USA: Doctor or no, cannabis is out
The court in a 6-3 ruling did not take a position on the wisdom of California’s law that allows patients to use marijuana under a doctor’s recommendation, only that Congress has the power to trump that state law. Justice John Paul Stevens pointed out that it is for the "democratic process," not the courts, to resolve the legality of medical cannabis. He’s right: Congress should give states the authority to legalize cannabis for personal, medically approved use.
While it is mildly entertaining to witness octogenarian jurists on the (ahem) high court holding forth on the subject of hemp, this case was not about chemically induced euphoria. It was a vehicle to revisit a longtime debate: How far Congress can stretch its authority granted by the Constitution to regulate commerce among the states. When the unlikely triumvirate of conservative Justices Sandra Day O’Connor, Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice William Rehnquist defended California’s medical-marijuana law, they were in fact defending states’ rights from being usurped by Congress.
This debate is as old as the Constitution. It makes obvious sense to operate as a single national marketplace rather than 50 separate competing countries. The court majority makes a persuasive case that Congress’ exercise of Commerce-clause powers in this case is consistent with the court’s precedents. As for medical cannabis, someone other than Cheech and Chong will have to do the movie version of this case.
Business As Usual At Cannabis Clubs Despite Court Ruling
A Supreme Court ruling didn’t seem to deter a steady stream of customers from filing into a San Francisco Cannabis Club, according to the Washington Post, where anybody with a city-issued cannabis card can purchase brownies made with weed, or reportedly spend up to 20 minutes smoking premium reefer that will set you back $320 an ounce.
Yep, it appeared to be business as usual at many of the ’medical marijuana’ clubs in California. The Love Shack is one of dozens in San Francisco, according to published reports, that continued to serve customers despite the Supreme Court ruling that came down on Monday: people who smoke pot for medicinal purposes can and apparently will be prosecuted for violating federal drug laws.
Now, anyone who lights up a joint for medicinal purposes isn’t likely to be pursued by federal authorities, reported the AP, but needless to say the ruling does have some folks extremely concerned.
The justices found marijuana users can be prosecuted under a federal ban on the drug — even if used with a doctor’s blessing.
Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, said that Congress could change the law to allow medical use of marijuana.
In a dissent, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said that states should be allowed to set their own rules.
Under the Constitution, Congress may pass laws regulating a state’s economic activity as long as it can be labeled "interstate commerce" by crossing the state border.
The California marijuana in this case was homegrown and distributed to patients free of charge, and didn’t cross state lines.
While the justices expressed sympathy for Diane Monson and Angel Raich, who brought the case, the majority agreed that federal agents may arrest sick people who use the drug as well as those who grow the cannabis for them.
