Skip to main content

Medical Marijuana

ASA’s Medical Marijuana in the News: 1/25/08

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT
Discontinuation of ASA's Weekly Media Summaries

Dear ASA Supporter,

This week's media summary will be the last that ASA produces in this form. We know many of you have enjoyed these news summaries, and we intend to keep you updated in other ways. Here are three ways to stay informed:

Continue to look for special announcements and news updates on the ASA national email list. For state specific news, please sign up for one of our state or local announcement lists.

Check the Online Media Buzz section of ASA's discussion forums, where users and staff post news articles and press releases daily. Read news analysis and more from ASA staff and guests on ASA's blog, Medical Cannabis: Voices from the Frontlines.

ASA would like to thank William Dolphin, who has compiled the news and provided analysis of important medical cannabis stories weekly for the past several years.

If you have questions or comments about this change, feel free to contact me at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Rebecca Saltzman
Chief of Staff
Americans for Safe Access

ASA ACTION: Fighting for Patients’ Right to Work

In a split decision on a workers’ rights case argued by ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, the California Supreme Court decided this week that employers can fire workers for testing positive for marijuana use, even in the case of those who use it for medical reasons on the advice of a physician. The 5-2 ruling came despite a brief filed by all the authors of the California legislature’s Medical Marijuana Program Act (SB420), saying that it had been their intent to extend such civil protections to medical marijuana patients. One of the authors, Assemblyman Mark Leno, has taken immediate action to submit a new bill, sponsored by ASA, that would specify workplace protections for patients.

Calif. Firms Can Fire Medical Marijuana Users
by Karl Vick, Washington Post
The California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that employers can fire workers who test positive for marijuana even if they have a note from a doctor recommending its use for medical reasons. Kris Hermes, spokesman for Americans for Safe Access, the Oakland advocacy group that argued the case, said advocates would go back to the state legislature to seek more explicit protections.

Medical marijuana users can be fired: Calif. court
by Adam Tanner, Reuters
Companies can fire employees who use marijuana for medical reasons even if California law allows such use because federal law prohibits it, the state's Supreme Court ruled on Thursday. "We remain hopeful that the legislature will come to the aid of patients by preventing the sort of discrimination that is likely to occur from such a decision," said Joe Elford, chief counsel of Americans for Safe Access.

DrugSense FOCUS Alert: Use Medical Marijuana - Lose Your Job

In the latest blow to medical marijuana rights, the California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that employers can fire workers who test positive for the drug, even when it is used under a physician's advice. "Nothing in the text or history of the Compassionate Use Act suggests the voters intended the measure to address the respective rights and duties of employers and employees," wrote Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar in the 15-page opinion. "Under California law, an employer may require pre-employment drug tests and take illegal drug use into consideration in making employment decisions...The Compassionate Use Act does not eliminate marijuana's potential for abuse or the employer's legitimate interest in whether an employee uses the drug." The decision is on line here: http://drugsense.org/url/NDVd3p20lJ "The majority's holding disrespects the will of California's voters, "wrote Justice Joyce L. Kennard, whose dissent was joined by Justice Carlos R. Moreno, calling the decision "conspicuously lacking in compassion." The voters "surely never intended that persons who availed themselves" of the medical marijuana act "would thereby disqualify themselves from employment," Kennard wrote. Thus five of the seven justices - who will never face a drug test - showed their contempt for the people of California. Daily newspapers throughout California, as well as major national newspapers, covered the story. Please write letters to the editor to your local newspapers giving your views about the decision. A sample of the coverage may be found at this link: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/RagingWire ********************************************************************** Style guides for writing effective letters to the editor are available at MAP's Media Activism Center: http://www.mapinc.org/resource/#guides ********************************************************************** Please Send Us a Copy of Your Letter Please send copies of your letters to the sent letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed, or email a copy to [email protected] if you are not subscribed.

Press Release: CA Supreme Court Denies Medical Marijuana Patients' Right to Work

[Courtesy of Americans for Safe Access] For Immediate Release: January 24, 2008 Contact: ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford (415) 573-7842 or ASA Media Liaison Kris Hermes (510) 681-6361 CA Supreme Court Denies Medical Marijuana Patients' Right to Work Advocates to call on state legislature to prevent discrimination Sacramento, CA -- The California Supreme Court ruled against medical marijuana patient Gary Ross today in his fight against employment discrimination. In a 5-2 decision, the Supreme Court claimed that Ross could not rely on the Fair Housing and Employment Act or the state's medical marijuana law to prevent discrimination at the workplace. The Court did indicate in its decision that the state legislature had not adequately clarified employment rights of medical marijuana patients. "Obviously, we are very disappointed by today's decision," said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel of Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the medical marijuana advocacy organization that argued the case. "However, we remain hopeful that the legislature will come to the aid of patients by preventing the sort of discrimination that is likely to occur from such a decision." The dissenting opinion, written by Justice Joyce L. Kennard, stated that the ruling "has seriously compromised the Compassionate Use Act, denying to those who must work for a living its promised benefits." Despite a clearly worded amicus "friend of the court" brief filed in support of Ross in July 2006 by all of the original co-authors of SB 420 (state legislation that helped to define the rights of medical marijuana patients), the Supreme Court failed to believe that it was the intent of the entire legislature. Advocates assert that they will seek a different response from the state legislature in the form of a bill introduced in the next few weeks. Gary Ross, a 45-year old disabled veteran and a medical marijuana patient living in Carmichael, California, is at the forefront of a landmark employment case, with significant ramifications for patients in California and across the country. Ross was fired in September 2001 for failing an employer-mandated drug test while working as a systems engineer for RagingWire Telecommunications, Inc. "All I am asking is to be a productive member of society," said plaintiff Gary Ross. "I was not fired for poor work performance, but for an antiquated policy on medical marijuana,” continued Ross. “This practice allows employers to undermine state law and the protections provided for patients.” Ross's physician recommended cannabis for chronic back pain that resulted from injuries sustained during his military service. But Ross's employer, RagingWire Telecommunications, refused to make an exception to its policy of terminating anyone testing positive for marijuana. Ross filed suit after he was fired in 2001, arguing that RagingWire illegally discriminated against him because of his condition. However, a Sacramento Superior Court, and then the Third Appellate District Court both rejected his argument. In October 2005, ASA appealed to the California Supreme Court on behalf of Ross. Strong public support has been shown for Ross and the plight of California patients to seek and maintain employment. Since it began recording instances of employment discrimination in 2005, ASA has received hundreds of such reports from across California. Companies that have either fired patients from their job, threatened them with termination, or denied them employment because of patient status or a positive test for marijuana, include Costco Wholesale, UPS, Foster Farms Dairy, DirecTV, the San Joaquin Courier, Power Auto Group, as well as several construction companies, hospitals, and various trade union employers. Further information: Today's California Supreme Court decision: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/downloads/Ross_Ruling.pdf Photo of Gary Ross: http://safeaccessnow.org/img/original/Ross_pic3.jpg Legislative-based amicus brief: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/downloads/ross_legislative.pdf Review legal briefs and more about the Ross v. RagingWire case here: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/Ross

ASA's Medical Marijuana in the News: 1/18/08

NEW MEXICO: Patient Suing Sheriff, County over Federal Raid

Within weeks of New Mexico implementing its medical cannabis law, federal agents, with the help of local sheriff’s deputies, raided the home of a paraplegic and seized his medicine. The raid outraged the state’s governor Bill Richardson, who sent an angry letter to Washington demanding that the federal government stop interfering in New Mexico’s efforts to care for its citizens. Now the man who was victimized is suing the county and local officers for their part in subverting the state law.

Lawsuit says deputies targeted man for medical marijuana
Associated Press
A paraplegic man from Malaga has sued Eddy County sheriff's deputies. Leonard French alleges they seized marijuana plants and equipment to grow them last summer despite the fact he has a license under New Mexico's medical marijuana law.

N.M. man sues deputies over pot seizure
KOB TV 4 (NM)
A wheelchair-bound man is suing Eddy County deputies for seizing marijuana that he says he was using for medical purposes.

ACLU files suit over raid
by Tom Moody, Current-Argus (NM)
A paraplegic Malaga man who holds a medical marijuana permit from the state of New Mexico filed a lawsuit Thursday against Eddy County and several county law officers for their part in a drug raid that seized his marijuana plants and growing equipment, attorneys announced.

COLORADO: Police Pursued for Damaged Cannabis

The landmark court order for the return of medical marijuana to a Colorado couple got them their plants back, but in unusable condition. With the help of attorney Brian Vicente, director of the Colorado Campaign for Safe Access, the couple is now pursuing damages based on federal estimates of the plants’ value. State law has a provision that requires law enforcement to return wrongfully seized medical marijuana in good condition.

Couple seeks compensation for pot
by Trevor Hughes, The Coloradoan
In what is believed to be a first-of-its-kind request for Colorado, a Fort Collins couple is demanding police pay them more than $200,000 for improperly confiscating and destroying 39 marijuana plants.

Couple to ask police to pay for dead marijuana
by Jeffrey Wolf, KUSA 9News TV (CO)
A couple plans to file for compensation after they say police destroyed their medical marijuana.

Fort Collins couple to ask city for reimbursement for dead marijuana plants
The Coloradoan
The attorney for James and Lisa Masters, whose 39 medical marijuana plants were seized by Fort Collins police and later destroyed, plans to file a motion this afternoon asking the city pay the couple for the destroyed plants.

Couple Wants Police To Pay For Damaged Marijuana Plants
by Lance Hernandez, KMGH TV News7 - Denver
James and Lisa Masters said they want to send a message to police departments all across Colorado. The couple and one of their attorneys filed a motion late Thursday seeking compensation for 39 damaged medical marijuana plants.

Medical Marijuana Users Seek $200K For Lost Stash
by Emil Steiner, Columnist, Washington Post
Today in Fort Collins, Colo., a lawyer will walk into a court house and ask the city to pay his clients for destroying their marijuana. The motion for compensation asks Fort Collins to fork over $202,800, the most money ever sought for the destruction of a drug.

ASA's Medical Marijuana in the News: 1/11/08

COLORADO: Another Return of Medical Marijuana

Another case of wrongfully seized medical cannabis has come to a happy close in Colorado, as a former Marine had his medicine returned by police. The return is thanks largely to landmark litigation brought in part by Brian Vicente, director of the Colorado Campaign for Safe Access, a joint project of Sensible Colorado and ASA. Even the Washington Post is taking note.

Aurora Police Return Marijuana To Former Marine
by Rick Sallinger, CBS 4 Denver
Police in Aurora have given back dozens of marijuana plants they seized. The owner claimed the pot was being used for medicinal purposes and he had a state issued card to back it up.

Medical Marijuana Payback Burns Colorado Police
by Emil Steiner, Washington Post
Policing pot in Colorado is about to get a lot more complicated. The kick-in-the-door raids SWAT teams have long employed could now cost cities hundreds of thousands of dollars following two landmark court decisions upholding the state's constitutional protection of medical marijuana. Under the rulings, police departments are required to return any marijuana and paraphernalia taken from state-sanctioned growers, and can be sued by those growers if the crops aren't preserved.

CANADA: Caregiver Limits Found Unconstitutional

A federal court in Canada has again found that country's policies on restricting access to medical cannabis to be unconstitutional, saying the current approach has "caused individuals a major difficulty with access." In this case, the issue is the number of patients for which a person may provide cannabis, which had been limited to a single patient per grower, and the government's requirement that those who cannot grow their own use the cannabis provided by the government's contractor. The court's decision opens up the possibility of a more efficient dispensary model, such as California's.

Federal Court strikes down regulation limiting growers of medical marijuana
Canadian Press
Canadians who are prescribed marijuana to treat their illnesses will no longer be forced to rely on the federal government as a supplier following a Federal Court ruling that struck down a key restriction in Ottawa's controversial medical marijuana program.

Canada court rejects supply limit on medical pot
Canadian Press
A Federal Court judge has struck down a government regulation that prevents medical marijuana growers from producing the drug for more than one patient.

IMPLEMENTATION: Cultivation Quantities Disputed

The number of plants patients are legally entitled to grow has been a source of contention in California since medical use was approved by the voters. Californians had the wisdom to recognize that the amounts patients would require could vary considerably, so they did not try to mandate medication amounts. Since then, law enforcement, courts, local officials and even municipal referenda have tried to establish limits, but the law is clear in its silence on the subject, and cannot be changed except by another statewide initiative. What the legislature and local entities can do, is provide guidance on the levels at which law enforcement can decline to investigate further or refer matters to the courts for decision.

Medical pot users arrested
by Stacia Glenn, San Bernardino Sun (CA)
JoAnn Cates, who has 16 great-grandchildren, seems an unlikely candidate to be handcuffed and hauled off to jail for growing a marijuana crop in her backyard.

Pro-pot measure returns to ballot
Press-Democrat (CA)
A landmark 2000 Mendocino County marijuana measure will be back before voters in the June primary, a move taken Tuesday by the Board of Supervisors after a contentious three-hour public hearing.

ASA’s Medical Marijuana in the News: 1/5/08

ASA ACTION: City of San Diego Sides with ASA on Patient Rights

When officials from three counties tried to opt out of California’s requirement that they issue medical marijuana patients ID cards, ASA’s legal team took action. ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford appeared in court on behalf of a coalition of advocacy groups to argue that state law must be respected, and won. San Diego County was alone in deciding to appeal the ruling, and now the city of San Diego has filed a brief arguing in favor of patients.

City files amicus brief for medical ID cards
by Jeff McDonald, San Diego Union Tribune
In the legal tug of war between the county and state over medical marijuana, the city of San Diego has sided with Sacramento – and voters.

County Wants Relief of Duty Providing ID Cards for Medical Marijuana Users
Fox 6 San Diego
The city of San Diego has taken the state's side against San Diego county in a battle about medical marijuana use, according to court documents.

County, City At Odds Over Medical Marijuana
NBC San Diego
The city of San Diego joined the fight in support of medicinal marijuana Friday, issuing a request to the state court to confirm that ailing patients have the right to use the drug for medicinal purposes.

MONTANA: Corrections Officials Try to Block Access

Medical care for Montanans under state supervision would be limited if corrections officials get their way. But there is substantial opposition to the plan, which would eliminate access to the state’s medical marijuana program for those on parole or probation.

Medical Pot Ban Sought for Parolees
by Mattt Gouras, Associated Press
Montana's Department of Corrections is facing stiff resistance to a proposal to prohibit all people on parole or probation from obtaining medical marijuana.

Medical Marijuana - No medicine for parolees
by Patrick Duganz , Missoula News (MT)
Convicts on parole or probation in Montana currently have the same rights as anybody else to use medical marijuana as prescribed by a physician, but the Montana Department of Corrections (DOC) wants to alter this policy because of a perception that parolees are “doctor shopping” for the legal medication.

A Holiday Surprise & Victory for Medical Marijuana!

[Courtesy of Americans for Safe Access] 

Last week, House Judiciary Committee Chair, Rep. Conyers (D-MI) pledged to investigate the DEA’s recent and ongoing tactics threatening the safety and security of state-sanctioned patients, providers, and innocent third-party landlords. Chairman Conyers’ commitment to question DEA attacks on medical marijuana states has brought holiday cheer to medical marijuana patients and supporters. Please thank Chairman Conyers, and his staff, today!

Click here to thank Chairman Conyers right now! Chairman Conyers needs to know you support and appreciate his decision to hold oversight hearings. Be sure to thank him and tell him that as a patient and/or medical marijuana supporter, you look forward to working with him and his dedicated staff as they prepare for the oversight hearing.
Visit www.AmericansforSafeAccess.org/ThankYouRepConyers to send a short message.

Since the DEA began raiding medical cannabis dispensing collectives in 2002, Congress has never held a hearing to investigate the goal of these raids, how much these raids are costing taxpayers in both dollars and precious resources, or what impact these raids are having on patients and the state and local governments attempting to regulate the distribution of medical marijuana in accordance with state law. A House oversight investigation is an important and significant opportunity for the medical marijuana community. Please thank Chairman Conyers today. Click here to send a message.

Thank you for your commitment to safe access.

Sincerely,

Sonnet Seeborg Gabbard
Field Coordinator
Americans for Safe Access

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/)

Subscribe to Medical Marijuana