Pubdate: Tue, 28 Nov 2000
Source: Lincoln Journal Star (NE)
Copyright: 2000 Lincoln Journal Star
Contact:  PO Box 81609, Lincoln, NE 68508
Fax: (402) 473-7291
Feedback: http://www.journalstar.com:80/info/about_ljs/letform
Website: http://www.journalstar.com/
Author: Laurie Asseo The Associated Press

SUPREME COURT ACCEPTS MEDICAL-MARIJUANA CASE

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court entered the debate over medical 
marijuana Monday, agreeing to decide whether the drug can be provided 
to patients out of "medical necessity" even though federal law makes 
its distribution a crime.

The justices said they will hear the Clinton administration's effort 
to bar a California group from providing the drug to seriously ill 
patients for pain and nausea relief.

A lower court decision allowing the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' 
Cooperative to distribute the drug "threatens the government's 
ability to enforce the federal drug laws," government lawyers said.

But the California group says that for some patients, marijuana is 
"the only medicine that has proven effective in relieving their 
conditions or symptoms."

The group's lawyer, Annette P. Carnegie, said Monday the federal 
Controlled Substances Act does not prohibit the distribution of 
marijuana for medical reasons.

"Those choices, we believe, are best made by physicians and not by 
the government," she said. Marijuana has been effective in relieving 
nausea in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, weight loss in 
HIV-positive patients and in reducing pain, she said.

Eight states in addition to California have medical-marijuana laws in 
place or approved by voters: Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Maine, Oregon, 
Washington, Nevada and Colorado. Residents of Washington, D.C., voted 
in 1998 to allow the medical use of marijuana, but Congress blocked 
the measure from becoming law.

Justice Department lawyers said Congress has decided that marijuana 
has "no currently accepted medical use."

In August, the Supreme Court barred the California organization from 
distributing marijuana while the government pursued its appeal.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer did not participate in the case. His 
brother, Charles, a federal trial judge in San Francisco, previously 
barred distribution of marijuana only to have his decision reversed 
by a federal appeals court.

California's law, passed by the voters in 1996, authorizes the 
possession and use of marijuana for medical purposes upon a doctor's 
recommendation.

The Oakland group said its goal is "to provide seriously ill patients 
with safe access to necessary medicine so that these individuals do 
not have to resort to the streets."

But the federal Controlled Substances Act includes marijuana among 
the drugs whose manufacture and distribution are illegal.

In January 1998, the federal government filed a lawsuit against the 
Oakland club, asking a judge to ban it from providing marijuana.

Judge Charles Breyer issued a preliminary order imposing such a ban. 
But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, saying the 
government did not disprove the club's evidence that the drug was 
"the only effective treatment for a large group of seriously ill 
individuals."

Last May, Breyer issued a new order allowing the Oakland group to 
provide marijuana to patients who needed it.

In the appeal granted Supreme Court review, Justice Department 
lawyers said the appeals court "seriously erred" in deciding the 
federal law allowed a medical-necessity defense.

The Oakland club's lawyers said "the voters of California have 
spoken" in approving the medical-marijuana measure. Congress has not 
explicitly barred a medical necessity defense against the federal 
anti-drug law, the lawyers added.

The Supreme Court also agreed Monday to hear an appeal by a condemned 
killer from Texas whose lawyers say he is mentally retarded. The 
court said it will use the case of Johnny Paul Penry to clarify how 
much opportunity jurors in death-penalty cases must have to consider 
the defendant's mental capacity.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Josh Sutcliffe