Skip to main content

Medical Marijuana

December Cannabinoid Chronicles Newsletter Available Online

[Courtesy of Vancouver Island Compassion Society] The December issue of Cannabinoid Chronicles is online and available for viewing at: http://www.thevics.com/publications/vol5/VICSNews5_4.pdf Some stories: Constitutional Challenge Hits Bump Loosen Medical Cannabis Rules, Lawyers Argue Ontario Court Ruling Challenges Cannabis Prohibition Comments on Swiss Study (Cannabis and Adolescents) Drug Disposal 101 IACM Bulletin Enjoy, Robin at the VICS

Press Release: Day After Lawsuit Filed Against DEA, U.S. Congress Decides To Question Agency

[Courtesy of Union of Medical Marijuana Providers] One day after the Union of Medical Marijuana Providers filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court, Central District of California (case CV07-07951) challenging the DEA's tactic of sending threatening letters to hundreds of owners of Commercial Property who rent to Marijuana Providers, the House Judiciary Committee will question the agency about the practice. Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) December 10, 2007 -- The DEA, who has declared war on California's Medical Marijuana Law, began the draconian tactic of sending letters to Commercial Property owners who rent to legally authorized Medical Marijuana Providers this summer. In the letter, the DEA informed the owners of these properties that if they continue to rent to dispensaries they may face federal prosecution which could result in a possible prison sentence for up to 20 years as well as seizure of their property. The Union of Medical Marijuana Providers which was formed in part, as a direct result of the DEA's letter writing campaign, as well as L.A.'s Arts District Healing Center, have been aggressively litigating this issue in both state and federal court for the past several months (state case in Los Angeles Superior Court, case 07K21837). Just yesterday, December 6, 2007 they filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court, Central District, which requested that the Court issue an injunction stopping the DEA from continuing to send these letters. "When I saw Representative Conyers statement regarding the DEA's abuse of their power in order to thwart California's law, I knew that our legal efforts were beginning to pay off," said James Shaw, Executive Director of the Union. "The DEA has alienated too many citizens with their heavy-handed 'above the law tactics' for too long. We welcome all the support we can find in our efforts to ensure our rights are protected." Steven Schectman, the Union's chief counsel said he has contacted Representative Conyers office today in order to provide his staff copies of the litigation that was filed in both state and Federal Court. "I am hopeful we can support the Judiciary Committee in any way possible. As a result of our research and investigation of the DEA's threatening letter campaign, in preparation of our litigation, we have become the most knowledgeable group, outside the DEA, who best understands the scope and import of their tactics. We are here to help." The Union of Medical Marijuana Providers (UMMP) is a legal advocacy group based in Los Angeles, California. The Union's membership comprises legally compliant cooperatives, collectives, and caregiver groups throughout the State of California. UMMP was founded in 2007 to address the shared concerns of legally compliant medical marijuana patient groups.

Press Release: Medical Marijuana Law Needs Fixing

[Courtesy of Iowans for Medical Marijuana]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 8, 2007

CONTACT: Carl Olsen Iowans for Medical Marijuana (515) 288-5798

Dear Governor Richardson,

In your press release dated August 17, 2007, you vowed to fight the federal intimidation efforts, and use every state resource to fully implement the state law making medical marijuana legal for the most seriously ill patients. We think it is inconsistent that New Mexico state law continues to classify marijuana as a schedule I controlled substance, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31-5(A)(2) (2007), with no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

Although federal law currently classifies marijuana as a schedule I controlled substance with no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, the actual determination of whether marijuana has accepted medical use is specifically reserved to the states under the federal Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA) (21 U.S.C. §§ 801 et seq.). This is clear from the recent decision by the United States Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006).

Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243, 250 (2006) (referring to 21 U.S.C. § 903):

"No provision of this subchapter shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of the Congress to occupy the field in which that provision operates . . . to the exclusion of any State law on the same subject matter which would otherwise be within the authority of the State, unless there is a positive conflict between that provision . . . and that State law so that the two cannot consistently stand together." § 903.

Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243, 269-270 (2006):

In deciding whether the CSA can be read as prohibiting physician-assisted suicide, we look to the statute's text and design. The statute and our case law amply support the conclusion that Congress regulates medical practice insofar as it bars doctors from using their prescription-writing powers as a means to engage in illicit drug dealing and trafficking as conventionally understood. Beyond this, however, the statute manifests no intent to regulate the practice of medicine generally. The silence is understandable given the structure and limitations of federalism, which allow the States "great latitude under their police powers to legislate as to the protection of the lives, limbs, health, comfort, and quiet of all persons." (Citations omitted).

United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, 532 U.S. 483, 492 (2001):

The Attorney General can include a drug in schedule I only if the drug "has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," "has a high potential for abuse," and has "a lack of accepted safety for use . . . under medical supervision." §§ 812(b)(1)(A)-(C). Under the statute, the Attorney General could not put marijuana into schedule I if marijuana had any accepted medical use.

Although New Mexico Senate Bill 523, effective July 1, 2007, now includes marijuana in both schedule I and schedule II of New Mexico's state version of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, the question that we have for New Mexico is why New Mexico's version of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act continues to list marijuana as a schedule I controlled substance, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31-6 (2007), which has "no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States", N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31-5 (2007). Under both New Mexico and federal law, the criteria for placing a substance in schedule I is "no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States".

We fear that this inconsistency is going to cause problems for patients in New Mexico who are attempting to comply with the Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31C-1 (2007), as amended by New Mexico Senate Bill 523, effective July 1, 2007.

Carl Olsen, George McMahon, Barbara Douglass

Directors of Iowans for Medical Marijuana (http://www.iowamedicalmarijuana.org/)

Members of the Board for Patients Out of Time (http://www.medicalcannabis.com/)

Petitioners in The Federal Marijuana Rescheduling Petition (http://www.drugscience.org/)

ASA: Judiciary Committee Chairman Conyers Opposes DEA Tactics

[Courtesy of Americans for Safe Access] Judiciary Committee Chairman Conyers Opposes DEA Tactics Pledges to Question DEA During Oversight Hearings Dear Friend, As many of you know, DEA recently launched an entirely new tactic in their continued efforts to undermine the effective implementation of medical marijuana laws in California. They have sent hundreds of letters threatening prosecution and asset forfeiture against property owners who rent to legal medical cannabis collectives – a strategy that could have ramifications for medical marijuana programs nationwide. ASA Government Affairs Director Caren Woodson has been talking to House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers’ (D-MI) staff and other Democratic leadership to encourage them to oppose these tactics and stand up for patients in states where medical cannabis is legal. Today, Chairman Conyers issued at a statement saying: “I am deeply concerned about recent reports that the Drug Enforcement Administration is threatening private landlords with asset forfeiture and possible imprisonment if they refuse to evict organizations legally dispensing medical marijuana to suffering patients. The Committee has already questioned the DEA about its efforts to undermine California state law on this subject, and we intend to sharply question this specific tactic as part of our oversight efforts.” In conjunction with more than fifty raids at medical cannabis collectives in California this year, the asset forfeiture threats against property owners represent the most serious challenge to patients’ access in the United States today. Conyers’ support signals the first significant Congressional opposition to the DEA’s attempted end run around voters and state lawmakers. ASA welcomes this statement and we look forward to working with Chairman Conyers to finally end DEA interference in state medical marijuana laws. Congratulations to the hundreds of ASA members who helped put grassroots strength behind our work! Keep your eyes open for an Action Alert next week to put even more support behind Conyers’ initiative, and visit www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org/Donate to make a contribution to support our effective advocacy today. Thank you, Steph Sherer Executive Director Americans for Safe Access -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Americans for Safe Access is the nation's largest organization of patients, medical professionals, scientists and concerned citizens promoting safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutic use and research.

Americans for Safe Access: December 2007 Activist Newsletter

Victory for Patients' Right to Return of Marijuana

Appeals Court Says Police Must Give Back Property Despite Federal Law

ASA's legal team won another huge victory when a California appeals court said police must return marijuana seized from qualified patients. The November 28th ruling in favor of Felix Kha, a medical marijuana patient from Garden Grove, means police must return the eight grams of medical marijuana they took from him in a June 2005 traffic stop.

The rally at the governor's office ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford

Attorneys for the police claimed that they should not have to since federal law prohibits possession of marijuana, even for medical use. But a three-justice panel from the state's Fourth Appellate District unanimously rejected that claim, saying "it is not the job of the local police to enforce the federal drug laws."

"California law enforcement is now on notice that they cannot seize and keep the medicine of seriously ill patients," said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who represented Kha. "The court has ensured that patients have a way to get their cannabis back."

The ruling was more than two years in the making. After a marijuana possession charge against Kha was dismissed in August 2005 because he had a valid doctor's recommendation, an Orange County Superior Court judge ordered the return of his medicine. But the City of Garden Grove refused and appealed the order.

The issue was ripe for review, as state courts have split on the issue previously. The question found the California Attorney General and the California Police Chiefs Association on opposite sides. Both filed "friend of the court" briefs in the case on opposite sides of the issue, with the state Attorney General in support of Kha.

In analyzing reports from nearly 800 patient encounters with local or state police in 53 of California's 58 counties, ASA found that more than 90% resulted in medicine seizure by police, regardless of probable cause.

The court's ruling also affirms a 2005 policy change by the California Highway Patrol (CHP). CHP abandoned its policy of mandatory seizure of medical marijuana after a court challenge from ASA.

"Both today's court ruling and the new CHP policy go a long way toward restoring patients' rights in California," said Elford.

For further information, refer to:
Decision by the California Fourth Appellate District Court
Background on Felix Kha's return of property case

ASA Victory: The End of Medical Cannabis Seizures in California

[Courtesy of Americans for Safe Access] 

Court rules that police must enforce state, not federal law

Dear ASA Supporter,

Yesterday, a California Appeals Court ruled that “it is not the job of the local police to enforce the federal drug laws.” Ending years of dispute, the court ruled in favor of Felix Kha, a medical marijuana patient seeking the return of his medical marijuana that was seized by police. “It should now be abundantly clear to law enforcement across the state that it is not acceptable to seize the medicine of seriously ill patients,” said Joe Elford, who represented Kha as Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access (ASA).

Yesterday’s victory marks the culmination of two years of litigation led by ASA. This important decision would not have been possible without the generous contributions of ASA supporters.

To help ASA continue the fight for patients’ rights, donate today!

"The ruling can help someone else that is in really bad need of access to their medicine." Felix Kha said after hearing of the victory. Felix is not alone: Americans for Safe Access (ASA) has compiled reports from nearly eight hundred patient encounters with local or state police during a period of more than two years. These reports show a glaring trend: more than 90% of all encounters result in medicine seizure by police regardless of any probable cause. According to reports received by ASA, rampant seizure of medical marijuana from qualified patients and primary caregivers has taken place in 53 of California's 58 counties.

As of yesterday, California law enforcement will be “fulfilling their more traditional duty to administer the laws of this state,” according to the court’s ruling. This precedent-setting victory was achieved through years of meticulous planning by ASA’s Legal Affairs Department, none of which would have been possible without our members and supporters, whose donations fund the $200,000 annual budget of our Legal Affairs Department.

Donate today! Support ASA’s Legal Affairs Department and help set precedents to ensure patients’ rights!

With your help we can fund several other important legal challenges to achieve the lasting victory we seek: Truly safe and legal access to medical cannabis for every patient who needs it. Thank you for your continuing generous support!

Warmly,

Steph Sherer
Executive Director
Americans for Safe Access

P.S.: To learn more, please refer to Felix Kha's return of property case and the Decision by the California Fourth Appellate District Court.

Press Release: Appellate Court Strongly Vindicates Patients Right to Medical Marijuana Seized by Police

[Courtesy of Americans for Safe Access] For Immediate Release: *November 28, 2007 Appellate Court Strongly Vindicates Patients Right to Medical Marijuana Seized by Police Ending years of dispute, court rules that police must enforce state and not federal law Santa Ana, CA: A California Appeals Court ruled today in favor of Felix Kha, a medical marijuana patient from Garden Grove seeking the return of his 8 grams of medical marijuana that was seized by police. In a ruling that rejects law enforcement's claim that federal law preempts the state's medical marijuana law, the court asserted "we do not believe the federal drug laws supersede or preempt Kha's right to the return of his property." The court further stated that, "it is not the job of the local police to enforce the federal drug laws..." After more than 2 years, the appellate court has answered a divisive question pitting the State Attorney General against the California Police Chiefs Association. Both filed "friend of the court" briefs in the case on opposite sides of the issue, with the Attorney General in support of Kha. "It should now be abundantly clear to law enforcement across the state that it is not acceptable to seize the medicine of seriously ill patients," said Joe Elford, who represented Kha as Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access (ASA), a national medical marijuana advocacy group. "And if, for whatever reason, a seizure occurs, the court has ensured that patients have a mechanism to get it back." Kha was cited for marijuana possession and had his medicine seized in June 2005, but after the case was dismissed in August 2005, an Orange County Superior Court judge ordered the return of his medicine. However, the City of Garden Grove not only refused to return Kha's unlawfully seized property, it also appealed the order, an unprecedented action by a California city. Americans for Safe Access (ASA) has compiled reports from nearly eight hundred patient encounters with local or state police during a period of more than two years. These reports show a glaring trend: more than 90% of all encounters result in medicine seizure by police regardless of any probable cause. According to reports received by ASA, rampant seizure of medical marijuana from qualified patients and primary caregivers has taken place in 53 of California's 58 counties. These violations of state law occur in both urban and rural locales, in the north as well as the south, and by both city and county law enforcement. The court's ruling also affirms a policy change by the California Highway Patrol (CHP), which until 2005 held the record for the worst violator of Proposition 215. The CHP's policy of mandatory seizure of medical marijuana was challenged in court by ASA, after which the state's top law enforcement agency amply modified its policy. "Both today's court ruling and the CHP policy should go a long way to restore patients' rights in California," continued Elford. For further information, refer to: Decision by the California Fourth Appellate District Court (http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/G036250.PDF) Felix Kha's return of property case (http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=4412).

The DEA is waging war on California

[Courtesy of MPP] 

The DEA is continuing to terrorize medical marijuana patients and their caregivers. On November 20, DEA agents raided the Long Beach Compassionate Cooperative (L.B.C.C.), a medical marijuana dispensary in Los Angeles County. In addition to seizing assets, federal agents arrested the owner and warned that other area dispensaries could face the same fate. Read the news coverage here.

In recent months, MPP has raised $150,000 of the $180,000 that’s needed to launch our new project in California to fend off these raids. Please donate now to help close the $30,000 gap.

Since the beginning of the year, the DEA has executed dozens of raids in California, including:

• January 11: 11 dispensaries in West Hollywood
• March 29: Central Coast Compassionate Caregivers in Morro Bay
• May 1 and July 16: Nature's Medicinal Cooperative in Bakersfield
• June 13: Farm Assist Caregivers in Pomona
• July 17: Healing Nations Collective in Inland Valley
• July 25: 10 dispensaries in Los Angeles County
• August 29: 3 dispensaries in San Mateo
• October 11: Arts District Healing Center in Los Angeles
• October 30: Compassionate Caregivers of Alameda County
• November 1: C-3 Collective in Garden Grove
• November 2: 105/405 in North Hills

The DEA has also instituted a chilling new form of interference in California’s medical marijuana law: In July, the DEA began threatening landlords who lease space to medical marijuana dispensaries with prison time and forfeiture of their property — a move that was condemned in a Los Angeles Times editorial as a “deplorable new bullying tactic.” The L.B.C.C.’s landlord was a recipient of one of these letters.

Please fight for the will of California voters and for safe access to medical marijuana by donating to MPP’s California plan today.

In the coming year, MPP will be working with a coalition of reform organizations, dispensary owners, health care professionals, patients, activists, and state legislators to protect patients and dispensaries operating legally under state law, but we need your help. Would you please help fund a lobbyist in Sacramento to represent the medical marijuana community against the DEA’s reign of terror?

The situation in California is critical, and what happens in California matters to all of us: Just as California launched the modern era of the medical marijuana movement with the passage of Prop. 215 in November 1996, so, too, will it pave the way for state-recognized dispensaries with the legislation we will help pass next year. And, with your help, MPP and our allies will end state and local cooperation with federal law enforcement — which regularly utilizes local police for assistance during the DEA’s raids. Please join us in making sure that California resources will no longer be used to subvert the state’s own laws. This is important not only to Californians but to residents of every state seeking to enact compassionate medical marijuana laws.

We’re going to make medical marijuana access safe for seriously ill patients. Can I count on your help by making a donation to our California efforts today?

Thank you for your generosity during this critical time.

Sincerely,

Rob Kampia
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.

P.S. As I've mentioned in previous alerts, a major philanthropist has committed to match the first $3.0 million that MPP can raise from the rest of the planet in 2007. This means that your donation today will be doubled.

Press Release: New Study Finds Marijuana Compound Inhibits Breast Cancer Growth

MEDIA RELEASE from Americans for Safe Access For Immediate Release: November 19, 2007 Contact: ASA Director of Government Affairs Caren Woodson (510) 388-0546 or ASA Media Liaison Kris Hermes (510) 681-6361 New Study Finds Marijuana Compound Inhibits Breast Cancer Growth Mounting evidence should compel federal government to stop obstructing research San Francisco, CA -- A new study announced today by the California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute (CPMCRI) found that a non-psychoactive, naturally occurring compound in the cannabis plant (marijuana) called cannabidiol (CBD) inhibits the activity of breast cancer cells “in vitro” and in animals. While previous studies have found that tetrahydrocannabinol, another cannabis compound known as THC, has properties found to inhibit cancer growth, the CPMCRI study is the first time that CBD has been shown to have a similar effect. According to CPMCRI, the study was accepted for publication in October. “This pre-clinical research clearly demonstrates the therapeutic potential of marijuana’s active compounds,” said CPMCRI cannabinoid researcher Jahan Marcu, who is also on the Medical & Scientific Advisory Board of Americans for Safe Access (ASA). “The availability of a non-toxic substance that has the potential to fight breast cancer and likely other forms of cancer is of tremendous importance.” Despite mounting evidence verifying the medical efficacy of smoked marijuana and it’s isolated compounds, the federal government continues to obstruct scientific research in this field. In the last 20 years, the FDA has approved only three studies using plant-derived marijuana or its constituent compounds, forcing researchers such as CPMCRI to use synthetic versions. One reason for a lack of U.S. research using naturally derived marijuana is that scientists must obtain it from the National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA), which has a stated disinterest in the investigation of marijuana’s therapeutic qualities. “It’s time for NIDA and the federal government to end the monopoly on research cannabis,” said Caren Woodson, Director of Government Affairs for ASA. “This study should compel our government to do everything in its power to conduct the long-overdue research recommended by the 1999 Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine report.” The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which works with NIDA to restrict the availability of research cannabis, is currently refusing to license University of Massachusetts Amherst Professor Lyle Craker, despite a ruling earlier this year from Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Bittner that stated such research was “in the public interest.” The CBD compound used by CPMCRI for the study was synthetic due to the complications of obtaining research cannabis. However, compounds extracted from the marijuana plant are far cheaper and would be easier to acquire for the purpose of research if a competitive source of research grade marijuana were available. Coincidentally, the DEA is recommending that the natural form of THC be rescheduled under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) so that the plant derived compound may be naturally extracted in order to facilitate the research and development of generic, natural THC-based therapeutic drugs. “This study provides clear evidence which suggests that DEA ought to further consider rescheduling other cannabinoids with clear medical benefit in order to jump-start the research and development of cannabis-based drugs so patients have access to these drugs sooner as opposed to later,” continued Woodson. Further information: CPMCRI Study and Researcher Dr. Sean McAllister – http://www.cpmc.org/professionals/research/programs/science/sean.html Additional cannabis research – http://www.cannabis-med.org/studies/study.php 2007 Ruling by ALJ Bittner, claiming marijuana research is “in the public interest” – http://www.maps.org/ALJfindings.PDF

Sensible Colorado Press Release: Historic Lawsuit Overturns State's Medical Marijuana Policy

For Immediate Release: November 18, 2007 Contact: Brian Vicente, Sensible Colorado, 720-280-4067 Historic Lawsuit Overturns State's Medical Marijuana Policy Denver Judge slaps state health department; rules medical marijuana patients can appoint provider of their choice. DENVER -- Sensible Colorado will hold a press conference on Monday, Nov. 19, in front of the Denver City and County Building, to announce the issuance of an order by Chief Denver District Court Judge Larry J. Naves permanently overturning the Colorado Health Department's "Five Patient Policy." Adopted by the Health Department in a closed meeting in 2004, this policy limited the number of patients to which a caregiver can provide marijuana for medical purposes. Chief Judge Naves's decision stems from a lawsuit filed in June 2007 by Sensible Colorado on behalf of state-licensed medical marijuana patient Damien LaGoy. LaGoy, who uses medical marijuana to cope with nausea related to AIDS wasting-syndrome and Hepatitis C, sued the agency after his caregiver request was denied by the Health Department in May 2007 based on the "Five Patient Policy." In a July hearing Judge Naves temporarily suspended the policy accusing the agency of acting inappropriately in establishing the policy in a closed-door meeting which was not open to public or scientific input. Naves further alluded to the harmful nature of the policy in stating, "There is no reason this plaintiff should suffer." In a decision released late last week, Naves permanently overturned the policy citing violations of both the Colorado Open Meetings Act and the Administrative Procedures Act. This decision will allow the plaintiff Damien LaGoy, and the rest of Colorado's 1700 licensed medical marijuana patients, to appoint the medical marijuana provider of their choice. "I feel safer already," said LaGoy. "Now I can get my medicine from a safe and responsible caregiver instead of taking my chances on the streets." "This policy had the real effect of harming seriously-ill Coloradans," said Brian Vicente, lead attorney and head of Sensible Colorado. "Hopefully the Health Department will now begin acting to help medical marijuana patients, not harm them." WHAT: Press conference to announce an order protecting medical marijuana patient rights **copies of Judge Naves's decision will be made available at the press conference** WHEN: Monday, November 19, 12 p.m. (noon) WHERE: In front of the Denver City and County Building, 1437 Bannock Street WHO: Damien LaGoy, plaintiff and medical marijuana patient Daniel J. Pope, medical marijuana caregiver for LaGoy Brian Vicente, attorney and Sensible Colorado executive director Sean McAllister, co-counsel and criminal defense attorney # # #
Subscribe to Medical Marijuana