Pubdate: Tue, 15 May 2001
Source: International Herald-Tribune (France)
Copyright: International Herald Tribune 2001
Contact:  http://www.iht.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/212
Author: Charles Lane, Washington Post Service

MARIJUANA AS MEDICINE REJECTED BY HIGH COURT

Ruling Could Shut California Distributors

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the federal government can 
shut down California marijuana cooperatives that distribute the drug to 
people who say they need it to combat the symptoms of AIDS, cancer, 
multiple sclerosis and other diseases. There is no "medical necessity" 
exception to the federal prohibition on the possession and distribution of 
marijuana, the court said in an 8-0 opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas.

The decision is a major setback to the medical marijuana movement. In 1996, 
California voters approved a referendum which gave rise to medical 
marijuana cooperatives in that state, and since then voters in eight other 
states have passed similar measures.

Medical marijuana advocates maintain that a decision against the Oakland, 
California, marijuana cooperatives would deter other states from taking 
similar action. Voters in Arizona, Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Nevada, Oregon 
and Washington also 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.

The case began in 1998 when the federal government sought an injunction 
against the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and five other marijuana 
distributors. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower-court 
ruling that had sided with the government. In doing so, the 9th Circuit 
created the "medical necessity" defense. However, the court held Monday 
that federal anti-drug laws trump state provisions and that they "leave no 
doubt" that medical necessity cannot be a defense to a charge of 
distribution of marijuana. "It is clear from the text of the act that 
Congress has made a determination that marijuana has no medical benefits 
worthy of an exception," Justice Thomas wrote. 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.

In a concurring opinion Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justices David 
Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, expressed concern that Justice Thomas's 
opinion may have been too sweeping, since there might be circumstances 
where an individual patient might need to use a prohibited drug to save his 
life. Justice Stevens wrote: "Most notably, whether the defense might be 
available to a seriously ill patient for whom there is no other means of 
avoiding starvation or extraordinary suffering is a difficult issue that is 
not presented here."

Court to Act on Search Seizures

The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide if the police may prosecute new 
crimes with evidence seized from homes of criminals who consented to 
blanket searches as a condition of probation, The Associated Press reported 
from Washington.

The Justice Department and California's attorney general both asked the 
justices to reconsider lower court rulings that threw out bombmaking 
supplies and other evidence seized during the search of a home of a man on 
probation for an unrelated drug crime. At issue is the rationale for 
searches of probationers' homes, and whether a probationer waives 
constitutional protections by giving advance consent to a search.

The case concerns a northern California man suspected of a series of 
vandalism attacks on Pacific Gas Electric transformers and other property. 
Mark James Knights had a long history with the utility, which had accused 
him of stealing electric service and running out on his bill. As a 
condition of probation for a drug conviction in 1998, Mr. Knights agreed to 
let police or probation officers search him and his property at will.

Mr. Knights contended that the police used his probationer status as a 
pretext to follow a hunch that he and a friend were behind an explosion and 
fire that damaged a PG&E transformer. Mr. Knights argued that the search of 
his apartment was intended only to investigate the fire, and not to check 
up on his rehabilitation for the drug conviction, he argued.The police 
watched the pair for two days after the fire, and then went into Mr. 
Knights's apartment without a warrant. There, they said they found 
bombmaking equipment and a brass padlock stamped "PG&E" and drug 
paraphernalia. Mr. Knights was arrested and charged with arson conspiracy 
and other crimes.

A federal judge ruled that evidence seized could not be used at trial, and 
the San Francisco-based 9th U.S.Circuit Court of Appeals agreed.

Mr. Knights did consent to searches when he agreed to terms of his 
probation, the appeals court found. "But we have made it clear that this 
consent must be seen as limited to probation searches, and must stop short 
of investigation searches," the court found.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth