cannabisnews.com: Medical-Pot Backers Get Cool Reception





Medical-Pot Backers Get Cool Reception
Posted by FoM on April 20, 2002 at 18:18:17 PT
By Claire Cooper -- Bee Legal Affairs Writer
Source: Sacramento Bee
State and private lawyers trying to salvage California's medical marijuana law got no encouragement from a federal judge during a court hearing Friday. The session was the first on implementing a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court decision against Proposition 215, which sanctioned pot distribution and use for some Californians with cancer, AIDS and other serious ailments.U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer said he will rule later. But he showed little interest when a lawyer representing the state argued that the 1996 initiative can be reconciled with a federal ban on pot for any purpose.
Taylor S. Carey, a special assistant California attorney general, said constitutional states'-rights principles should protect "wholly intrastate cultivation and distribution of cannabis" from federal interference under the 1970 Controlled Substances Act.Carey joined lawyers representing marijuana cooperatives in Oakland, San Francisco, Fairfax and Ukiah, who were on the losing side of the Supreme Court case.The high court's 8-0 decision ruled out the defense of "medical necessity" for people charged with violating the federal statute. But it did not finally resolve the underlying dispute -- the federal government's long-standing fight to get a permanent injunction shutting down the pot cooperatives.In renewing the government's bid for an injunction, Mark Quinlivan, a lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice, said violations were likely without one.Breyer said the only open issue was whether the defendants could assure him that, without being enjoined, they would not "directly or indirectly" distribute marijuana for any reason."All I can tell you is that the clients will obey the law," said Annette Carnegie, the lawyer for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative."I'm talking about the federal law," Breyer said. "I'm not talking about the state law."Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/oc.htmOCBChttp://www.rxcbc.org/OCBC Vs US Government Newshttp://www.freedomtoexhale.com/mj.htmOakland Pot Cooperative Heads Back To Court http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12583.shtmlJudge Appears Unswayed by Marijuana Argumentshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12582.shtmlCalifornia Cannabis Clubs Organize to Fight Feds http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12569.shtml 
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #3 posted by FoM on April 21, 2002 at 07:05:11 PT
Just a Note: This isn't the complete article.
You must click on this link I put in the article to read the whole one. I am trying to figure out how to legally get around snipped articles. It has a link at the bottom back to here. I hope I haven't confused anyone. I thought about how to do this for a long time last night and hope this explains better what I'm trying to do.Thanks Everyone!Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/oc.htm
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Patrick on April 21, 2002 at 04:50:53 PT
Federal law vs State law
According to a recent federal judge's decision "The Justice Department" has no authority to overturn Oregon's physician assisted suicide law.Explain to me then, how they have the authority to overturn California's medical marijuana initiative?Also, say I lived in Oregon and smoking cannabis was the only substance that prevented me from having thoughts of suicide, what would they rule on that one? Get government's law enforcement arm out of our bodies now!I celebrated 4/20 with some kind buds and watched the movie The Matrix for the first time finally! Prohibition is exactly like the Matrix. Hiding truth from humanity. And the DEA is just like those "Agents" in the movie. What a freak that movie put on the rest of my euphoric day. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by SoberStoner on April 20, 2002 at 23:48:19 PT:
???
"I'm talking about the federal law," Breyer said. "I'm not talking about the state law."
Ok, so your state law doesnt matter because the feds say so? Thats basically whats he is saying...I know he hasnt issued a judgement yet, but considering his previous rulings and this comment, it looks like this one is headed to the supreme court as well. Let's face it...the system does not work..if we are going to change things, we are going to have to go outside the system..Like Hope said a few days ago, the older people always told us if we didnt like the laws, change them, and we have...and this is the response we get? Your puny laws dont matter because big brother says so..welcome to the new Demokracy.You know..if everyone who smoked planted their seeds instead of throwing them out, there's no way the government could control all the new plants..unless they want to start spraying roundup on U$ citizens like they do in Columbia, and at this point, I really dont think thats too far of a stretch for them to do.SS
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment