cannabisnews.com: Court Blocks D.C. Vote on Medical Use of Marijuana





Court Blocks D.C. Vote on Medical Use of Marijuana
Posted by CN Staff on September 20, 2002 at 07:42:18 PT
By Arthur Santana, Washington Post Staff Writer
Source: Washington Post 
Efforts to legalize marijuana for medical purposes in the District were blocked yesterday when a federal appeals court overturned, without explanation, an earlier court ruling that had cleared the way for the issue to be put before D.C. voters.The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reversed a ruling by the U.S. District Court, which in March declared unconstitutional a congressional amendment that prevented the city from spending money to put a medical marijuana initiative on the ballot.
The three appellate justices said in their order that they made the ruling yesterday because today is the city's deadline for printing ballots for the November election. Appeals judges David S. Tatel, Merrick B. Garland and Stephen F. Williams said their decision "will be more fully explained in an opinion to be filed at a later date."The decision ends a 14-month campaign by the District-based Marijuana Policy Project to again put the marijuana initiative before voters. It would protect from arrest people who, on the advice of their doctors, use marijuana to alleviate nausea, stimulate appetite or ease pain. Eight states have similar medical marijuana laws.This is the second time that the measure has been blocked in the District. In 1998, D.C. voters passed a similar initiative, 69 percent to 31 percent. But a congressional rider to the D.C. appropriations bill prevented the initiative from taking effect.Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.), who sponsored the rider, said in a statement yesterday that "despite a concerted public relations campaign to distort the real dangers of drugs, such as marijuana, the pro-drug lobby ran head-on today with the rule of law and a court, which recognized the right and responsibility of Congress to protect citizens from dangerous, mind-altering narcotics."The case, Barr said, "was about whether federal taxpayer dollars should be used to support the drug legalization effort in the nation's capital, and the court's decision today was a clear and emphatic 'No.' "The Marijuana Policy Project sponsors had hoped to get the measure on the November ballot."It is too bad that a three-judge panel was able to thwart the will of tens of thousands of D.C. voters," said Steve Fox, a spokesman for the group. "It is sadder still that this ruling will cause the suffering of seriously ill patients in the city to continue."In July 2001, the group filed a request with the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics to circulate petitions for the initiative. The board denied that request, citing the Barr amendment -- which prevented the District from spending money to put the measure on the ballot.The group then filed suit against the federal and District governments, calling the Barr amendment an abridgment of political speech. On March 28, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled in the group's favor.Additional legal wranglings, which weren't settled until June, left the group with only 25 days to gather the more than 17,000 signatures necessary to place the initiative on the November ballot.The group turned in more than 38,000 signatures, but the elections board said the medical marijuana advocates had come up short of the required signatures in one city ward. An extensive recount, however, showed that the board had failed to count hundreds of valid signatures.But by then the U.S. Department of Justice had appealed the federal court decision. An elections board spokesman, Bill O'Field, said this week that board members were waiting for the appeals court ruling before issuing its own decision on whether the initiative could be on the ballot in November.The court ruling "was very disappointing," Fox said. "But as Al Gore found out, sometimes you fight the good fight only to have your legs cut out from under you by the court."The initiative is not dead, Fox said. If the Barr amendment is repealed by Congress, he said, the initiative could appear on the ballot in the next citywide election.Source: Washington Post (DC)Author: Arthur Santana, Washington Post Staff WriterPublished: Friday, September 20, 2002; Page A04 Copyright: 2002 The Washington Post Company Contact: letterstoed washpost.comWebsite: http://www.washingtonpost.com Related Articles & Web Site:Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Medical Pot Awaits Decision http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14169.shtmlMedical Marijuana Initiative Accepted for Election http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14141.shtmlMedical Pot May Again Go To Voters http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13336.shtmlMarijuana Advocates Submit Signatures http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13333.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #4 posted by Tim Stone on September 20, 2002 at 18:46:39 PT
Alice in Wonderland?
     "The three appellate justices said in their order that they made the ruling yesterday because
      today is the city's deadline for printing ballots for the November election. Appeals judges
      David S. Tatel, Merrick B. Garland and Stephen F. Williams said their decision "will be
      more fully explained in an opinion to be filed at a later date." "Isn't there something in "Alice in Wonderland" about this? Something about, "verdict first and trial later."?The Honorables trouble themselves enough to evacuate a cryptic, summary judgement just before a deadline, while not bothering to trouble themselves to give clear arguments for doing so. Hint: By the time the supporters get their day in court, the issue will be mote until the next election cycle. Justice delayed, as it smells like in this case, is justice denied. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by mayan on September 20, 2002 at 15:51:33 PT
Enemies of Democracy...
David S. Tatel, Merrick B. Garland and Stephen F. WilliamsWe will remember you. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by monvor on September 20, 2002 at 14:15:02 PT
Odds are
that at least one of these three Appeals judges, David S. Tatel, Merrick B. Garland or Stephen F. Williams will die of cancer. I hope they remember what they have done then.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by DdC on September 20, 2002 at 08:11:28 PT
What well trained slaves CA & DC have!!!
American Big Business Started Anti-Pot Movement
Publishing Group Inc., A Canwest Company
Contact: canderson thenownewspaper.com
Website: http://www.thenownewspaper.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1462
           
The Editor,Re: "Mellow out, people: it's just a little marijuana," the Now, Sept. 7.I enjoyed reading "Mellow out people: It's just a little marijuana." Clearly, the author has a proper perspective. I find that most people opposing decriminalization are ignorant of the true effects of marijuana. They seem to have bought the drug war propaganda, hook, line and sinker.It's not that North Americans decided that it was "bad." In fact, corporate greed led to the wave of hysteria.The Hearst newspapers had just locked up forestry rights for paper production, an industry that would be threatened by hemp production. They were joined by the petrochemical industry that had just discovered plastics, but was also threatened by the versatility of hemp. Together, they spread the disinformation far and wide, with a copious helping of racism (it's the drug of the Mexicans, it makes black men rape white women, yadda yadda yadda).Prohibition is doomed, and informed people know it. Talk to your friends, and spread the word. The drug war causes more harm than drug use itself, and the most glaring example is the marijuana ban.Danny Terwey, Pacifica, Calif.Article from: ARON KAY-
http://www.pieman.org/
http://www.pieman.org/links.html
http://www.pieman.org/60smidis.htm
http://www.pieman.org/potlinks.html
http://www.pieman.org/rottenrudy.htm
http://www.pieman.org/pagec.html
http://www.pieman.org/jeffersonstarship
http://www.pieman.org/pissonbush.html
http://www.pieman.org/anti-bushlinks.html
http://www.pieman.org/fuckyouverymuchbush.htm
http://www.pieman.org/bushisachump.htm
http://www.pieman.org/lowlifebush.htm
http://www.pieman.org/assholebush.htm
http://www.pieman.org/bushposters.htm
http://www.pieman.org/naziscum.htmlThu, 19 Sep 2002 09:50:20 -0700
From: "D. Paul Stanford" stanford crrh.org
Subject: Gov. Davis Vetoes CA Hemp Bill!Strom-Martin disappointed by decisionSACRAMENTO - Over the weekend, Governor Gray Davis vetoed Assembly Bill 388 by Assemblymember Virginia Strom-Martin (D-Duncans Mills) which asked the University of California to conduct an economic feasibility study of alternative fibrous crops including industrial hemp, kenaf and flax."I'm very disappointed that the Governor did not support an exploration of the industrial hemp market in California," Strom-Martin said. "When the bill was sent to the Governor, it had the support of the agriculture and hemp industry and had no opposition. I don't understand why the bill was vetoed because it doesn't permit the planting of industrial hemp. The bill simply asked the UC Agricultural Extension Center to produce a study on the economic opportunities for hemp in California based on extrapolated data from other states and countries."Governor Davis returned to the bill to the Assembly without his signature because the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) applies the same strict controls to industrial hemp as it does to marijuana. The federal government fails to distinguish hemp from marijuana even though it contains trace amounts of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana. The small amount of THC in hemp is so minute that if one were to smoke industrial hemp, chances are that individual would die of lung failure before ever attaining any sort of high.The production of industrial hemp is currently legal in more than 25 countries including Canada, France, Germany, and China. In recent years, 17 other states have passed or are considering pro-hemp legislation based upon the premise that hemp cultivation is an agricultural issue and as such, is a states' rights issue. In 2000, the National Conference of State Legislatures wrote a letter to President Clinton urging the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Drug Enforcement Agency and Congress to revise policies regarding hemp and to allow states to establish regulatory programs.Vote Hemp, a national pro-hemp advocacy group, has been actively lobbying members of Congress and has been successful in securing support for this cause at the federal level. Senator Kent Conrad (D- North Dakota) has announced plans to introduce an amendment to Agricultural Appropriations Bill that would distinguish industrial hemp from marijuana and allow farmers to grow it under a system regulated by the U.S. Dept of Agriculture.California's agriculture industry is considered the most diversified in the world, producing over 350 crops and commodities. California is also a major contributor to the United States' balance of trade. Approximately 20% of all the state's agricultural products are shipped overseas. Given those facts, California is in a prime position to capitalize on the exploding international hemp market. In 1999, worldwide sales of hemp and hemp-based products totaled $250 million and since then, the market has grown substantially with corporate entities entering the market."Industrial hemp could be of immense benefit to the economy and the environment of the North Coast and rural California in general," Strom-Martin said.  "This bill requested the study of the potential California industrial hemp market so that when the federal prohibition on growing hemp is lifted and I believe it will be, our farmers and businesses will have the option of entering and profiting from that market. It is my hope that one day California, as a leader in agricultural innovation and food production, will also one day become a leader in the fight to legalize industrial hemp."CRRH is working to regulate and tax the sale of cannabis to adults like alcohol, allow doctors to recommend cannabis through pharmacies and restore the unregulated production of industrial hemp.*Campaign for the Restoration and Regulation of Hemp*
mail: CRRH ; P.O. Box 86741 ; Portland, OR 97286 USA
email: crrh crrh.org
phone: (503) 235-4606
fax: (503) 235-0120
web: http://www.crrh.org/Grave Duffis: Smoke a Joint, Lose Your License! 
http://pub3.ezboard.com/fendingcannabisprohibitionwhyitstimetolegalize.showMessage?topicID=90.topicCannabis Hemp: The Invisible Prohibition Revealed
http://www.sumeria.net/politics/invpro.htmlThe Elkhorn Manifesto
http://www.wealth4freedom.com/Elkhorn6.htmlYhe Emperor Wears NO Clothes
http://www.jackherer.com
D.E.A.th Deceptions
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment