Medical pot case wafts to top court Oakland co-op hangs in the balance
By Brian Anderson Nov. 28, 2000 Granting the federal government's request that could decide the fate of an Oakland marijuana club, U.S. Supreme Court justices agreed Monday to review whether cannabis should be legalized for the critically ill. The decision was the latest victory for government lawyers, who have wrestled with marijuana advocates for nearly three years in federal courtrooms since the passage of California's Proposition 215. At issue for the high court will be whether there is a "medical necessity" for sick people to use marijuana, which is allowed under Prop. 215. Government lawyers have contended that the proposition, along with similar initiatives approved in eight other states, interferes with enforcement of the federal Controlled Substances Act. Justice Department spokeswoman Gretchen Michael declined to comment on the case or the court's decision. Attorneys and representatives for the cooperative viewed review of the case as largely favorable, but with obvious uncertainty. "We have faith that when the Supreme Court reviews or hears this case on its merits that it will consider the needs of the suffering patients," said co-op executive director Jeff Jones. "I can't give you a definitive opinion as to whether ... it will be good or bad because we do not know the details of what they are going to say, the dissenting opinions, or if there is a hope of raising other arguments." Cooperative lawyer Robert Raich, San Francisco attorney Annette Carnegie and Santa Clara University professor Gerald Uelmen will present arguments to the court next year. Raich expects a decision by June. The trio would try to convince the justices that federal law does not specifically prohibit a medical necessity defense for ill people, Carnegie said. "It's very important for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative to provide a public service by providing medical cannabis to people who have a clear and doctor-confirmed need," she said. Passed in 1996 with 54 percent of the statewide vote, Prop. 215 opened the doors for critically ill patients who had long heralded the benefits of using marijuana. The symptoms of diseases like cancer and AIDS that can make eating and sleeping nearly impossible could effectively be beaten back with the help of drug, they argued. However, the initiative, which passed with 71 percent of the vote in Alameda County and 63 percent in Contra Costa County, was viewed as vague and overly broad. Both sides anticipated litigation, which began in January 1996 when the federal government sued to shutter six Northern California pot clubs, contending the initiative unlawfully superseded federal law prohibiting marijuana use. Crayton Frost of San Ramon, who was diagnosed with cancer more than nine years ago, said marijuana has helped ease the pain of his terminal illness. "I've got, at best, five or six years," Frost said. "It comes down to whether I get those five or six years with some relative degree of comfort and something approaching normalcy or being constantly sick." Complicating the issue, however, is what government officials have characterized as scant medical evidence of any benefits associated with marijuana consumption, and the country's protracted war on drugs. Still, the issue has gained nationwide support in the four years since both California and Arizona passed the measures. Voters in Alaska, Hawaii, Maine, Oregon, Washington, Nevada and Colorado all have approved similar laws. The court's acceptance of the case brings to a head, at least for now, the question of legalizing marijuana in some cases. But it's too early to tell, Carnegie said, whether the court's ultimate decision will have nationwide implications for sick individuals.
The legal battles of the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative: November 1996: Nearly 5 million Californians voted to pass Proposition 215, allowing ill people with a doctor's permission to buy and use marijuana for medical reasons. January 1998: Federal government attorneys sued six Northern California pot clubs, including the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative, for distributing marijuana to sick patients under Prop. 215. May 1998: Federal Judge Charles Breyer ordered the clubs to stop distributing marijuana while he considered whether they should be closed. July 1998: The Oakland City Council voted to recognize the cooperative, giving the group the city's approval to distribute marijuana to approved users. A month later, city officials designated the cooperative a city agency. August 1998: Breyer dismissed the group's argument that it should be allowed to remain open because marijuana has medicinal value and that cooperative workers, as city agents, were immune from prosecution. October 1998: Breyer ordered the cooperative to shut down. The group complied, but was allowed to open its doors, without marijuana, a month later pending an appeal of the judge's decision. September 1999: A three-judge panel from the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco stopped short of overturning Breyer's decision, but pressured him to reconsider the case taking "medical necessity" of marijuana into account. July 2000: Breyer reversed his original decision after considering the cooperative's argument that critically ill people should be allowed to use marijuana for its medicinal value. Two weeks later, U.S. Justice Department attorneys asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the judge's order, preventing the club from selling marijuana. Simultaneously, government lawyers appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, as well as the panel's ruling. August 2000: Voting 7-1, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to halt Breyer's ruling allowing the club to distribute marijuana while it considered reviewing the case. Monday: Supreme Court justices granted review of the case. |