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