Pubdate: Thu, 14 Jun 2001
Source: Inquirer (PA)
Copyright: 2001 Philadelphia Newspapers Inc
Contact:  http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/home/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/340
Author: David Kravets, Associated Press 
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/ocbc.htm (Oakland Cannabis Court Case)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)

CANNABIS RULING HAS LITTLE INFLUENCE 

The Eight States With Medical-Marijuana Laws Say It's Been Business As
Usual Since The Decision.

SAN FRANCISCO - In the month since the U.S. Supreme Court said it was
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
federal law prohibits people from dispensing marijuana to the ill. Some
states have even moved to expand marijuana laws despite the ruling. 

State prosecutors say it is 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. 

Silence at the top 

In Maine, "state prosecutors aren't too involved with enforcing the
federal law," said Chuck Dow, a spokesman for the state attorney
general. 

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 T. Quinlivan, the Justice Department's
lead attorney in the Supreme Court case. 

Leslie Baker, head of the U.S. attorney's Portland, Ore.,
drug-enforcement unit, said last week that U.S. Attorney General John
Ashcroft's office had 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. 

Signing into law 

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 occurred despite the opposition of Gov. Bill Owens and the state's
attorney general, who urged federal authorities to prosecute people who
sell, distribute or grow medical marijuana, even if they qualify for the
state program. 

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," he said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Doc-Hawk