|
|
| Judge Rejects San Diego Challenge To MMJ Law |
|
Posted by CN Staff on November 16, 2006 at 12:17:08 PT By Allison Hoffman, Associated Press Writer Source: Associated Press 
San Diego, CA -- A state judge on Thursday rejected San Diego County's challenge of California's decade-old law permitting marijuana use for medical purposes.The ruling by Superior Court Judge William R. Nevitt, Jr., was tentative. The county's lawyers will have a chance to convince the judge to change his decision during oral arguments scheduled later Thursday. San Diego County sued the state of California and its health services director in February, saying a federal ban on marijuana use trumps state laws that permit usage of the drug with a physician's approval. Two other California counties, San Bernardino and Merced, joined San Diego as plaintiffs. All three counties have refused to comply with a state requirement that counties issue identification cards for medical marijuana users and maintain a registry of people who apply for the cards. In his ruling, Nevitt agreed with attorneys for the state, who argued that California is entitled to pass its own drug laws and legislate programs that allow marijuana use for medical purposes. Five California patients and caregivers, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans for Safe Access and other advocacy groups, joined the case on the side of the state. A sixth patient, Pamela Sakuda, who suffered from rectal cancer, died last Friday, said William Dolphin, a spokesman for ASA. Supporters of the law expressed relief. "They tried to make California's medical marijuana law null and void, and they lost," said Anjuli Verma, director of advocacy for the ACLU's Drug Law Reform Project. San Diego County Supervisor Bill Horn said he welcomed the clarity of the judge's ruling. "All we wanted was guidance from the court telling us where we're at so we don't break any rules and lose any funding," Horn said. He said the county had not considered whether to appeal if the judge affirms his tentative ruling. California's law allows people suffering AIDS, cancer, anorexia, chronic pain, arthritis and migraine and "any other illness for which marijuana provides relief" to grow or possess small amounts of marijuana with a doctor's recommendation. Since California voters passed the law 55 percent approval in 1996, 10 other states have adopted measures protecting qualified patients from prosecution. They are Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. Last week, voters in South Dakota rejected a ballot measure to permit marijuana use for medical purposes. In 2003, the California Legislature amended the 1996 bill to direct county health departments to issue ID cards to medical marijuana users. Counties, which did not receive money to fulfill the requirement, have been slow to issue ID cards, but San Diego was the first to refuse on legal grounds. Newshawk: Taylor121 CannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archives Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #7 posted by Taylor121 on November 16, 2006 at 13:11:47 PT |
| I didn't mean to double post FoM. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #6 posted by Taylor121 on November 16, 2006 at 13:05:04 PT |
| I'm under no illusions to think that marijuana is going to cure everyone from their particular illness. I'm saying that for some patients, marijuana can mean the difference between having an appetite and not having one, or living in pain or not living in pain. Sub populations of patients benefit from marijuana more than any other medication for particular conditions, yet we deny them relief in the vast majority of states and on the Federal level. This all needs to change. We need Congress to support a bill that will allow states to craft their own medical marijuana policies. The FDA cannot be depended on in this case. That body is corrupt. We need Congress to support a bill that would allow states to tax and regulate marijuana without interference. We need Congress to decriminalize marijuana on the Federal level to send a message to states that their criminal penalties are too high. We need states to pass their own medical marijuana bills to protect patients from arrest and prosecution, at least allowing them to possess small amounts of marijuana to help alleviate symptoms from their illness. This in turn provides more support for medical marijuana in Congress. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #5 posted by Taylor121 on November 16, 2006 at 13:05:03 PT |
| I'm under no illusions to think that marijuana is going to cure everyone from their particular illness. I'm saying that for some patients, marijuana can mean the difference between having an appetite and not having one, or living in pain or not living in pain. Sub populations of patients benefit from marijuana more than any other medication for particular conditions, yet we deny them relief in the vast majority of states and on the Federal level. This all needs to change. We need Congress to support a bill that will allow states to craft their own medical marijuana policies. The FDA cannot be depended on in this case. That body is corrupt. We need Congress to support a bill that would allow states to tax and regulate marijuana without interference. We need Congress to decriminalize marijuana on the Federal level to send a message to states that their criminal penalties are too high. We need states to pass their own medical marijuana bills to protect patients from arrest and prosecution, at least allowing them to possess small amounts of marijuana to help alleviate symptoms from their illness. This in turn provides more support for medical marijuana in Congress. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by FoM on November 16, 2006 at 13:03:49 PT |
| SAN DIEGO – A Superior Court judge rejected an argument Thursday from San Diego County that the state medical marijuana laws are illegal because they conflict with federal drug prohibitions. In a tentative ruling, Judge William R. Nevitt Jr., said California laws permitting chronically ill patients to grow and smoke marijuana are voluntary, and as such do not automatically conflict with federals laws banning pot. Snipped: Complete Article: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20061116-1247-bn16potlaw.html [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by Taylor121 on November 16, 2006 at 12:59:03 PT |
| Let's face it. There are many people suffering right now who could benefit from marijuana and they are living in fear not just from the Federal government, but in 39 states they live in fear of all 3 branches of government. Many of these people are dying, and they are dying a painful and terrible death because they fear that using marijuana could land them in jail. I am sorry for Pamela's death, and I'm sorry for every person that has to suffer so terribly out there. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by whig on November 16, 2006 at 12:47:57 PT |
| But there was a victim, Pamela Sakuda was one of the patients and she died on Friday of cancer. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by Taylor121 on November 16, 2006 at 12:45:32 PT |
| This victory means we haven't lost any ground and California has the legal right to protect patients if they choose to. This lawsuit could have struck a blow to medical marijuana patients by destroying their protection from arrest and prosecution by California Law Enforcement Officers. [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |