Pubdate: Fri, 18 May 2001 Source: Santa Barbara News-Press (CA) Copyright: 2001 Santa Barbara News-Press Contact: http://www.newspress.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/393 COMPASSION AND CANNABIS It may have made good legal sense, but the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling this week prohibiting the distribution of so-called medical marijuana should not necessarily be the final word on the issue. Putting aside all the breast-beating and tub-thumping that have surrounded the issue, the high court's decision underscores the nation's desperate need for consistent and sensible public policy regarding controlled substances that may have valid medicinal uses. In this sense, the court has challenged government at all levels -- from our local city councils right up to the U.S. Congress -- to shape a rational body of law that discourages drug abuse without penalizing the innocent. In particular, lawmakers need to keep in mind the thousands of cancer and AIDS patients for whom marijuana provides the only reliable relief for the paralyzing nausea that accompanies chemotherapy and other treatments -- not to mention countless others who depend on pot to ameliorate the debilitating effects of diseases ranging from epilepsy to glaucoma to multiple sclerosis. The court's ruling came in response to a federal challenge of Proposition 215, a relatively modest 1996 California ballot measure aimed at legalizing the medical use of marijuana. Although Prop. 215 limited this use to seriously or terminally ill patients with the approval of a licensed physician, the feds nonetheless decided to make an example of the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, one of 20 or so medical marijuana distribution centers that sprung up across the state after California voters overwhelmingly approved the idea. As the feds saw it, referendum or no, outfits like the Oakland cooperative were violating the law -- in particular, a 1970 federal statute that classifies marijuana as a dangerous drug with no medicinal value. Local officials saw it differently, arguing that "medical necessity" entitled them to ignore federal law. Now that the Supreme Court has decided that medical necessity "is not a defense to manufacturing and distributing marijuana," virtually all of these programs -- including Santa Barbara's own Compassionate Cannabis Center -- could be liable to prosecution. But that doesn't mean they are doomed. The fact is, despite the 8-0 vote, the high court's ruling hardly amounted to a blanket condemnation of medical marijuana. For one thing, while the justices made it clear that there is currently no such thing as a "medical necessity" exception to the federal ban on marijuana distribution, they left the door open for Congress to create one. For another, the decision dealt with distribution by private marijuana clubs. It did not prohibit local governments from setting up their own systems to distribute marijuana for specified medical purposes. Nevada and Maine are currently considering doing just that. Moreover, while the justices agreed unanimously that current law allows no exceptions to the federal ban on distribution, they disagreed among themselves about whether medical necessity might justify the use of marijuana by properly qualified patients. So where does this all leave us? Very simply, with a real opportunity to bring some badly needed sanity to what so far has been a largely hysterical war on drugs. Santa Barbara officials could do their part by resurrecting a proposed city ordinance that would set out specific procedures and guidelines to ensure that medical marijuana is distributed only to those with a genuine medical need. First introduced in the City Council last September, the measure had been sidelined by the unwillingness of some council members to take action while the Supreme Court was considering the Oakland case. Now that the court has rendered its decision, council members should cease their dithering and adopt the ordinance. Further delay will only result in additional hardship for hundreds of Santa Barbara residents who, as one of them put it, are "in a horrendous amount of pain ... and (are) just asking for a little compassion." In doing so, the council would be sending an unmistakable signal to federal authorities and laying out a road map other local governments could follow. This is an important issue. It would be gratifying to see Santa Barbara blaze the trail. - --- MAP posted-by: Andrew