Community | January 17, 2009 | 42 comments

San Diego County asks U.S. Supreme Court to erase state's medical marijuana law

source: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/01/16/news/sandiego/z902e5e7a37f7085788257540007cadfb.txt

Image
Gregorous
San Diego County filed papers this week asking the U.S. Supreme Court to erase California's medical marijuana law, arguing that federal prohibitions outlawing the substance supersede California's law allowing sick people to use it.

The county is asking the nation's highest court to overturn a state appellate court's July decision upholding the voter-approved law legalizing marijuana use for medicinal purposes.

"You have a conflict here between federal and state law, and we are in the middle," 5th District Supervisor Bill Horn said Friday. "What we have been asking all along is which takes precedence here. We will take it as far as we can take it and get a definitive answer."
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Green,   WTF,   2 more
  2. tags:
    News,  News and Politics,  WTF,  Green,  3 more
  3.     
    |

42 comments // San Diego County asks U.S. Supreme Court to erase state's medical marijuana law

  • ciregg222
    • 0
      ciregg222  

    • the government it there to voice the PEOPLES word .... god damn bastards ... listen to what WE want ...

      this crap cant stand forever until people start snapping

    • 3 years ago
  • lifestudentno83
  • mosatchmo
    • 0
      mosatchmo  

    • this won't do anyone any good. they can't arrest all these people that've been using it legally, and already have plants, legally, and are stoners that aren't a threat to anyone, legally. i think the supreme court will have mercy on the cannabis culture of california. our state's already jacked up enough as it is, the least they can do is let us get high(with a prescription, and real medical need, lol)

    • 3 years ago
  • lifestudentno83
    • 0
      lifestudentno83  

    • San Diego County wants to overturn the state's laws? I think they are outnumbered...

      States have the right to make their own laws, and the Federal government have no right to impose or enforce laws that directly conflict with state's laws. So all those Fed raids on medicinal Cannabis stores are illegal and a waste of manpower.

      If we can push for legalizing medicinal Cannabis, decriminalizing Cannabis, or legalizing Cannabis altogether in a majority of states, then the Federal government will have to follow suit.

    • 3 years ago
  • rightbrain
    • 0
      rightbrain  

    • We're in two wars, facing a crumbling economy, people are desperate for jobs and health care, and this is what they're griping about? Get real San Diego!

    • 3 years ago
  • Datura420
  • idealist
  • lyndzstyles
    • 0
      lyndzstyles  

    • States and it's people have the right to make their own laws, right? Isn't it the 10th amendment? Also besides the state allowing it, the people voted on it.

      Back off Bill Horn, this fight is a waste of tax payers money! If you are going to waste the peoples money don't let it be the people that voted yes on prop 215, get our own funding!!

    • 3 years ago
  • Conserve_nation
    • 0
      Conserve_nation  

    • Another example of the Federal Government stretching their arm of power to challenge State Law, if the issue was voted by the people, then shouldn't it stay. Thats at least what I thought our country was founded on.

    • 3 years ago
  • Ayahuasca2012
    • 0
      Ayahuasca2012  

    • The people spoke... we voted for Medical Marijuana and it should stay legal.

      This is obviously something pushed by the pharmaceutical companies to try and shove more prescription garbage down our throats.

      I could give less a shit what the Federal Government thinks about it to be honest. Stay out of our affairs, take our tax money and burn in hell with it...

      Seriously, lets just remove San Diego as part of the state and give it to someone else... Just chop that bottom edge right off... they are so un-californian...

    • 3 years ago
  • Leonidis
  • Valentin0o
  • TopScruffy
  • simplecj
    • 0
      simplecj  

    • WTF!!!!

      Oh, so because state and federal law are contradicting, the answer is to go against the citizens that passed the state law in order to conform to the completely unjust federal law??

      BULLSHIT!!!!

      It should be the other way around. 13 states, about one quarter of all 50, have passed medicinal marijuana laws as demanded from their citizens, doing so with the support of medical evidence and doctor/patient testimony. The only reason these states are at odds with Federal Law is because the feds won't pull their heads out of their asses and reschedule cannabis as they should have done more than 12 years ago when California passed the first medicinal marijuana law.

      This is outrageous that San Diego officials now want to apparently return their heads to the saftey of their colons instead of demanding that the Feds reckognize the accepted medicinal value.

      ABSOLUTELY BULLSHIT, I"M SOOO PISSED OFF TO HEAR THIS!!! Fucking hypocritical ignorant people running our government and screwing with the lifes of sick and dying people all because no one apparently can force the Feds to reschedule cannabis as is stipulated by the very code that defines the Controlled Substances ACT, which states clearly that upon a change in status of a substance, it should be immediately rescheduled to reflect reality.

      WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON HERE???

    • 3 years ago
  • tbowman131
    • 0
      tbowman131  
    • simplecj:

      all they did was file the request. before we all freak out, let's wait and see if the court takes the case...

      and if they do hear the case, don't forget that they could also rule in favor of the CA law over the Federal law

    • 3 years ago
  • simplecj
    • 0
      simplecj  
    • simplecj:

      God I hope so!!! This is so depressing though... even the slightest chance that the court could find in favor of Federal Law could mean the end of ALL medicinal marijuana.

    • 3 years ago
  • PJSEE36
    • 0
      PJSEE36  

    • its new i MI. I am waiting to see what will happen. probably the same. its too confusing. we need lobbyists at the national level so that this can get sorted out properly.SUPPORT OUR TROOPS------------------ Patrick

    • 3 years ago
  • jubal
    • 0
      jubal  

    • This is a state's rights issue. The federal government has no authority to regulate what a state decides for itself. Provided their is no interstate commerce involved.

    • 3 years ago
  • tbowman131
    • 0
      tbowman131  

    • medical marijuana (like gambling and same-sex marriages) is clearly a state, not federal, issue per the 10th amendment.

      i would be shocked if the supreme court overturned the CA medical marijuana law...

    • 3 years ago
  • TopScruffy
    • 0
      TopScruffy  
    • tbowman131:

      "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled."

    • 3 years ago
  • Bisbonian
    • 0
      Bisbonian  
    • tbowman131:

      I would be shocked if the Supreme Court had any respect for the 10th Amendment. Do we still have a 10th Amendment? Does Antonin Scalia ("strict constructionist" that he is) even know what it says?

    • 3 years ago
  • amberaa
    • 0
      amberaa  
    • tbowman131:

      I don't know the Supreme Court has had a long standing medical marijuana ban. They have made decisions twice in the past decade just on marijuana in California, citing both times that California doesn't have the right to use medical marijuana in any way...

    • 3 years ago
  • unimatrix0
  • maisry
  • squidcrown
    • 0
      squidcrown  
    • maisry:

      me too, my moms rheumatoid arthritis is real bad and for years, since i can remember, she has been on pills that supposedly should help her, the pills give her mild relief in her hands, but the side effects that shes had to endure for all these years have taken a toll on her appearance and vitality. my moms not old but the medications, i feel, have aged her substantially. my parents come from a conservative south american upbringings and she used to see pot, as a whole, to be only for lowlifes and drug addicts. as grown ups ive sat with my mom and explained why this could be so much better for her than her chemical prescribed medication. i feel if marijuana was ever medically legal in VA she would benefit much more, and maybe even be able to get of her current medication.

    • 3 years ago
  • squidcrown
    • 0
      squidcrown  

    • Cali and the federal government should respect their wishes by NOT having to force someone to use some pill made by some pharmaceutical company for their financial gain. pfizer could give a flying f^%k about you, the consumer. which in turn makes them pushers. legal drug dealers that have sway in dc.
      and thats why pharmaceutical companies are fighting to not legalize a medical alternative that can be grown in everyones backyard. Seriously how is ED getting more funding and my neighbor cant use THC to counteract chemo related symptoms.
      wtf america and being in dc i hope that Cali fights hard for this one.

    • 3 years ago
  • WiTeBoi
    • 0
      WiTeBoi  

    • I honestly feel as though, beyond all debating of legalization, prohibition, etc..., that we should all agree on certain topics, and one is that the Civil War was fought, the main reason, over states' rights, and it was the South, at the time, who were strong advocates of states' rights. However, the North won. So, if the federal government now makes a law and sets a limit, then that limit should be honored by all states until the federal government declares otherwise. Looking at this case, in particular, it is an obvious notion that if a local police officer catches someone with a prescription for marajuana and the person is able to prove it, the police cannot do or say anything, but the police may still feel the need to find who is leagal and who is not, and that takes a lot of time away from the police force enforcing laws that harm people instead. If an FBI agent catches you, however, they have every right to lock you up in federal prison no matter what.

    • 3 years ago
  • unimatrix0
    • 0
      unimatrix0  
    • WiTeBoi:

      civil war = states rights: I don't think so.

      That is what apologists for the south claim.. The war was about slavery. The racist south wanted slaves to produce cotton. There is no need to revise history.

    • 3 years ago
  • squidcrown
    • 0
      squidcrown  
    • WiTeBoi:

      State law should be honored by the federal government, instead of tobacco and alcohol being readily accessible, they too should be considered class one drugs. instead of the feds taking away funding from schools,roads, community programs etc. they should embrace this and not try and bury it. i dont want it to be available at 711's or gas stations, it should be regulated just like liqueur stores. dispensaries would keep this away from kids just like ABC stores keep it away from anyone under 21

    • 3 years ago
  • amberaa
    • 0
      amberaa  
    • WiTeBoi:

      unimatrix- the civil war was over states rights. That's a fact. The slavery issue was the states right that fueled the fire. The actual ammunition was Lincoln winning the election even though he didn't win any states in the south and was very unpopular...No need to rewrite history or anything.

    • 3 years ago
  • bfcooper
  • amberaa
    • 0
      amberaa  
    • WiTeBoi:

      it's not ABOUT slavery, slavery was just the issue that made it obvious to the people that they were unrepresented and weren't allowed to live as they wished. Slavery was obviously wrong, but it wasn't the reason they decided to secede. It would be like if some people in America decided not to pay their taxes because they felt the government was misspending it. Then they couldn't pay for the war... the issue wouldn't be about the war persay, although a great number of people would probably have that as their reason for not paying, it would have been about the government mishandling their money.

    • 3 years ago
  • Commentor
    • 0
      Commentor  
    • WiTeBoi:

      Wrong actually. The "Federal Government" has limited power its supposed to be that way! The National government is supposed to be limited to the powers specifically enumerated. In fact there were many that said the bill of rights was unnecessary because the national governments power didn't extend to the areas that the rights were about.

    • 3 years ago
  • wierdobeardo
  • pissedoffinarkansas
  • SHAWN_RITTIMAN
  • cool0ne
  • cool0ne
  • crazy_french
  • northerntouchblog
more from Community:
from the community

top videos