Supreme Court Clears Way for Medical Pot

aol news ^ | 10.15.03 | GINA HOLLAND,

[freepatriot32]

WASHINGTON (Oct. 14) - The Supreme Court cleared the way Tuesday for state laws allowing ill patients to smoke marijuana if a doctor recommends it.

Justices turned down the Bush administration's request to consider whether the federal government can punish doctors for recommending or perhaps just talking about the benefits of the drug to sick patients. An appeals court said the government cannot.

Nine states have laws legalizing marijuana for people with physician recommendations or prescriptions: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington. And 35 states have passed legislation recognizing marijuana's medicinal value.

But federal law bans the use of pot under any circumstances.

The case gave the court an opportunity to review its second medical marijuana case in two years. The last one involved cannabis clubs.

This one presented a more difficult issue, pitting free-speech rights of doctors against government power to keep physicians from encouraging illegal drug use. A ruling for the Bush administration would have made the state medical marijuana laws unusable.

Some California doctors and patients, in filings at the Supreme Court, compared doctor information on pot to physicians' advice on ''red wine to reduce the risk of heart disease, Vitamin C, acupuncture, or chicken soup.''

The administration argued that public heath - not the First Amendment free-speech rights of doctors or patients - was at stake.

''The provision of medical advice - whether it be that the patient take aspirin or Vitamin C, lose or gain weight, exercise or rest, smoke or refrain from smoking marijuana - is not pure speech. It is the conduct of the practice of medicine. As such, it is subject to reasonable regulation,'' Solicitor General Theodore Olson said in court papers.

In states with medical marijuana laws, doctors can give written or oral recommendations on marijuana to patients with cancer, HIV and other serious illnesses.

Even some supporters of the laws had expected the Supreme Court to step into the case. They said the court's refusal to intervene, although it does not address the merits of the case, could encourage other states to consider passing medical marijuana laws.

''It finally definitively puts to rest these federal threats against doctors and patients,'' said Graham Boyd, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney representing patients, doctors, and other groups in the case.

Robert Kampia, head of the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, said the court ''has eliminated any doubt that states have the right to protect medical marijuana patients under state law, and that physicians have the right to give patients honest advice and recommendations, whether the federal government approves or not.''

Keith Vines, a prosecutor in San Francisco who used marijuana to combat HIV-related illnesses, was among those who challenged a federal policy put in place during the Clinton administration. That policy required the revocation of federal prescription licenses of doctors who recommend marijuana.

''If the government is zipping them up, and we're not being told about options, that's negligence,'' Vines said.

Policy supporters contend that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration must be allowed to protect the public.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that physicians should be able to speak candidly with patients without fear of government sanctions, but they can be punished if they actually help patients obtain the drug.

The case is Walters v. Conant, 03-40.

[freepatriot32]

Justices turned down the Bush administration's request to consider whether the federal government can punish doctors for recommending or perhaps just talking about the benefits of the drug to sick patients.

for all you small goverment constitutionalists bush supporters out there just think about what bush was advocating here then go look in the mirror and repeat after me bush is a stalinist soviet and so am I for supporting him you will feel better and less like a hypocrite trust me

[Support Free Republic]

A Recall AND a Fundraiser? I'm toast.

Let's get this over with FAST. Please contribute!

[AmericaUnited]

bush is a stalinist soviet and so am I for supporting him

What a jerk!

[rhombus]

Well Bush is not alone here, what did Clinton do? -- or more importantly what didn't Clinton do. I don't remember similar acusations that Clinton was a Stalinist. Both parties are dirty in this war on drugs.

What's the deal here? Perhaps money? Lots of marijuana convictions means lots of easy jobs for lawyers and easy busts for cops who can show they are fighting the war on drugs and thus keep collecting easy federal money.

[goldstategop]

A war on medical marijuana patients is counterproductive and a waste of law enforcement resources. Do U.S Attorneys really want to prosecute terminally ill patients in federal court? It doesn't look good for them from a public relations standpoint even if they can make a prima facie case the use of marijuana remains illegal under federal law.

[Havoc]

Oh boy, 10 to 1 this is another anti WOD thread. Sometimes I really wish those losers would just Shut up. One wishes they could imagine for 5 seconds that no one really cares that they don't like anti drug laws. Then again, that would assume they could act like adults instead of like 4 year olds constantly nagging "I want a cookie, WaaaaaH".

[GraniteStateConservative]

I don't remember similar acusations that Clinton was a Stalinist

I accused him plenty-- before I even found FR. He is a Stalinist.

[eno_]

How about we sue all the DRug Warriors for a rebate on the Drug War?

You are free to have a stupid opinion, but we are free to pursue the wasters of our money and despoilers of our Constitution to their graves. Drug Warriors are no better than Stasi - to be spat on.

[The Shootist]

Policy supporters contend that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration must be allowed to protect the public.

The Gob'mint knows best.

[The Shootist]

Sometimes I really wish those losers would just Shut up

Another lover of Liberty, I see.

Show me the sentence in the US Constitution that grants the Federal Gob'mint the power to regulate the growth and use of a flower.

[bird4four4]

Show me the sentence in the US Constitution that grants the Federal Gob'mint the power to regulate the growth and use of a flower

Or... show me in the constitution where the govnment can regulate the private conversation of doctors and patients.

[huck von finn]

I've always found the irony in this to be how this administration loves big government and tramples states' rights. Republican?

[Constitution Day]

Good:
for all you small goverment constitutionalists bush supporters out there just think about what bush was advocating here then go look in the mirror and repeat after me bush is a stalinist soviet and so am I for supporting him you will feel better and less like a hypocrite trust me

Better:
small goverment *CONSTITUTIONALISTS* -- ((bush supporters)) ... think!! about what *BUSH* was *ADVOCATING* here --- mirror!
Bush -- Stalinist... *SOVIET*!!
So am I!!! Less *HYPOCRITE*!

[Wolfie]

It was a bi-partisan effort. Clinton started the case, Bush continued it. Nice to see the Dems and Reps can agree on something (namely, that the concept State's Rights should be killed off).

[kegler4]

So you're in favor of the government telling your doctor what medical advice he can or can't give? If so, maybe you belong over on DU.

[Petronski]

I don't know if this is going to be a surprise to anyone, but I favor medical marijuana, especially for chemo patients, AIDS patients, etc.

I just think it's too bad that for each one of these poor souls who benefit from medical marijuana even for purely palliative care in terminal cases, there will be four or five recreational drug users trying to leech off of the therepeutic system for a connection.

[Petronski]

As for the *POINT* of your *POST*, well, *THAT'S* not *LOST* on me *EITHER*.

[thoughtomator]

Shouldn't you be on a Rush Limbaugh thread explaining why he, unlike the average Joe caught in his position, shouldn't be facing a 15-year mandatory minimum sentence?

(Apologies in advance if you actually consistent and support putting Rush in jail for a decade and a half.)

[pageonetoo]

that depends on what the definition of "therapeutic" is!
For some folks, a glass of scotch whiskey, or Port wine, with a good stinky cigar works, some like to run marathons... others wish to light up a joint...
IMHO, If you do ONE (OR SIMILAR ACTS) and criticize those who smoke hemp, you are a hypocrite!
My favorite therapy is paddling a kayak, and generating lots of internal highs, but I also enjoy a good red wine, strong margaritas, and smoke an occasional bowl of hemp (or one of those stinky cigars)... and they are all THERAPEUTIC! Should I go to jail, or continue my successful life? I have lyme disease and can certainly have my doctor certify that it is good for me! And it ain't no business of yours, or anybody else that I don't affect!