a constitutional question, such as whether the
Controlled Substance Act exceeds Congress' power under the Commerce
Clause."

Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg
also expressed concern. "Most notably, whether the [medical necessity]
defense might be available to a seriously ill patient for whom there
is no other means of avoiding starvation or extraordinary suffering is
a difficult issue that is not presented here," wrote Stevens. "The
overbroad language of the Court's opinion is especially unfortunate
given the importance of showing respect for the sovereign states that
comprise our Federal Union."

Conservative Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., also praised the court ruling. "The
unanimous vote in this case reflects the overwhelming evidence that
marijuana has been appropriately and lawfully declared to be a
dangerous, mind-altering substance that should not be legalized for
whatever contrived reason," Barr said. "The true aim of those who
support the so-called medical marijuana movement, has been ... the
legalization of all drugs. Terminally ill patients have been used as
pawns in a cynical political game designed to weaken society's
opposition to drug abuse."

But California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who submitted an amicus
brief in support of the cooperative, called the ruling "unfortunate."
In that Feb. 20, 2001, brief, Lockyer wrote that the "Controlled
Substance Act (CSA) unduly interferes with the Ninth Amendment ability
of the states to enact voter approved legislation." He added that
"states are entitled to create an exception for cannabis under the
[CSA] because of the traditional state interest in regulating for the
health, safety and welfare of its citizens." The federal law
prohibiting the use of cannabis by seriously ill people in California
also "violates traditional notions of state sovereignty protected by
the Tenth Amendment." A new constitutional challenge has been filed in
the 9th Circuit, arguing that the federal government has no authority
to interfere with medical marijuana in California under the Interstate
Commerce Clause, and that the federal law violates the Fifth, Ninth
and 10th Amendments.

In another blow to state sovereignty, as reported by the Associated
Press, the Bush administration is now going after Oregon's
assisted-suicide law. Attorney General John Ashcroft gave federal drug
agents the go-ahead Nov. 6 to take action against doctors who help
terminally ill patients die. The decision would allow the revocation
of drug licenses of doctors who participate in an assisted suicide
using a federally controlled substance, according to the AP. Ashcroft
based his decision on the Supreme Court medical marijuana ruling in
May.

Meanwhile, on July 31, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., introduced
legislation that would reclassify marijuana as a "Schedule 2"
controlled substance, which allows for its use for medical purposes.
The bill, which has 19 co-sponsors, including two Republicans, is
currently pending in the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on
Health.

But while the Supreme Court noted that it was dealing with specific
issues, and local and state law enforcement challenge the ruling as
confusing or in collision with state sovereignty, the Bush Justice
Department has used the decision as the basis for launching a series
of raids on medical marijuana distribution centers in California.

"The recent enforcement is indicative that we have not lost our
priorities in other areas since Sept. 11," Susan Dryden, a Justice
Department spokeswoman told The New York Times. "The attorney general
and the administration have been very clear: We will be aggressive,"
she said, adding that they made no distinction between medical
marijuana and other illegal drugs.

This is very clear in the 27-page search warrant executed on LACRC.
Throughout the affidavit, DEA Special Agent Anthony James Zavacky
refers to large-scale "narcotics trafficking" and the "manufacturing
and distribution of controlled substances and related money-laundering
offenses." According to the affidavit, "illegal conduct permeates the
organization's activities and that all documents, records and
equipment present at the site constitute fruits, instrumentalities or
evidence of federal criminal offenses." Imler is one of several people
named as being under investigation for criminal activities.

Ironically, the affidavit also notes that the operation was initially
prompted by Imler's February 1999 application to the DEA to register
"for a license to manufacture marijuana for medical research and drug
development purposes." That was followed by an on-site visit by a DEA
investigator on Sept. 17, 1999, who was given a guided tour. It
appears from the affidavit that while Imler thought he was complying
with his city mandate to be open for inspection, as well as engaging
in the application process to become federally approved, the DEA was
gathering evidence for a subsequent bust. "Everything we did to try to
be legitimate they used against us," Imler said later.

Thom Mrozek, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles,
notes that "whether these are medical records is subject to some
question. This [LACRC] is not a hospital we're talking about, not a
doctor's office. Any patient records that may reflect [the] medical
condition of a particular person will be maintained in the strictest
of confidentiality as we would in any investigation we're
investigating." Otherwise, they will investigate the files "looking
for evidence of the violation" of federal laws, "basically, the
cultivating and manufacture [of illegal drugs, i.e., marijuana] and
possession with intent to distribute," he told Frontiers.

The Los Angeles raid has put other California cities on the alert.
Indeed, in response to the DEA action, San Francisco District Attorney
Terrence Hallinan on Nov. 5 asked the DEA to rethink its campaign. "I
urge Administrator Hutchinson to respect our city's approach to
medical marijuana, which has reduced crime, saved money, and
contributed to public well-being," Hallinan said. "Any move to close
the dispensaries will result in sick people trying to get marijuana
from street vendors."

But as Mrozek told Frontiers in the earlier conversation, "We don't
recognize [Prop.] 215--that's the bottom line." Mrozek added that
raising the question about the timing of the raid is "kind of a red
herring. They're saying, in times of anthrax and terrorism, that the
DEA should not be going out there and doing it. That's what federal
law enforcement agencies do. They conduct investigations; they're out
there looking for violations of federal law."

That doesn't sit well with Imler, however. "They're going after
medical marijuana while the rest of the world is falling apart. If
they had been doing what we paid them to do, then maybe we'd still
have a World Trade Center."