Pubdate: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 Source: Register-Guard, The (OR) Copyright: 2001 The Register-Guard Contact: http://www.registerguard.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/362 Author: Associated Press Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/ocbc.htm (Oakland Cannabis Court Case) PATIENTS STILL SMOKING POT, DESPITE HIGH COURT SAN FRANCISCO - In the month since the U.S. Supreme Court said it's illegal to sell or possess marijuana for medical use, the decision appears to be having little effect in the eight states with medical marijuana laws. "I dispense a couple pounds a month," said Jim Green, operator of the Market Street Club, where business has thrived even after the May 14 ruling. "All of my clients have a legitimate and compelling need." Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Oregon and Washington allow the infirm to receive, possess, grow or smoke marijuana for medical purposes without fear of state prosecution. Those states have done little to change since the Supreme Court ruled that federal law prohibits people from dispensing marijuana to the ill. Some states have even moved to expand marijuana laws despite the ruling. No Enforcement By States State prosecutors say it's up to federal authorities, not them, to enforce the court's decision. "If the feds want to prosecute these people, they can," said Norm Vroman, the district attorney in Northern California's Mendocino County, where the sheriff issues medical marijuana licenses to residents with a doctor's recommendation, or to people who grow the marijuana for them. In Maine, "state prosecutors aren't too involved with enforcing the federal law," said state attorney general spokesman Chuck Dow. In response to the high court's decision, however, Maine lawmakers shelved an effort to supply marijuana to the ill. The Bush administration, which inherited the medical marijuana fight from President Clinton, has taken no public action to enforce the ruling and has been silent about its next move. "There's generally no comment about what the government will do in the future in any context," said Mark Quinlivan, the Justice Department's lead attorney in the Supreme Court case. Leslie Baker, head of the U.S. Attorney's Portland drug-enforcement unit, said last week that U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft's office has not given her guidance on how to respond to the ruling. Oregon allows "caregivers" to grow and dispense marijuana for patients who have a doctor's recommendation. Baker declined to say what federal authorities may do in the state. Meanwhile, Nevada lawmakers, abiding by a voter referendum, on June 4 adopted a medical marijuana measure that Gov. Kenny Guinn said he would sign. In California, the nation's first state to approve medical marijuana in 1996, the Senate approved legislation June 6 legalizing marijuana cooperatives for the sick. Three days earlier, Colorado expanded its medical marijuana law, complying with a state voter initiative that requires the state to license medical marijuana users. That was despite the opposition of Gov. Bill Owens and the state's attorney general, who urged federal authorities to prosecute anybody who sells, distributes or grows medical marijuana, even if they qualify for the state program. Speculation On Bush Strategy At the Market Street Club in California, the marijuana goes to patients such as Grant Magner, 49, of Novato, who says it reduces nausea and headaches resulting from AIDS and gives him enough of an appetite to eat. "It gives me a slight feeling of wellness. I can not smoke marijuana, and watch my body waste away," he said. The absence of federal action has led to speculation about the Bush administration's strategy. "I think they are biding their time and are being very careful for which organizations or persons they are going to target first after this U.S. Supreme Court decision because that is what is going to get all of the media attention," said Tim Lynch, the Cato Institute director of criminal justice studies. The Justice Department may take no action in hopes that the decision will scare medical marijuana providers out of business, said Mark Kleiman, a drug policy expert at the University of California at Los Angeles. The public silence also may reflect that the White House has more important issues to handle. "That is not what they're talking about in the Capitol and the corridors of the White House," said presidential analyst Stephen Hess of the Brookings Institution. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth