Pubdate: Tue, 19 May 2009
Source: Desert Sun, The (Palm Springs, CA)
Copyright: 2009 The Desert Sun
Contact: http://local2.thedesertsun.com/mailer/opinionwrap.php
Website: http://www.mydesert.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1112
Note: Does not accept LTEs from outside circulation area.
Author: K Kaufmann, The Desert Sun

COURT REFUSES TO RULE ON MEDICAL MARIJUANA

End Of Appeals Gives Medical Marijuana Advocates Hope

The U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to rule on a lawsuit seeking to 
invalidate California's medical marijuana law could open a new phase 
in battles over implementation of the law, statewide and in the 
Inland Empire, advocates said Monday.

The court refused to hear a case filed by San Bernardino and San 
Diego counties, two of nine counties statewide that have refused to 
issue identification cards to qualified patients, as required by 
state law. The two counties argued in their suit that state law and 
the card program were pre-empted by the federal ban on marijuana.

"This is a red-letter day. It just kind of pulls the rug out from 
underneath all of them," said Lanny Swerdlow, president of the 
Marijuana Anti-Prohibition Project, a patients advocacy group with 
branches in Riverside and San Bernardino counties.

Patients are planning to go to the San Bernardino Board of 
Supervisors meeting today to lobby the county to set up a card 
program, Swerdlow said.

"To me and to other patients, it provides us with a level of 
protection," said Scott Bledsoe of Crestline, who has also sued the 
county over its refusal to issue the ID card. "They're saying there 
can't be any legal patients. Now if we get some cards, we'll be 
afforded these protections."

But county spokesman David Wert said no action would be taken on the 
issue until the county counsel briefs the board in closed session, 
which is not likely to happen until early June.

In San Diego, Tom Bunton, senior deputy county counsel, said he will 
recommend that the county start issuing ID cards. But, he added, the 
court's action does not settle the state-federal conflict.

"There is clearly a disagreement on federal and state law on the use 
of medical marijuana," Bunton said. "In my mind it's still there."

The case has been watched closely by the seven other counties that 
have not set up card programs: Colusa, Madera, Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, 
Stanislaus and Sutter.

Americans for Safe Access, the Oakland-based advocacy group that took 
part in the suit against San Diego and San Bernardino, is ready to 
sue the seven other counties if they do not comply, said spokesman Kris Hermes.

"It's about time we achieved full implementation (of state law) that 
at a basic level includes implementation of the ID card program and 
goes beyond that," Hermes said.

Dispensaries are part of the "beyond that" Hermes referred to, even 
though, he said, they are not covered by the court's action.

In the Coachella Valley, the state-federal conflict has been a key 
point in arguments for the dispensary bans and moratoriums cities 
across the valley have adopted.

Coachella and Desert Hot Springs have moratoriums, while Indian 
Wells, Indio, La Quinta and Palm Desert have passed dispensary bans.

In Cathedral City, the City Council is also moving toward a ban with 
its 3-2 vote on Wednesday approving the first reading of an ordinance 
that defines dispensaries as unlawful and a public nuisance.

But, after the court action, Swerdlow said, "They have less ground to 
stand on."

David Nick, who represents Bledsoe in the San Bernardino case, said 
the city could face a lawsuit if the ban passes and goes into effect 
after a second vote.

"I think their attorneys are putting their moral beliefs ahead of 
their legal judgement," said Nick.

But Mayor Kathy DeRosa said no change in direction is expected.

"Unless a council member wants to bring it up, there will be no 
discussion till it's brought back to council again," De Rosa said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake