Pubdate: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 Source: Herald, The (WA) Copyright: 2001 The Daily Herald Co. Contact: P.O. Box 930, Everett, WA 98206-0930 Fax: (425) 339-3435 Website: http://www.heraldnet.com/ Author: Associated Press Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) SUPREME COURT HEARS MARIJUANA ARGUMENTS Feds Want Drug To Remain Illegal, But Proponents Says The Medical Benefits Are To Strong To Ignore. WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court took a first look at prescription pot Wednesday, hearing arguments on an issue that has pitted the federal government against cancer and AIDS patients, and others who sometimes regard marijuana as a wonder drug. As far as the federal government is concerned, marijuana is illegal and should remain so. Federal enforcement efforts have led to confrontations and arrests in California and other Western states. The issue for an openly skeptical Supreme Court is whether a patient's need for marijuana trumps a 1970 federal law that classifies it as an illegal substance with no known medical value. Voters in Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Maine and Nevada have approved ballot initiatives allowing the use of medical marijuana. In Hawaii, the Legislature passed a similar law and the governor signed it last year. President Bush supports federal prohibitions on marijuana, but also respects states' rights to pass voter initiatives, spokesman Ari Pleischer said. "The president is opposed to the legalization of marijuana, including for medicinal purposes," he said Wednesday. Lawyers for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative in California want to make what they call a "medical necessity" defense in federal court, and argue that federal judges and juries have the power to decide if the drug is warranted. Several justices seemed to think that approach was a stretch at best. "I thought the medical necessity defense was for an individual," Justice Antonin Scalia said. "You would extend it to the person prescribing the drug, and even to opening a business" to dispense it. "That's a vast expansion beyond any necessity defense I've ever heard of," Scalia said. The court's ruling is expected by the end of June. A ruling for the Oakland club would allow special marijuana organizations to resume distributing the drug in California, which passed one of the nation's first medical marijuana laws in 1996. A ruling for the federal government would not negate the California voter initiative, but effectively would prevent clubs such as Oakland's from distributing the drug openly. Advocates of medical marijuana say the drug can ease side effects from chemotherapy, save nauseated AIDS patients from wasting away or even allow multiple sclerosis sufferers to rise from a wheelchair and walk. Representing the government, Barbara Underwood said the 1970 Controlled Substances Act leaves no room for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and others to act as "marijuana pharmacies." Several states are considering medical marijuana laws, and Congress may revisit the issue this year. A measure to counteract laws such as California 's died in the House last year. - --- MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager