cannabisnews.com: Dying Woman Loses Appeal on MJ as Medication Dying Woman Loses Appeal on MJ as Medication Posted by CN Staff on March 14, 2007 at 21:30:21 PT By Jesse McKinley Source: New York Times San Francisco -- Federal appellate judges here ruled Wednesday that a terminally ill woman using marijuana was not immune to federal prosecution simply because of her condition, and in a separate case a federal judge dismissed most of the charges against a prominent advocate for the medicinal use of the drug.The woman, Angel McClary Raich, says she uses marijuana on doctors’ recommendation to treat an inoperable brain tumor and a battery of other serious ailments. Ms. Raich, 41, asserts that the drug effectively keeps her alive, by stimulating appetite and relieving pain, in a way that prescription drugs do not. She wept when she heard the decision.“It’s not every day in this country that someone’s right to life is taken from them,” said Ms. Raich, appearing frail during a news conference in Oakland, where she lives. “Today you are looking at someone who really is walking dead.”In 2002, she and three other plaintiffs sued the government, seeking relief from federal laws outlawing marijuana. The case made its way to the Supreme Court, and in 2005, the court ruled against Ms. Raich, finding that the federal government had the authority to prohibit and prosecute the possession and use of marijuana for medical purposes. But the justices left elements of Ms. Raich’s case to a lower court to consider.On Wednesday, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that while they sympathized with Ms. Raich’s plight and had seen “uncontroverted evidence” that she needed marijuana to survive, she lacked the legal grounds to exempt herself from federal law. The court “recognizes the use of marijuana for medical purposes is gaining traction,” the decision read. “But that legal recognition has not yet reached the point where a conclusion can be drawn that the right to use medical marijuana is ‘fundamental.’ ”Eleven states have medical marijuana laws on the books, and the New Mexico Legislature is poised to approve a medical marijuana bill there, with the support of Gov. Bill Richardson. Medical-marijuana advocates estimate more than 100,000 Americans use the drug to treat medical conditions. California was the first state to legalize medical marijuana, in a 1996 ballot measure, Proposition 215. That measure set off a decade-long fight over a variety of legal issues surrounding marijuana, including state rights and “common law necessity” defenses like the one Ms. Raich was trying to use. Graham Boyd, director of the Drug Law Reform Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, which has an unrelated medical marijuana case pending before a federal judge in San Jose, said the decision in Ms. Raich’s case was a setback for the movement but not a crippling one.“Today is just one chapter in a story that is still not over,” Mr. Boyd said Robert Raich, Ms. Raich’s husband and lawyer, said she might appeal the case to the full Ninth Circuit. In the other ruling on Wednesday, a judge in United States District Court here handed a victory to the marijuana advocate, Ed Rosenthal. Mr. Rosenthal, 62, said federal prosecutors had unfairly made him a target with an array of drug, money-laundering and tax-evasion charges, many of which closely mirrored charges he was convicted of in 2003, when he was growing medical marijuana under California’s law at a dispensary in Oakland. That conviction was overturned last year by a federal appeals court, which found evidence of jury misconduct.Mr. Rosenthal had asked the judge, Charles R. Breyer, for a dismissal at a hearing this month, suggesting that the prosecution was vindictive. On Wednesday, Mr. Breyer obliged in part, dismissing the charges of money laundering and tax evasion, but leaving the marijuana charges in place. And while Mr. Breyer said that he believed the prosecutors had acted in good faith, that nonetheless “the presumption of vindictiveness has not been rebutted.”Joseph Elford, a lawyer for Mr. Rosenthal, said the case had been “a tremendous waste of taxpayer resources.” Carolyn Marshall contributed from Oakland, Calif.Source: New York Times (NY)Author: Jesse McKinleyPublished: March 15, 2007Copyright: 2007 The New York Times CompanyContact: letters nytimes.comWebsite: http://www.nytimes.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Ed Rosenthal's Pictures & Articles http://freedomtoexhale.com/trialpics.htmJudge Guts Pot Case Against Ganja Guruhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22750.shtmlCourt Says U.S. Can Ban Medical Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22748.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #28 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 16:10:10 PT BGreen I'm not going to talk about elsewhere here except to say that no email address is required, and you can make one up anyhow. [ Post Comment ] Comment #27 posted by BGreen on March 15, 2007 at 14:55:59 PT whig I've really been depressed over your leaving CNews.com. I don't post at places where I have to give my email address so I never posted on your blog, and there wasn't any way to let you know how I felt.I connect with you in a very special way and that's why I felt so empty not being able to talk to you and help you. I know you were taking the pain of the world very personally and that internal pain was driving your intensity. Mrs. Green has to moderate the same thing in me.Welcome back and please don't leave again.The Reverend Bud Green [ Post Comment ] Comment #26 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 14:05:00 PT whig That's nice to know. All I ask is that you don't tell people how to think or feel. We all believe somewhat differently. [ Post Comment ] Comment #25 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 13:37:45 PT FoM I was never angry at you. [ Post Comment ] Comment #24 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 12:03:45 PT whig I never doubted that you are a good guy. [ Post Comment ] Comment #23 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 11:56:53 PT FoM I understand I needed to be kicked out of the nest, and appreciate that. Sometimes I might need a little tap on the shoulder. [ Post Comment ] Comment #22 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 11:52:01 PT whig I don't mind at all. Input is always good. [ Post Comment ] Comment #21 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 11:48:15 PT police We the people have California have commanded you shall not touch Angel Raich for her use of cannabis, nor deprive her of one gram of her medicine. [ Post Comment ] Comment #20 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 11:41:16 PT separation of powers The injunction requested was probably impossible as a matter of law, because to command the police not to arrest someone is not a judicial power. It is a power that we the people have. [ Post Comment ] Comment #19 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 11:37:44 PT footnotes For those who are interested in reading the full opinion it is here:http://tinyurl.com/2vpx6oRead the footnotes to get the true opinion of the court. [ Post Comment ] Comment #18 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 11:32:08 PT FoM Do you mind my putting short legal comments here occasionally? I think it's a little dry for most of my readers elsewhere, though sometimes it's appropriate, but I think that the cannabis movement needs to be using a little open source legal conversation.If I can say also, I'm still reading and digesting the opinion so I don't think my comments should be taken as my final thoughts. The ninth circuit is not able to do more than a certain amount, is my point. I'm not upset at them for this decision. I know it feels bad to Angel Raich to "lose" but sometimes you really won and they just can't say it. [ Post Comment ] Comment #17 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 10:56:46 PT whig I don't understand law but I feel that our hands are tied until we can get the attention of the Federal Government and change the law. This will be our lot in life until then. It will keep being us and them. [ Post Comment ] Comment #16 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 10:50:16 PT summary The 9th circuit is on our side. They are constrained from going further than the present circumstances permit. [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 10:48:09 PT museman Angel Raich is unharmed by this decision. Yes, the potential exists that the government will persecute her, but the court said it would probably defend her from persecution. [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by whig on March 15, 2007 at 10:43:17 PT initial analysis Okay, I've been reading the decision, and thought I'd give a little interpretation to what's going on now.The 9th circuit turned away the petition for a preliminary injunction. They did not deny a medical necessity defense, they implicitly affirmed that Angel Raich has a qualified medical necessity and that they almost certainly would rule in her favor if necessity were raised against a criminal prosecution.What they declined to do was apply the idea of "prospective" necessity, which is probably correct as a matter of law.Translated to plain English, they did not give a formal injunction, but they gave an "informal" one, as to say that if the FedGov decided to prosecute Angel Raich she would be protected by the 9th circuit decision, and this has the effect then of discouraging the Feds from bringing charges against her or anyone similarly situated. [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 10:42:47 PT museman I know you are correct.Also speaking with a forked tongue comes to my mind too. [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by museman on March 15, 2007 at 10:40:27 PT FoM We might not have heard the term, but we have surely been hearing IT. [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 09:47:56 PT museman I haven't heard the term lip service in a long time and it's so true. [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by museman on March 15, 2007 at 09:41:47 PT the truth "The court “recognizes the use of marijuana for medical purposes is gaining traction,” the decision read. “But that legal recognition has not yet reached the point where a conclusion can be drawn that the right to use medical marijuana is ‘fundamental.’ ”In other words, The court recognizes the actual truth, but hasn't either the moral and intestinal fortitude to stand on it, or the apparent humanity to be in such a position to judge.The 'fundamental' rights of "Life. LIberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" apparently do not apply to our 'legal system' even though they constantly claim it (the system) is constitutionally based. Rights are the direct equivalent and quantitative measure of ones economic and social standing, AND ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE.The court, it's officers, and it's doglike enforcement agencies are in parallel behavior patterns with xtian religious doctrine and dogma, ....small minds, small finite repetitions of cyclical 'logic', and a great sense of false superiority.So if the feds say "Jump over a cliff!", the court will certainly uphold that decision...unless of course you got enough money to convince them otherwise. They certainly aren't worried about 'the people' because 'the court' knows where the real power is. Truth? What the hell does truth have to do with law? Lip service, just empty words echoing the truths spoken by the ones that they murdered, and imprisoned to stop speaking it. Hypocrits, vipers, war mongers, fear propagators, and the sorriest excuses for humanity.They say that scum rises to the top. America proves it. [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by Max Flowers on March 15, 2007 at 09:29:18 PT USA USA = Uncaring State of AmericaThat's what it's come to mean to me. United? In what way? I don't see it. It's more like DSA, divided states of America. [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 08:12:20 PT reverendjasongraves I was never exposed to guns and neither has anyone in my family. We just don't care about guns. I believe in talking to an enemy and if the enemy doesn't get what I am saying I just don't talk to them anymore. Life should be filled with hope, love and caring for a better tomorrow. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by reverendjasongraves on March 15, 2007 at 08:05:52 PT: FoM Ya, me neither FoM (NRA), but having a debate with mi wifey who's going to work in Miami (Where she may have to carry a gun), but doesnt' smoke Cannabis because she could lose her job.NRA against Cannabis use. I mean it's a no brainer. Give me pot. Go bury the gun... Peace [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 07:48:54 PT reverendjasongraves I understand what you are asking. I don't think I have ever seen anything on the NRA because it just doesn't interest me. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 07:47:16 PT NPR: Court Rules Against Ill Woman Court Rules Against Ill Woman in Medical Marijuana Case By Richard Gonzales Morning Edition, March 15, 2007 · A chronically ill woman in California has lost a legal round in her effort to use medical marijuana. A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that even though medical marijuana use is legal in California, the woman is not immune from prosecution under federal drug laws.http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8922980&ft=1&f=1003 [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by FoM on March 15, 2007 at 07:04:58 PT Toker00 Thank you. It has been so hard for me to understand the anger that I have seen towards peace loving people no matter who they are or why they feel strongly against war and injustice. Hate is such a bad thing. Hate, gossip, smearing another person are not good emotions and they aren't constructive at all. They can destroy as we have seen so clearly.What is wrong with a little peace, love and understanding? [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Toker00 on March 15, 2007 at 05:37:57 PT We, the Hippies. Borrowed from one of Ddc's posts at DWR:Hippy is an establishment label for a profound, invisible, underground, evolutionary process. For every visible hippy, barefoot, beflowered, beaded, there are a thousand invisible members of the turned-on underground. Persons whose lives are tuned in to their inner vision, who are dropping out of the TV comedy of American Life. Timothy Leary The Politics of Ecstasy"Hippies started the ecology movement. They combated racism. They liberated sexual stereotypes, encouraged change, individual pride, and self-confidence. They questioned robot materialism. In four years they managed to stop the Vietnam War. They got marijuana decriminalized in fourteen states during the Carter Administration."...we condemned them, our children, for seeking a different future. We hated them for their flowers, for their love, and for their unmistakeable rejection of every hideous, mistaken compromise that we had made throughout our hollow, money-bitten, frightened, adult lives. June JordanUntil the philosophy that holds one race superior, and another, inferior, is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned, everywhere is war. Haille Sellassie/Bob Marley This, FoM, is why they hate us. Their Hate makes no SINSE.Toke. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by reverendjasongraves on March 15, 2007 at 04:00:15 PT: Guns against Cannabis! ...another thing I dont get about the USA.It's more possible to own a gun (because of the local friendly NRA), than it is to smoke a spliff.What the nuts is up with that USA?Come on, peaceful law-abiding people, do not want a gun shoved in their face, especially if they don't own one.This woman, suffering under tremendous pain, yes she could probably own a gun if she wanted too. But an ounce of medicine... the USA government flips out.Hypocrisy USA, sheer unadulterated hypocrisy.Alberto Gonzales, are you ashamed of yourself yet? You should be!Jesus THC [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by reverendjasongraves on March 15, 2007 at 03:50:48 PT: ...an unloving $y$tem! This story just highlights the cruelty and inhuman treatment the USA doles out to any that want to LIVE happily.USA, are you ashamed of yourself yet?Taking out the "United", and highlighting the STATE of AMERICA.Jesus Heal the 7000 year old way - Cannabis for the healing of the nations [ Post Comment ] Post Comment