Federal Court Rules Against Federal Subversion of State Medical Marijuana Laws
by ACLU Blog of Rights (03 Sept, 2008) The court battles over medical marijuana and state versus federal laws continues
For the first time, a court has recognized that a concerted effort by the federal government to sabotage state medical marijuana laws violates the U.S. Constitution. While California's landmark 1996 medical marijuana law has mostly been upheld by the state's courts, after the U.S. Supreme Court's unfavorable ruling in 2005 it appeared the sun may have been setting on medical marijuana reform in the federal courts.

The outlook is a whole lot brighter after last week's ruling by U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose, which denies a Bush administration request to dismiss a lawsuit by Santa Cruz city and county officials and the Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM), which was raided by federal agents in 2002.

More significantly, in a first-of-its-kind ruling, the court held that the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution bars the federal government from targeting the enforcement of federal drug laws to intentionally subvert state medical marijuana laws.

The court ruled that the 10th Amendment would be violated if the ACLU can prove, as it has alleged, that a calculated pattern of selective arrests and prosecutions by the federal government has been intended to render "California's medical marijuana laws impossible to implement and thereby forcing California and its political subdivisions to recriminalize medial marijuana."

This ruling is especially significant because it recognizes the constitutional significance of the fact that the federal government has gone out of its way to arrest and prosecute some of the most legitimate doctors, patients, caregivers and dispensary owners that are working most closely with state and local officials.

WAMM, for instance, is widely recognized as a model medical marijuana patients' collective. WAMM is fully supported by the City and County of Santa Cruz, and functions in strict compliance with city and county ordinances and California state law. (In response to the 2002 arrest of WAMM's founders, Mike and Valerie Corral, the city of Santa Cruz even allowed WAMM to hold its regular meeting to distribute marijuana to its members on the steps of City Hall.)

Founded over 15 years ago, WAMM has operated solely on a not-for-profit basis -- it has not sold or purchased marijuana but rather its members have collectively cultivated their medicine and provided it free of charge to approved collective members with a physician's recommendation. WAMM includes 250 seriously ill men and women, with more than 80 percent of members suffering from a life-threatening illness. Health permitting, members have been encouraged to contribute volunteer hours to the organization by working in the garden, assisting with fundraising, volunteering in the office, or helping each other with informal hospice care.

The ACLU lawsuit alleges that in addition to targeting medical marijuana providers who cooperate most closely with municipalities, the defendants -- U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, DEA agents involved in the raid of WAMM, and administrators of the DEA and Office of National Drug Control Policy -- also violated the U.S. Constitution by (1) threatening to punish California physicians who recommend marijuana; (2) threatening government officials who issue medical marijuana identification cards; and (3) interfering with municipal zoning plans.

So, we have a potential legal breakthrough on our hands. This ruling, combined with the issuance of medical marijuana guidelines this week by California Attorney General Jerry Brown, and the passage of a medical marijuana employment rights bill in the California legislature earlier this month, provide further indication that California's medical marijuana law -- which brings the state $100 million each year in tax revenue -- is continuing to gain legitimacy in spite of the Bush administration's best efforts.

Let's hope that federal officials quit playing politics with medical science by bringing a merciful end to their cruel and counterproductive war on sick and dying medical marijuana patients.


-Article from American Civil Liberties Association's "Blog of Rights", August 29th, 2008

Thanks ileso,

Seems that Cali., at least, is starting to stand up for state's rights. That this ruling was handed down by a Federal court seems to imply that some of the higher ups are beginning to see the light. This is indeed good news!

Later,
4kaan4

__________________
I am an incorrigible, pathological fantasizer fabricating illusionary amusements for various individuals. In other words I lie like a politician. I refuse to break the law because I intend to live my life till the day I die!

very good news. Thank you God! I'm so happy. May be we are starting to move in a positive direction.

cool, hawaii being part of the 9th circuit, just got med card. all is well.

kailiwela44

__________________
oh yeah, oh yeah.

Awesome! San Jose represent! thats where im at! This is excellent Progress.

-Token

That this is actually a FEDERAL court adjudication is the thing here, wow federal, that means federal agencies have to take notice - either obey it, which is not likely as they then out of business, or they have to challenge it in a higher federal court if they don't want to risk to get their butts whooped on the next bust - with that ruling every case against a medical licensed grower/medical licensed patient would have to be kicked out of court as soon the DA is done with the arraignment. at is at least how i read this very good ruling by the judge

__________________
Keep the gun oiled and the thumb green!