Pubdate: Tue, 19 May 2009
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Page: B - 1
Webpage: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/19/BASQ17MIN1.DTL
Copyright: 2009 Hearst Communications Inc.
Contact: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/388
Author: Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Note: The ACLU's opposition brief to the Court
http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/medmarijuana/39603lgl20090415.html
Note: The Americans for Safe Access page on the case
http://www.americansforsafeaccess.org/article.php?id=4405
Cited: San Diego County Board of Supervisors
http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/general/bos.html
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/Proposition+215
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/San+Diego+County+supervisors

U.S. SUPREME COURT REJECTS PROP. 215 CHALLENGE

SAN FRANCISCO -- California's medical marijuana law survived its most
serious legal challenge Monday as the U.S. Supreme Court denied
appeals by two counties that argued they were being forced to condone
violations of federal drug laws.

The justices, without comment, denied a hearing to officials from San
Diego and San Bernardino counties who challenged Proposition 215, an
initiative approved by state voters in 1996 that became a model for
laws in 12 other states. It allows patients to use marijuana for
medical conditions with their doctor's recommendation.

The counties specifically objected to legislation requiring them to
issue identification cards that protect holders from arrest by state
or local police for possessing small amounts of marijuana for medical use.

The cards are objectionable because "the state law authorizes
individuals to engage in conduct that the federal law prohibits,"
said Thomas Bunton, a lawyer in the San Diego County counsel's
office. "We are disappointed that the court did not take the case to
resolve what we believe was a conflict between federal and state law."

Medical marijuana advocates were relieved.

"This was the most threatening case to state medical marijuana laws,
the only one that tried to invalidate state laws," said attorney
Graham Boyd of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represented
patients and advocacy groups in the case.

"No longer will local officials be able to hide behind federal law
and resist upholding California's medical marijuana law," said Joe
Elford, lawyer for Americans for Safe Access, which also took part in the case.

He said the order should strengthen his group's case against the two
counties and eight others that have refused to issue the
identification cards. Bunton said San Diego County supervisors would
take up a resolution approving the cards in light of Monday's order.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government can enforce
its laws against marijuana to prosecute users and suppliers of the
drug in California and the other 12 states. The Obama administration
has said it will target only traffickers who violate state as well as
federal laws, although it has not stopped U.S. attorneys from raiding
dispensaries that operate with local government approval.

Prop. 215 remains in effect despite federal enforcement efforts that
began as soon as it passed. In the counties' case, the court left
intact a state ruling last year that said California remains free to
decide whether to punish drug users under its own laws.

"The purpose of the (federal law) is to combat recreational drug use,
not to regulate a state's medical practices," the Fourth District
Court of Appeal in San Diego said in the July 31 decision.

The cases are San Diego County vs. San Diego NORML, 08-887, and San
Bernardino County vs. California, 08-897.
______________________________________________________


_______________________________________________
Theharderstuff mailing list
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
http://mail.psychedelic-library.org/mailman/listinfo/theharderstuff