cannabisnews.com: When Judicial Fantasies Take a Toll 





When Judicial Fantasies Take a Toll 
Posted by CN Staff on June 12, 2005 at 08:46:10 PT
By Alan Bock, Sr. Editorial Writer 
Source: Orange County Register
California -- Despite its considerable impact on the rest of society, the judicial system often operates like a hermetically sealed environment, safely locked away from the dirt and grime we mere mortals experience. This can be especially true of the U.S. Supreme Court. When it takes a case, it decides only the issues before it in the briefs and decides them on the basis of the record created by lower courts. It places more reliance on words than professional writers do, so its insulation from reality can be hilarious or tragic.
Beyond the obvious irony - that people like Angel Raich face the likelihood of physical degeneration and even death if deprived of an herb people have used medicinally for millennia while judges in perhaps the most pampered environment in the country ponder whether to turn the feds loose on her - this insulation explains much about Justice John Paul Stevens's majority opinion in the medical marijuana case delivered Monday.The issue was whether the Constitution's grant of authority to Congress to "regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States" reaches those who grow their own cannabis or have friends supply it free within the boundaries of a single state. Justice Stevens decided the Congress had such authority and exercised it properly when in 1970 it passed the Controlled Substances Act and placed marijuana on Schedule I, reserved for drugs with a high propensity for abuse, no accepted medical uses and no way to be used safely under medical supervision.In the real world, of course, that's an absurdity. The 1999 Institute of Medicine report, only the most recent of a spate of government reports on marijuana, said this: "The accumulated data suggest a variety of indications, particularly for pain relief, antiemesis, and appetite stimulation. For patients such as those with AIDS or who are undergoing chemotherapy, and who suffer simultaneously from severe pain, nausea and appetite loss, cannabinoid drugs might offer broad-spectrum relief not found in any other single medication. The data are weaker for muscle spasticity but moderately promising." Based on science, then, keeping cannabis on Schedule I under the Controlled Substances Act is utterly unjustifiable. But the decision is made politically, not scientifically. In describing attempts to reschedule marijuana, Justice Stevens notes that in 1988 the chief administrative law judge of the Drug Enforcement Administration declared that keeping cannabis on Schedule I was "unreasonable, arbitrary, and capricious." But the politically appointed DEA administrator rejected the judge's opinion and Justice Stevens moves on laconically.Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/toll.htmSource: Orange County Register, The (CA)Author: Alan Bock, Sr. Editorial Writer Published: Sunday, June 12, 2005 Copyright: 2005 The Orange County RegisterContact: letters ocregister.comWebsite: http://www.ocregister.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Angel Raich v. Ashcroft Newshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/raich.htmClarity on Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20845.shtmlCongressional Leaders Should Act To Protecthttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20843.shtmlWill Congress Have The Guts To Tackle MMJ?http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20815.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #13 posted by jose melendez on June 13, 2005 at 13:10:23 PT
schmeff
hehehe, hehe . . . heh(grin)
'I need teepee . . . ' - The Great Cornholio
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by FoM on June 13, 2005 at 12:20:51 PT
schmeff 
I agree with what you said and yes Stick is so helpful to me. Our 32 wedding anniversary is in a couple of days and we are painting our house and I want a new bedroom window for our anniversary. Heck I'm probably one of the only women that would be happy with a vacuum cleaner for Christmas! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by schmeff on June 13, 2005 at 12:10:32 PT
The Victory Garden
I'm pretty sure the Wickard vs Filburn SC case (1942?) gave the Feds the AUTHORITY to regulate your tomatoes and cucumbers, Martha, which underlines the hypocrisy of the decision. The court has reasoned that while the actions of a single 'gardner' may not significantly affect commerce, the actions of many gardeners "in aggregate" could do so. (Surely the home produce grown in the gardens of America has a HUGE impact on commerce compared to the miniscule influence of a few individual in a very limited number of states who grow MMJ.) Further, in the Raich decision, Justice Stevens reasoned that the court need not prove that an activity had a substantial impact on commerce, merely that there was a "rational basis" to believe it!Basically I think what this ruling says is that every human activity either is commerce or affects commerce, and the Federal Govt. will decide which activitites it likes and which it doesn't so SHUDDUPABOUDITALREADY!!!!*****************************FoM, this Raich decision has kept you hoppin'. Have I mentioned lately what a sweetheart you are? Thank you for all the work you do here (I know nobody's paying you overtime, so I hope stick is putting extra marshmallows in your hot cocoa.)
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by FoM on June 13, 2005 at 11:23:37 PT
My Vegetable Garden
I have a garden with corn, tomatoes, cucumbers, green peppers and a few more vegetables. I want to have vegetables that are grown without chemicals and will be fresh. I won't need to buy them then either. Doesn't that effect interstate commerce since most vegetables come from Florida or Mexico that we buy here in my state?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by schmeff on June 13, 2005 at 11:18:41 PT
Jose
Planting corn is ok.Just don't harvest it or they'll have your ass.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by jose melendez on June 13, 2005 at 03:54:30 PT
cornball
If I plant corn, does that have a substantial effect on commerce in store bought and black market popcorn?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by mayan on June 13, 2005 at 03:48:50 PT
Science
Based on science, then, keeping cannabis on Schedule I under the Controlled Substances Act is utterly unjustifiable.It's too bad that U.S. government policy isn't based on science or facts.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by goneposthole on June 12, 2005 at 10:27:18 PT
'prolapsed' justice
prolapsedDescent, the falling of a structure. Displacement from the normal anatomical position.http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/prolapsedWhat medical cannabis can do:"The accumulated data suggest a variety of indications, particularly for pain relief, antiemesis, and appetite stimulation. For patients such as those with AIDS or who are undergoing chemotherapy, and who suffer simultaneously from severe pain, nausea and appetite loss, cannabinoid drugs might offer broad-spectrum relief not found in any other single medication. The data are weaker for muscle spasticity but moderately promising."I'll bet money, more money than William Bennett can burn in Las Vegas, that the hermetically sealed Supreme Court would benefit from a little bit of medical cannabis, too.It's ok to use medical cannabis. It's ok to use recreational cannabis. It's ok.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by FoM on June 12, 2005 at 09:30:54 PT
kaptinemo
OK then I'll take popcorn and a diet coke and lets see how about some potato chips. Hey come to think of it. All this stuff could kill us. Why don't they shift gears and make food illegal! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by kaptinemo on June 12, 2005 at 09:23:23 PT:
Sorry, FoM, I didn't mean to be rude
I should have asked if anybody wanted something before I got to the pantry. LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on June 12, 2005 at 09:20:41 PT:
Paging Mr. Mark Souder! Mr. Souder?
To all the media types who no doubt have been lurking, in some cases for years, greetings.I'm sure by now you've realized something: the medical cannabis prohibition worm is about to turn. Only this is a DUNE sized worm, and it's about to roll over and crush quite a few prominent prohibitionists who've made careers KNOWINGLY peddling misinformation and outright lies. It's time to question them as to the sources of that misinformation and those lies. In other words, as the time honored phrase goes, "Who what, when, where, how, and why." A good place to start is arch-prohibitionist Rep. Mark Souder. Given that Souder's Law has crippled if not outright ruined the futures of many middle-class kids by denying them school loans (while a murderer, rapist, child molestor or armed robber would have no trouble applying) I'm sure he would be happy to assist you.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by FoM on June 12, 2005 at 09:07:18 PT
kaptinemo
I'll take some popcorn too. I have a sinus infection so my head hurts and it slows me down. If I didn't need to keep looking for important news I'd kick back and wait to see what rabbit the antis try to pull out of a hat.This whole issue has become one of the most stupid issues ever happening and maybe just out of sheer embarassment they might let us win. If they don't give in and do the right thing we'll just keep being a big thorn in their side and they must know by now society doesn't appreciate it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by kaptinemo on June 12, 2005 at 09:00:12 PT:
The drumbeat gets louder, and louder
and louder. And the points we have been talking about for years(!) are making their way into the editorials. At last, as had been predicted here long ago, when the media 'discovered' the issue, they latched onto it with a vengeance. Nothing like raw, dripping red meat. Mmmmmmm! Naked, blind, stupid hypocrisy being dissolved in the face of scientific fact is always a good show. I'm gonna go get me some popcorn and wait for the antis to make the next move in the face of this incredibly overwhelming onslaught by the media...which is giving fact for lie again and again.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment