Pubdate: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 Source: Arizona Daily Star (AZ) Copyright: 2000 Pulitzer Publishing Co. Contact: http://www.azstarnet.com/ Author: Jim Herron Zamora, San Francisco Examiner Note: News Talk appears on Page A2 Monday through Friday. Responses appear Tuesday through Saturday on the Opinion page. ILLEGAL DRUG OR MEDICINE? Despite the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling barring distribution of medicinal marijuana in California to people whose doctors prescribe it, local cannabis supporters are optimistic they will win the fight in the long run. Supporters, including San Francisco District Attorney Terence Hallinan, said recently that they are not quite willing to give up the court battle. But they concede that the quest to legalize the medical use of marijuana will most likely be resolved in Congress and the White House rather than in court. "The federal classification of marijuana as a drug with no medical benefit is a case where the federal law is wrong," Hallinan said. The 7-1 ruling, in response to an emergency request from the Clinton administration, postponed the effect of a federal court ruling that would have allowed the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative to distribute the drug for medicinal use. But although it is the first time the Supreme Court has weighed in on the issue, it does not mean the justices have made their final decision on medical marijuana. The brief order from the high court is a stay that suspends a lower court ruling - one favorable to cannabis advocates - until the issue could be appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and then heard by the Supreme Court. No dates have been set for the next round of appeals. Hallinan and other supporters hope a new president and new Congress may be willing to revisit federal laws banning medical marijuana early next year. The court order was the latest development in a four-year conflict between federal narcotics laws and Proposition 215, the 1996 voter initiative that legalized medical marijuana in California. A similar measure was approved by Arizona voters in 1996. It allows physicians to prescribe marijuana and otherwise illegal drugs to seriously ill and terminal patients. But doctors so far have been reluctant to test the federal ban. "The federal government is way out of touch with medical reality and public opinion on this issue," said Hallinan. "This is a step backward, but ultimately I think it will force the U.S. government to come to grips with this issue. Talk About The News: * Do you believe that marijuana should be available to seriously ill and terminal patients? * Should the federal government reconsider its stand that marijuana is a drug with no medical benefit? * What should Arizona do about putting into place the results of a 1996 ballot question that says doctors should be able to prescribe marijuana? Share your thoughts on today's News Talk. Because of space limits, a sample of responses will be selected to offer a range of opinions. E-mails should contain two to four sentences and may be sent to: Phone messages of no more than one minute may be called in to 434-4094. Be sure to spell your name and leave a phone number for verification purposes. All comments should reach us by noon today. - --- MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart