Monday May 14 12:11 PM ET
Court Rules Against Marijuana Use
By LARRY MARGASAK, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court handed medical marijuana
users a major defeat Monday, ruling that a federal law classifying the
drug as illegal has no exception for ill patients.
The 8-0 decision was a major disappointment to many sufferers of AIDS,
cancer, multiple sclerosis and other illnesses. They
have said the drug helped enormously in combatting the devastating
effects of their diseases.
Justice Stephen Breyer did not participate in the
marijuana decision because his brother, a federal judge, initially presided
over the case.
``In the case of the Controlled Substances Act, the statute reflects a
determination that marijuana has no medical benefits worthy of an
exception (outside the confines of a government-approved research
project),'' Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the
unanimous court.
Thomas noted the act states marijuana has ``no currently accepted
medical use.''
The federal government triggered the case in 1998, seeking an injunction
against the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and five other
marijuana distributors.
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, brother of the justice, sided with the
government. All the clubs except the Oakland group eventually closed
down, and the Oakland club turned to registering potential marijuana
recipients while it awaited a final ruling.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the
lower court, ruling that medical necessity is a legal defense. Charles
Breyer followed up by issuing strict guidelines for making that claim.
Voters in Arizona, Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Nevada, Oregon
and Washington also have approved ballot initiatives allowing the use of
medical marijuana. In Hawaii, the legislature passed a similar law and the
governor signed it last year.
The cooperative argued that a drug may not yet have achieved general
acceptance as a medical treatment, but may still have medical benefits to
a particular patient or class of patients.
Thomas said the argument cannot overcome the intent of Congress in
approving the statute.
``It is clear from the text of the act that Congress has made a
determination that marijuana has no medical benefits worthy of an
exception,'' Thomas wrote.
``Unwilling to view this omission as an accident, and unable in any event
to override a legislative determination manifest in a statute, we reject the
cooperative's argument.''
Advocates of medical marijuana say the drug can ease side effects from
chemotherapy, save nauseated AIDS patients from wasting away or even
allow multiple sclerosis sufferers to rise from a wheelchair and walk.
There is no definitive science that the drug works, or works better than
conventional, legal alternatives.
Several states are considering medical marijuana laws, and Congress may
revisit the issue this year. A measure to counteract laws like California's
died in the House last year.
Thomas was joined by Chief Justice William Rehnquist , Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote a concurring opinion, joined by Justices David Souter
and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The case is United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative,
00-151.
|