Pubdate: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 Source: News & Observer (Raleigh, NC) Copyright: 2005 The News and Observer Publishing Company Contact: https://miva.nando.com/contact_us/letter_editor.html Website: http://www.news-observer.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/304 Author: David Whitney and Claire Cooper, McClatchy Newspapers Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topics/Raich (Angel Raich) MEDICINAL WEED IS ILLEGAL Federal drug laws do not exempt ailing marijuana users, the Supreme Court rules Supreme Court plaintiff Diane Monson of Oroville, Calif., smokes marijuana to relieve back pain. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that federal laws supersede state laws permitting patients to use the drug under doctors' orders. WASHINGTON -- A medical prescription is not a ticket to legal marijuana, the U.S. Supreme Court said Monday in a 6-3 ruling. The justices nonetheless expressed sympathy for those whose illnesses have been uniquely alleviated by the popular street drug. In an opinion written by Justice John Paul Stevens, the court held that state laws do not trump the federal government's authority under the Constitution to prosecute sick users on federal drug charges. California's law, passed by voters in 1996, allows people to grow, smoke or obtain marijuana for medical needs with a doctor's recommendation. The ruling does not strike down California's law, or similar ones in Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and Washington state, according to The Associated Press. Besides those states, Arizona permits marijuana prescriptions but has never instituted a program to support them. In Maryland, people accused of violating state possession laws can present evidence to a judge of a medicinal use of the drug; the judge can then lower the punishment to a $100 fine. The justices said their decision was "made difficult" by the claims of the two California women who brought the appeal -- Angel McClary Raich of Oakland and Diane Monson of Oroville. The women said they would suffer irreparable harm if their supply of legal marijuana dried up because of the ruling. But the justices said the state exemption for medical marijuana was certain to add to the street supply of marijuana. "In contrast to most prescriptions for legal drugs, which limit dosage and duration of the usage, under California's law the doctor's permission to recommend marijuana is open-ended," the majority said. The high court suggested that the issue belongs in the political arena. Medical marijuana proponents can turn to administrative avenues to have it reclassified from a banned Schedule I drug to a Schedule II drug restricted to medical use, the justices said. "But perhaps even more important than these legal avenues is the democratic process in which the voices of voters allied with these [women] may one day be heard in the halls of Congress," it said. Raich, who has a brain tumor and has credited marijuana with relieving her misery to the point that she no longer requires use of a wheelchair, said she will be beating a path to Congress. "We're not going away," Raich said. Monson, who has chronic back spasms, said she was "very disappointed" with the ruling. "I think it's just a blow to compassion everywhere," she said. "But I'm going to ... continue to do what I think is right." - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake