Pubdate: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 Source: San Francisco Bay Guardian, The (CA) Copyright: 2004 San Francisco Bay Guardian Contact: http://www.sfbg.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/387 Author: Ann Harrison Cited: Raich v. Ashcroft www.angeljustice.org/ Cited: National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws http://www.norml.org/ Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization) HIGH EXPECTATIONS Marijuana Growers Wait On Supreme Court Ruling To Determine If They Must Return To Prison A pending U.S. Supreme Court decision on medical marijuana patients and their caregivers could have far-ranging consequences for cannabis activists slapped with federal drug charges - and those wishing to limit the power of the federal government. At least 30 pending federal marijuana cases will be affected by the outcome of /Ashcroft v. Raich, /a case the Supreme Court heard Nov. 29 that debated whether the feds exceeded their constitutional powers by imposing national drug laws on the local, noncommercial use and cultivation of medical cannabis. A decision is expected by summer. The cases include growers, patients, and dispensary operators busted by federal agents for growing marijuana that they considered legal. At least two California medical cannabis growers, Bryan Epis and Keith Alden, have been released from prison pending the outcome of the Raich case after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals limited federal oversight of medical pot growers. Windsor resident Alden was convicted in 2003 for cultivating 755 plants for several medical cannabis dispensaries. He served 20 months of his 44-month federal sentence before being released in April. Alden says he's optimistic the patients will win the case, but no matter the outcome, the publicity surrounding the case has helped defendants like him rally support for their own legal battles. "The Raich lawyers are done now, but we the people are not done," Alden said. "We will always maintain our right to petition and be heard, and this is our time now to step up and put the pressure on." The Supreme Court case was brought by Oakland medical cannabis patient Angel Raich and Oroville patient Diane Monson after the federal Drug Enforcement Administration raided Monson's home in 2002, seizing six marijuana plants grown under the Compassionate Use Act, which California voters passed as Proposition 215. A federal judge denied the women's request for a preliminary injunction against more government raids. But that decision was reversed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which then placed an entire group of medical cannabis cases on hold pending the federal government's appeal of the case to the Supreme Court. "If Raich wins her case, then I will win my case, and if not, I will defiantly go back to prison," said Epis, who was released from his 10-year mandatory federal drug sentence in August. Epis was arrested in June 1997 for growing free medical cannabis for four medical marijuana patients in Chico, and he was convicted five years later. Ashley Epis, Epis's 10-year-old daughter, appeared on billboards throughout California that read "My dad* *is not a criminal." Epis says that if the justices find the government has overstepped its powers by arresting growers like him, then "people could feel more protected and safe from federal harassment and intimidation." Dale Gieringer, state coordinator for the California chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said those distributing medical cannabis will also be vulnerable if the federal government gets the green light for future raids. "I expect a crackdown on [medical marijuana] dispensaries if this goes the wrong way," Gieringer said. "It wouldn't surprise me at all if there would be an attack on large dispensaries in particular, with the government seeking forfeiture against the landlords. If that happens, who is going to want to rent to a dispensary anymore?" Asked to comment on this prediction, the feds were tight-lipped. "We are reserving comment on any medical marijuana issues until the case is decided," DEA spokesperson Bill Grant said. Gieringer added that the case will also impact negotiations between patients, caregivers, and local officials, who often use the federal prohibition against all marijuana use as an excuse to duck medical marijuana laws in the 10 states that have passed them. "I know there will be local entities that say regulation of dispensaries will be contingent on what happens in the Raich case," Gieringer said. Robert Raich, Angel Raich's husband, who served as an attorney on her legal team, said the case will directly affect three California medical cannabis dispensaries with cases in the Ninth Circuit: the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative, the Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana, and the Ukiah Cannabis Buyers Club. The Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana collective in Santa Cruz, which serves terminally ill patients, also received an injunction against federal raids as a result of the Ninth Circuit Court ruling, Raich said. He added that Oakland medical marijuana grower Ed Rosenthal is appealing his conviction for growing medical cannabis to the Ninth Circuit and that a loss in the Raich case could also reduce his grounds for appeal. The Raich case rests largely on the Supreme Court justices' interpretation of the 1942 case /Wickard v. Filburn,/ which defines the limit on the federal government's power to regulate commerce. The case involved a wheat farmer who argued that the federal government had no jurisdiction over his crop because it was all consumed on his family farm. But the court found that the case fell under the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce. If the justices rule against the patients, it could vastly expand the federal government's reach, even though state marijuana laws would still stand. The government's acting solicitor general, Paul Clement, argued in the case that if the service or good in question is also available in a commercial market, then it impacts the market and could thus be regulated by the federal government. "This could affect virtually everything," said Raich, who cited child care as a service that is sold in the commercial market and could thus be regulated by the federal government. Under this argument, even sex is not excluded from government control. "Under the solicitor general's argument, the federal government would be able to regulate every aspect of marital relations because the conduct is the same as that engaged [in] as part of a commercial market for prostitution," said Raich, who noted that this very example was brought up during the Raich Supreme Court arguments. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin