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.
August 29th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Finally justice has been served. We need to return to a proper and limited reading of the Commerce Clause and the powers of the Federal government as stated in Article 1, Section 8. (And legalize all drugs.)
Although I whole-heartedly support the ACLU’s work in the area of drug policy, it seems that the ACLU only supports limited Federal government involvement in those areas it wants, while supporting massive Federal government involvment in many other areas.
Just some food for thought. Keep up the good work.
August 29th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
This kind of Law is stupid, I am a California teacher legalizing MJ have students not seeing the drug for what it is a danger this only makes it more attractive and students think it is ok to break moral codes and laws at the expense of the imediate desire of MJ. MJ is a harmful drug regardless of what voters may think.
September 1st, 2008 at 4:51 am
Firstly, if your grammar and writing skills are any indication of your proficiency as a teacher, I am saddened at what a future our children have.
Secondly, but far more importantly, you speak from the stance of utter ignorance to fact. It is exactly your sort that continues to drive the persecution of those patients that would benefit from the lawful, and beneficial, responsible use of medical marijuana.
Robert, I encourage you to actually do some research before continuing to profess your ignorance. The fact that you are charged with the education of our youth is saddening.
Remember, Robert, “It is better to be silent, and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.”
September 1st, 2008 at 4:57 am
Robert…
Furthermore… what gives you the right to impose your “moral codes” on others?
Who decides these “moral codes”?
In Pakistan, a member of their parliament just defended the “honor killings” of five women that were beaten, shot, and then buried alive - for “moral” reasons. Three of the women wanted to choose their own husbands and the other two were related to them.
Nevertheless, that is “morally acceptable” there. So, I guess morals should always take precedence over good judgment and civil liberty. Right?
Seriously, how do people like you become teachers!?!
September 1st, 2008 at 11:51 am
I hope that Robert isn’t teaching English to California children.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:25 pm
you’re a teacher and that’s how you type and spell? kids, don’t listen to this guy - what a joke.
marijuana is not for children, and i think everyone can agree on that. it should be kept out of the hands of the youth..period. drug education should approach the subject from a realistic angle i.e. marijuana will not kill you, but it can affect x,y,z.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Robert-
I don’t know what you teach, but it’s obviously not English.
September 1st, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Robert - I taught public high school in california, too. And our abstinence-only education (for drugs) is obviously not working. Students need to be informed about all the aspects of drugs - why people take them, the effects both positive and negative, and which drugs are most likely to lead to serious addiction and disastrous consequences. If we teach kids that Cannabis and Cocaine are equally dangerous, THEN cannabis can be a gateway drug. Teach how much more addictive and destructive cocaine and methamphetamines are, and they can make an informed choice.
September 1st, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Luckily we don’t live in a country where one person unilaterally decides the morality of an entire nation. At least not on paper.
September 1st, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Robert, I sure hope you’re not an English teacher because your grammar is terrible. Do you teach Phys. Ed.?
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:36 am
Hey Robert
For a teacher your grammar and spelling is pretty poor, and I doubt your knowledge of marijuana is any better.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:16 am
It’s a shame the ACLU is not forcing the DEA to update federal regulations. The Controlled Substances Act, 21 USC 801-904, requires that anything in Schedule I must have no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. The last time I checked, there were twelve states that have enacted medical marijuana laws over the last twelve years. Marijuana no longer meets the requirements for Schedule I and the DEA hasn’t done anything about amending the regulations. If there were criminal penalties for fradulent enforcement of outdated federal regulations, the DEA might obey the law. The DEA has grown addicted to the public tax dollars and asset forfeitures and can’t kick the habit.
See Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006), for the details on how the states, and not the federal government, determine accepted standards of medical practice.
Carl Olsen
Post Office Box 4091
Des Moines, Iowa 50333
515-288-5798
http://www.iowamedicalmarijuana.org/
(former ACLU member, I might join again if they wake up)
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:28 am
Simplistic, knee-jerk, conditioned responses to complex issues such as these are to be expected from those who allow others to do their thinking for them.
What do you teach, Robert, kindergarten?
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:51 pm
God Help Those who Help Themselves
Blessings to the ill with Hope and Charity. Amen
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:13 pm
What Carl Olsen is saying is the most important comment here, and a MUCH bigger news story than the medical marijuana one. Here it is in plain (er) English. Marijuana is no longer illegal. It is currently not on Schedule I, or any schedule. Consequently, any “enforcement” of any regulation based on the purported Schedule I status is based on a lie and subject to…dare I say it…litigation! Any hungry lawyers out there?
September 3rd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
You guys lay off Robert.
September 4th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
The only problem with what Carl is saying is that MJ has to be considered to have medical use as defined by the Federal Gov’t, which hasn’t as of yet. So, the DEA is still “valid” keeping it Sched 1, unfortunately.
September 6th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
Doesn’t the State of California know what the National Guard is? They are there to defend the State!
September 7th, 2008 at 11:53 am
my husband is being denied treatment for pain managment(Narcotics)due to the fact he admitted to using marijuania at times for chrons he has never been perscribed narcotics, nor was he seeking when he visited a pain manegment clinic he was told if you want treatment you must summit drug screen at each visit. he does not drink alcohol or use any other drugs. worse yet the dr releases this inf to lawyer and other dr,s now he will be denied disability and fair treatment from physicians due to fact he said he will continue to use mj over narcotics.no one else in the 8 years seeking treatment has offered anything other than anti-inflamatories which cause his stomach to bleed, he is suffering and should not be treated like a crimminal
September 7th, 2008 at 11:58 am
sorry i should add this the doctor told my husband her #1 concern was her licence, she would lose them if sthe dea found out he used mj and she percribed narcotics.
September 10th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
The only problem with what Joe is saying is that it isn’t true.