Justices question medical use of marijuana
- Nov 30, 2004
The Supreme Court expressed skepticism during oral arguments Nov. 29 about a state’s authority to legalize the medicinal use of marijuana.
The justices heard arguments in a case involving a clash between a federal law that prohibits the use of marijuana and a California law that permits the use of the drug for medicinal purposes. The Bush administration appealed the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ 2003 ruling that medical use of marijuana in a state that has legalized it is allowed if a patient has a doctor’s permission, the drug is free and there is no interstate commerce involved.
Based on their questions, all of the justices may find there is no exemption from federal law for marijuana as medicine, said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice. “It became very apparent that the Supreme Court was very concerned about in any way easing restrictions on controlled substances like marijuana because of the potential impact that could have on narcotic enforcement laws around the country,” Sekulow wrote on the ACLJ’s Web site after observing the oral arguments.
The Controlled Substances Act, a 1970 federal law, bars the use of marijuana and other drugs. California voters, however, approved the medical use of marijuana by passing the Compassionate Use Act in a 1996 referendum.
The case, Ashcroft v. Raich, involves two women who have used marijuana for health problems. Angel Raich has used the drug grown and provided without charge by friends to treat several serious medical conditions, including a brain tumor. Diane Monson has used marijuana she has grown to treat severe back pain and muscle spasms.
In addition to California, nine other states have approved the medical use of marijuana: Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.
A decision is expected before the court adjourns next summer.
Further Learning
Learn more about: Family, Addictions, Substance Abuse