>Sender: >To: >X-Original-Message-ID: <138601befe3d$d7880b70$9acf69cf@pacbell.net> >From: "Peter McWilliams" >Subject: GREAT NEWS! >Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 16:15:15 -0700 >X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 >X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 > > >Court boosts California medical marijuana clubs > >By Andrew Quinn > >SAN FRANCISCO, Sept 13 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court gave fresh hope >on Monday to California's embattled medical marijuana clubs, saying a judge >should not have granted a Clinton administration request to shut them down >without regard for the sick people they served. > >The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered U.S. District Court Judge Charles >Breyer to review his October 1998 decision, which shut the Oakland Cannabis >Buyers Cooperative (OCBC) for violating federal anti-drug laws. > >In a 3-0 decision, the appeals court said Breyer had not given proper weight >to the possibility that marijuana was an indispensable treatment for people >served by the club -- including patients with AIDS and cancer -- and thus >potentially protected by the "medical necessity" defense. > >The appeals court order did not vacate Breyer's injunction against the >Oakland club, which was closed by federal marshals last October. But it did >suggest Breyer amend the injunction to allow medical marijuana clubs to >resume service for patients who can prove that cannabis is a medical >necessity for treating their illnesses. > >Medical necessity, as defined by earlier court cases, means that patients >have found every legal alternative to marijuana ineffective in treating >their conditions and that they would suffer imminent harm without access to >the drug. > >The decision opened a fresh chapter in California's medical marijuana saga, >which began in 1996 when state voters approved medical use of the drug and >then quickly moved to the courts as the federal government sought to block >implementation of the new state law. > >In its decision, the appeals court held that the Oakland club had >demonstrated "there is a class of people with serious medical conditions for >whom the use of cannabis is necessary in order to treat or alleviate those >conditions or their symptoms; who will suffer serious harm if they are >denied cannabis; and for whom there is no legal alternative." > >"The government, by contrast, has yet to identify any interest it may have >in blocking the distribution of cannabis to those with medical needs, >relying exclusively on its general interest in enforcing its statutes," the >court said. > >Jeff Jones, OCBC's director, said the appeals court decision represented the >first step back toward legitimacy for California's cannabis clubs, which >were chased underground by federal legal challenges. > >"I feel we are going to need to work out some details with the district >court before anything can happen," Jones said. > >"We are asking, more or less, the district court to allow our dispensary to >remain open to medical necessity cases ... somebody that is dying from >cancer, from HIV ... should be be protected by their constitutional right to >protect themselves." > >Robert Raich, a lawyer for the OCBC, said Monday's court decision could have >an impact far beyond California, noting that some six other states covered >by the 9th Circuit have followed California's lead and passed some form of >ballot measure aimed at legalizing medical marijuana use. > >"I think we will have an opportunity, for the first time, to provide medical >cannabis to a class of patients legally under federal law," Raich said. > > > > > >================================================================ > >This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . >To unsubscribe, E-mail to: