HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Content-Type: text/html
Calif. Medical Marijuana Proponents Vow To Fight On
Pubdate: Mon, 14 May 2001
Source: Reuters (Wire)
Copyright: 2001 Reuters Limited
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/364
Author: Andrew Quinn
CALIF. MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROPONENTS VOW TO FIGHT ON
California medical marijuana proponents vowed on Monday to fight on
for what they call ``a life-saving drug'' after the U.S. Supreme Court
ruled that federal law prohibited its distribution to seriously ill
patients.
``The justices have shown no compassion,'' said Angel McClary, a
35-year-old Oakland, Calif. mother-of-two who uses marijuana to treat
a variety of ailments including a brain tumor, seizures and partial
paralysis.
``We are victims of the drug war, so why haven't we been taken off the
battlefield? We are entitled to live our lives without pain.''
McClary and other medical marijuana patients saw their hopes for
broader acceptance dashed Monday when the nation's top court, in a
unanimous decision, said marijuana cannot be distributed as a
``medical necessity'' because it has been classified as an illegal
drug under federal law.
The verdict marked a key victory for the federal government in its
battle over whether the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative, a
California cannabis club, may resume distributing marijuana to patients.
It also marked a watershed for the U.S. medical marijuana movement,
which has been mired in legal battles since California in 1996
approved the nation's first initiative legalizing medicinal use of the
drug.
Jeff Jones, director of the Oakland group, said few supporters had
expected an outright victory at the Supreme Court -- noting that the
conservative-dominated court had not appeared receptive to the medical
marijuana argument in earlier cases.
``We (knew) we were not going to be getting exactly what we wanted or
needed for seriously ill patients in California and abroad that we
represent,'' Jones said on Monday.
ONE DOOR CLOSES, ANOTHER OPENS
But while conceding that the Supreme Court ruling had closed one legal
door, lawyers for the Oakland cooperative said there were plenty of
other avenues open for pursuing the medical marijuana cause.
Specifically, they noted that the Supreme Court's decision had been
cast narrowly on the issue of ``medical necessity'', and had failed to
address other constitutional questions raised by the case including
whether states have the right to set their own laws on the issue.
``I can see how on the issue of medical necessity they might have come
down as they did, but I was surprised that the Supreme Court chose
completely to sidestep the other issues we raised in the case,'' said
Robert Raich, an Oakland attorney who worked on the case.
``The next step is to go back to the lower courts and address fully
these important constitutional questions.''
California's trailblazing 1996 state initiative allowed seriously ill
patients to use marijuana for pain relief as long as they have a
doctor's recommendation. Similar measures have since been adopted in a
number of other states.
But all have run afoul of federal laws which since 1970 have banned
marijuana as a ``Schedule 1'' drug -- dangerous, and with no possible
medicinal value.
Some analysts said the focus of the medical marijuana campaign would
now switch from the courts to medical laboratories, where researchers
are seeking to bolster evidence of cannabis' effectiveness in treating
symptoms of diseases ranging from cancer and AIDS to glaucoma and nausea.
``That's the next big battleground,'' said Dr. David Smith, medical
director at the California State Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs.
Smith said while there was ``substantial clinical evidence'' of the
medical benefits of marijuana, more double-blind research studies were
needed to persuade federal officials to re-categorize marijuana as a
``Schedule 2'' drug -- potentially addictive like morphine and
cocaine, but with potential medicinal value.
McClary, who calls cannabis ``a life-saver,'' said she could not
afford to wait for the federal government to come around on the issue
of medical marijuana.
``I will literally die without cannabis, and I don't feel that the
justices have the right to tell me what is best for my medical
condition,'' McClary said.
``This is about real lives, real people, the sick, disabled, and
dying. The funny thing is, the U.S. government is afraid of us. But we
are not going to back down. This is just the beginning.''
- ---
MAP posted-by: Derek