Pubdate: Tue, 15 May 2001
Source: Wisconsin State Journal (WI)
Copyright: 2001 Madison Newspapers, Inc.
Contact:  http://www.wisconsinstatejournal.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/506
Author: Brenda Ingersoll, Wisconsin State Journal
Note: The Associated Press contributed to this story

SUPREME COURT NIXES MEDICINAL MARIJUANA

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling against medical marijuana dealt an emotional 
blow to a seriously ill Wisconsin woman. It also irked some state 
legislators, who hope Wisconsin will join nine other states in endorsing 
limited use of the drug for those with a medical need.

"It was definitely a huge shock to hear that that many people on the court 
of the land that I love so much could just kick patients to the curb, so to 
speak," said Jacki Rickert of Mondovi, who suffers from Ehlers-Danlos 
syndrome and reflexive sympathetic dystrophy. The illnesses keep her in 
pain and unable to eat.

"I'm just so angry, I'm almost shaking. I feel I've had my wheelchair 
kicked out from under me," said Rickert, executive director of the group, 
"Is My Medicine Legal Yet?"

Rickert, who weighs about 90 pounds, was arrested last year when Mondovi 
police raided her home and confiscated marijuana. The Buffalo County 
district attorney later declined to press charges.

The nation's high court ruled Monday, 8-0, that there are no exceptions for 
sick patients to a federal law classifying marijuana as illegal. "It is 
clear from the text of the (controlled substances law) that Congress has 
made a determination that marijuana has no medical benefits worthy of an 
exception," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court.

Justice Stephen Breyer didn't participate because his brother, a federal 
district judge, presided over the case.

The decision reversed a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that 
medical necessity can be a legal defense in marijuana cases.

The federal government triggered the case in 1998, seeking an injunction 
against the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and five other marijuana 
distributors.

The high court did not strike down state laws allowing medical use of 
marijuana but left those distributing the drug for that purpose open to 
prosecution. The nine states that have endorsed limited use of marijuana 
are Arizona, Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon 
and Washington.

Given Monday's ruling, now might be the time for Congress to rewrite the 
U.S. Controlled Substances Act, said state Rep. Rick Skindrud, R- Mount Horeb.

"It's kind of disgusting the court ruled this way, but I think they had to, 
given the way the federal law is written," Skindrud said. "However, this 
might prove that the people in Washington should get off their butts and 
rewrite the laws."

Skindrud has been invited to be the lead sponsor of a Wisconsin medical 
marijuana bill drafted by two Democrats, Rep. Frank Boyle of Superior and 
Rep. Mark Pocan of Madison. The as-yet unintroduced bill is roughly modeled 
after Hawaii's legalized marijuana law, which gives doctors the authority 
to give patients registration certificates to use marijuana to ease pain 
caused by debilitating diseases such as cancer and AIDS.

"I think it's unfortunate the Supreme Court used faulty logic, following 
along with the drug war, rather than the logic we've been using, which is 
that this is a health care issue," Pocan said. "It can help people with 
wasting conditions or glaucoma. It's useful for some patients, who can't 
keep down a pill but can utilize a smoked drug."

Pocan added, "The question will be, at what level do states have state's 
rights in this area. It's not clear to me how this will affect those (nine) 
states. We'll have to see exactly what the Supreme Court decision means. It 
may mean we need a change at the federal level (of the law) to allow states 
that have those laws to retain them."

Justice John Paul Stevens, in a concurring opinion joined by two 
colleagues, said the court majority went too far. It should have left open 
the possibility that a person could raise a medical necessity defense, 
especially a patient "for whom there is no alternative means of avoiding 
starvation or extraordinary suffering," he wrote.

He said the ruling could lead to friction between the federal government 
and the states with medical marijuana laws.

Kevin Zeese, president of Common Sense for Drug Policy, a pro-medical 
marijuana group in Washington, D.C., said the court's decision will 
heighten conflict. "Caregivers for the seriously ill will continue to 
provide medical marijuana, thus the federal government will have to enforce 
the law before juries where over 70 percent of the population voted for 
medical marijuana," he said.

The court's ruling is consistent with the policy of the State Medical 
Society of Wisconsin, said president-elect Dr. Mark Andrew, a surgeon. "It 
doesn't seem at this point that research has proven that the benefits (of 
smoking medical marijuana) outweigh the risks of drug addiction or of 
cancer," Andrew said. "The decision just dealt with smoking. There are 
other forms of marijuana derivatives - pills and aerosols - so they can 
still be used."

Gina Dennik-Champion, president of the Wisconsin Nurses Association, called 
the ruling "a step back for patients who could really benefit from its use."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth