Pubdate: Fri, 18 May 2001
Source: Times-Standard (CA)
Copyright: 2001 The Times-Standard
Contact:  http://www.times-standard.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1051

HIGH COURT RULING ADDS TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA CONFUSION

This week's U.S. Supreme Court ruling on medical marijuana appears to leave 
medical users deeper in legal limbo than they were before.

But it may discourage some growers who were apparently abusing the 
loosely-written Proposition 215.

The court ruled that federal law prohibits distribution of marijuana, even 
for medical purposes.

The ruling does not, however, deal directly with simple possession of 
medical marijuana in California and the other eight states where its use is 
legally permitted.

That seems to leave open the possibility that state-authorized medical 
users may still grow plants for their own personal use.

As marijuana can be raised at home under artificial plant lights, this may 
be a practical temporary solution -- if hardly satisfactory as a permanent 
answer.

Neither federal nor state officers are likely to arrest, nor district 
attorneys to prosecute, an invalid for possession of small amounts of 
medical marijuana.

They have bigger public safety problems to deal with.

Most of the legal controversy arising from Prop 215 involves groups and 
individuals that grow and distribute large amounts, ostensibly as 
"medicine" for persons who can't raise their own. While some of these are 
responsible organizations, others are thinly disguised commercial 
operations, allowing professional pot dealers to make sales under a legal ruse.

The high court ruling declares all such enterprises illegal, and may 
discourage growers who would rather not face a federal rap. It will surely 
affect the lawsuit filed against Humboldt County Sheriff Dennis Lewis, who 
has been charged with contempt of Superior Court for refusing to return 
confiscated marijuana.

In the long run, the only answer is to write better laws. Prop 215, having 
been passed as a ballot initiative, is far more loosely worded than normal 
legislation. That's why it's been so seriously open to abuse.

Both state and federal codes should be amended to allow medical use of 
marijuana under the same strict standards as other controlled drugs. That 
means regulated doses, properly prescribed by physicians and distributed 
through clinics and pharmacies.

A legitimate objection to this is that it would place a herbal cure that 
anyone can grow cheaply at home in the hands of pharmaceutical corporations 
that routinely mark their products from 1,500 to 3,000 percent above the 
cost of manufacture. There must be a way to avoid this, such as mandating 
generic prescriptions.

Cocaine, amphetamines, opiates such as morphine and codeine and many other 
dangerous drugs are used medically with proper safeguards. There is no 
reason why cannabis should not -- compared to these, or even to alcohol, it 
is relatively innocuous.

Unfortunately, it's no easier to conduct a calm and rational public debate 
about marijuana than it is about sex, religion or capital punishment. Too 
many politicians have been grandstanding for too long -- and who wants to 
be tagged as "soft on drugs?"

The voters of California, and of most states where the issue has been 
placed on the ballot, have spoken clearly.

They do not want marijuana legalized for recreational use (measures to do 
so have always failed) but they do want it -- and any other drug that can 
relieve human suffering -- available to those who might genuinely benefit 
from it.

That really shouldn't be an insurmountable legal problem, given the 
political will to solve it.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D