Community | May 18, 2009 | 53 comments

Supreme Court Affirms CA Medical Marijuana Law

source: http://ohhburn.com/2009/05/supreme-court-affirms-ca-medical-marijuana-law/

Image
DeliaTheArtist
"Today, the US Supreme Court REFUSED to hear a landmark case brought by San Diego County stemming from a law suit they filled back in ‘06 that challenged the state-mandated use of ID cards for medical marijuana patients. The ID card program was adopted in 2004, resulting from the legislature’s passage of SB 420, the Medical Marijuana Program Act. The ID cards can substitute for Dr. recommendations for the use of cannabis and allow patients to enter medical marijuana shops in California and can be shown to police officers who find patients in possession of marijuana.

Well, San Diego decided not to play along with the ID card game arguing that the federal ban on weed trumps state law. The San Diego Superior Court and the Fourth District Court of Appeals rejected that argument. And, the California Supreme Court refused to review the case in 2008. Despite those failures the San Diego Board of Supervisors voted to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court! And, well that didn’t work out! The end of this case and the Obama administration’s decision not to raid law-abiding medical marijuana clubs has supercharged the legalization movement now.

s-pot-large1“The courts have made clear that federal law does not preempt California’s medical marijuana law and that local officials must comply with that law,” said Joe Elford, chief counsel with Americans for Safe Access (ASA), a national medical marijuana advocacy group with a large presence in California. “No longer will local officials be able to hide behind federal law and resist upholding California’s medical marijuana law.”

“The Supreme Court and the lower courts in California have blown away the myth that federal law somehow prevents states from legalizing medical marijuana,” said Rob Kampia, executive director for the Marijuana Policy Project.

ASA has also notified ten weed-unfriendly holdout counties (Colusa, Madera, Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, San Bernardino, San Diego, Solano, Stanislaus, and Sutter) of their legal obligation to implement the ID card program. Change is coming whether they like it or not.
  1. groups:
    Community,   Politics,   US Politics,   Law,   2 more
  2. tags:
    News,  Politics,  Law,  US Politics,  9 more
  3. recommended by:
    ras_menelik,
    uroborus8
  4.     
    |

53 comments // Supreme Court Affirms CA Medical Marijuana Law

  • hunzedog
  • jubal
    • 0
      jubal  

    • Good News to hear that States rights are being upheld. Now if we can get i industrial hemp to be accepted by legislators then we have a real chance to rebuild our economy and put more money in the hands of local people and communities; instead of bailouts to big corporations.

    • 2 years ago
  • ras_menelik
    • 0
      ras_menelik  
    • Image

    • * unimatrix0
      THE War is NOT over!

      the emancipation prop. was affirmed by the US Supreme court after the civil rights movement .......................wez almost there(A native American prez? would help!)

      in the NOW

      Prop. 215 just got affirmed by US Supreme court after the 'OVER GROW' civil rights movement ......................................now that Reefer madness is wounded and cornered Watch out for the Beast til the final breath

      when it's Mr Hemp and not "weed" your work will be done here,in this Dimension

      Borg ON!

    • 3 years ago
  • FrankyZemo
    • 0
      FrankyZemo  

    • I really wouldn't view this as a victory...or an affirmation...this is more like a "ha! you actually think we are going to open this can of worms NOW? Nope, not hearing it."

    • 3 years ago
  • SHAWN_RITTIMAN
  • bailey78
    • 0
      bailey78  

    • Looks like I'm moven to califurnya folks pack my bags and load the van I'm going to the free land way out west going to get me the best and smoke till I'm dust In God I trust

    • 3 years ago
  • VoyagerFilms
  • cabinettags
  • carmalite
    • 0
      carmalite  

    • There are people who are on chemo who really do get help from cannabis, and this is great news for them and for others who are helped by it.
      Thanks for posting this.

    • 3 years ago
  • artemis6
  • MikefromhisG1
    • 0
      MikefromhisG1  

    • Jesus; now if we could only get more people to understand that there are THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT and they work when used correctly. 2 down, 1 to go. Now it's up to, ahh crap. . . . .those guys.

      Yep, Big Tobacco, Big Liquor, Big Business a/k/a The Congress & Senate.

    • 3 years ago
  • Gargaryun
  • trelk
  • SoundBigfoot
  • Conniepae
    • 0
      Conniepae  

    • Cannabis is one issue which crosses party lines. Republicans smoke cannabis. Democrats smoke cannabis. Libertarians smoke cannabis. It's time for the U.S. government to acknowledge, the war on cannabis hemp is an un-just war, based on fixed facts and disinformation.

      Great leaders from America's past supported cannabis. Cannabis has history. It has been hidden for decades, but thanks to the Internet, Jack Herer and others, the facts are no longer hidden.

      "Two of my favorite things are sitting on my front porch smoking a pipe of sweet hemp, and playing my Hohner harmonica." - Abraham Lincoln (from a letter written by Lincoln during his presidency to the head of the Hohner Harmonica Company in Germany)

      "Hemp is of first necessity to the wealth & protection of the country."
      - Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President

      "Make the most you can of the Indian Hemp seed and sow it everywhere."
      - George Washington, U.S. President

      "We shall, by and by, want a world of hemp more for our own consumption."
      - John Adams, U.S. President

      It's time for change! I agree with Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and John Adams.

    • 3 years ago
  • lucidstone
    • 0
      lucidstone  
    • Conniepae:

      Please, let's not confuse the difference between industrial hemp and the drug.

      One of those quotes talks about the smoking of the plant . . . and who knows what the THC composition of the wild plants were back then, but I'm pretty sure we've domesticated the plants to make them far more potent today than what they were 200 or so years ago.

      The other 3 quotes refer to the industrial applications of the plant fibers.

      I'm pro-legalization, but let's keep the facts straight and the arguments clean.

    • 3 years ago
  • Conniepae
    • 0
      Conniepae  
    • Conniepae:

      Yes, let’s keep the facts straight, they knew the values of the plant cannabis hemp. Our forefathers were not controlled by one aspect of cannabis hemp. They supported all aspects of the plant. Why do we have to separate the importance of the plant?

      Why do you assume they were talking about wild plants? Everything isn’t new, just because you are finding out about it now. Facts were facts before you learned them. We didn’t domesticate the plant. Cannabis hemp was domesticated long before we were born.

      You’re right let’s keep the facts straight and the arguments clean. Our government has been lying and misleading people for decades. The facts were removed from educational material, they weren’t any less factual, facts were just hidden. It’s time to unhide the truth.

    • 3 years ago
  • lucidstone
    • 0
      lucidstone  
    • Conniepae:

      "Why do we have to separate the importance of the plant?"

      Why? Because there are two completely different uses between hemp and cannabis . . . which actually utilizes different breeds of the plant for different purposes (due to our practice of domestication).

      Yes, domestication has been ongoing well before I was born . . . that's a "duh" statement if I have ever heard one. That also means though that the plants we have today are different than the plants we had 200 years ago . . . something I don't think you quite understand.

      There was just an article on another thread that said just this, that said plants have become much more potent than what they used to be.

      Your quotes misrepresent the truth in implying that they former presidents were saying here that there is nothing wrong with getting stoned, that's not what they were saying.

      Yes, there's been a shit ton of false propaganda in the past . . . but let's "unhide the truth" with ACTUAL truth and not just propaganda from the opposite position.

      Free the weed, but free the logic first.

    • 3 years ago
  • Conniepae
    • 0
      Conniepae  
    • Conniepae:

      lucidstone, yes I do think the Presidents were talking about relaxing and enjoying life with the help of cannabis. Getting stoned – now that’s a spin term. Getting stoned, getting high, are terms, which spins cannabis into sounding as though all cannabis consumption is reckless. I’m sick of spin.

      Yes, you are correct about the varying potency, but that spins people into believing regular cannabis is also more potent. People have been FALSELY spinning DANGER for decades.

      I'm seeking dialog. You may choose to lessen the voices of past presidents, but I don't. Cannabis for medicine and relaxation, hemp for industry. Both strains would be beneficial to Americans.

      I'm 54 years old. I don't drink alcohol. I enjoy cannabis. I should not be forced into a closet, for fear of being a criminal, while people who consume alcohol and legal pharmaceutical drugs are not. That's just wrong!

    • 3 years ago
  • lucidstone
    • 0
      lucidstone  
    • Conniepae:

      Weed is NOT dangerous, regardless of the potency . . . If you think I was insinuating otherwise, then you are mistaken.

      The quote from Lincoln was talking about smoking pot (though he was probably smoking less potent pot), so kudos . . . you can definitely use that quote from an important president that endorsed smoking.

      However, I really really don't think the other 3 quotes are talking about smoking at all . . . but are endorsing the usage of the plant's fibers for industrial benefit.

      If you have any supplemental quotes from those 3 presidents that would imply they were talking about smoking, then I would love to read them . . . and subsequently concede and say you are correct then, and I was misinformed . . . but as it stands, I think you are misinterpreting the other three quotes.

      Keep in mind though that you still have Lincoln in agreement, and that is huge.

      sidenote: Being "stoned" is not a spin word but mainstream terminology that me and my friends quite happily used during our college days . . . different generations just use different terminology. =)

    • 3 years ago
  • Conniepae
    • 0
      Conniepae  
    • Conniepae:

      You're correct, three of the Presidents were probably talking about industrial hemp. Lincoln was talking about smoking it.

      True or false, both are illegal due to the so called war on drugs? No distinction is made between the two, when they decide illegality of the plants.

      My point being, they have distorted the issue. Ordinary Americans don't realize Abraham Lincoln supported smoking cannabis. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams had strong opinions about industrial hemp. Facts about cannabis hemp were removed from educational material, even industrial hemp. They called it other.

      Lies and distortion were used to start a war of choice on American soil, on ordinary Americans. Parents were told lies about cannabis, distorting their judgment by reckless distortion of facts. How many adults would not be alcoholics, had cannabis been a choice. Many people chose alcohol, instead of cannabis due to lies, hidden facts and the war mentality generated to make criminals out of individuals who did choose cannabis over alcohol.

      Much of the funding for the war on drugs came directly from corporations, who stood to gain from the elimination of their competition. A God made plant. Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, alcohol manufacturers, all benefited from the war on cannabis. It's time for our own government to put people before profit of greedy heartless corporation.

    • 3 years ago
  • lucidstone
    • 0
      lucidstone  
    • Conniepae:

      "You're correct, three of the Presidents were probably talking about industrial hemp. Lincoln was talking about smoking it.

      True or false, both are illegal due to the so called war on drugs? No distinction is made between the two, when they decide illegality of the plants."

      Yes, yes, and yes! =)

      Like you point out, the politicians from decades ago wrongly did not make the distinction between the two, and I think it would be wrong to continue not to make the distinction in our arguments for legalization (that was my only point).

      But yes, I'm pretty much in complete agreement with your last response as I feel that it's a much more accurate outlook with much less rhetoric . . . it's "lucid-approved"! =D

      Good conversation though connie, much enjoyed. =)

    • 3 years ago
  • csmonut
  • AveryMoore
    • 0
      AveryMoore  

    • Those wacky Supremos! They're in for it now! Boy did they blow it with the faithful of true GOPerdom.

      I can already see thousands, well maybe it's dozens of placard carrying marchers, demanding the immediate de-peachment of disloyal right benchers.

      Doubtless, POX News teams will be out in force promoting "spontaneous" media arranged "Gavel Parties".

      "If You Want San Diego GOPers To Dictate To The Supreme Court - Bang Your Gavels!" Booyeah!

      Those poor judges. Why do they think the law gives them anywhere to hide behind?

      O'Reilly will have to tell em straight, "You do as I say, or we'll cut your mike."

    • 3 years ago
  • ras_menelik
  • kennymotown
  • eriatarka23
    • 0
      eriatarka23  

    • Theres at least 100 things i can think of that are more important than pot being legal or not.
      So if it will help people start thinking about real issues and not a plant, just legalize the goddamn thing already and lets get on with our lives.

    • 3 years ago
  • ras_menelik
  • cabinettags
  • Conniepae
  • ras_menelik
  • pjacobs51
    • 0
      pjacobs51  

    • Wow! Democracy is working again, I thought it was broken, they must have called one of those service techs in India and "rebooted" it somehow.

    • 3 years ago
  • AveryMoore
    • 0
      AveryMoore  
    • pjacobs51:

      Democracy?

      It's what we used to call "a hidden feature of the Operating System."

      You have to know it's there, or want it to be there, badly enough, to sweat the reboot procedure. It can be both quite exhilarating and very discomfiting for people grown emotionally attached to dysfunction.

    • 3 years ago
  • pjacobs51
  • Conniepae
  • jahbini
  • AveryMoore
  • ras_menelik
  • AveryMoore
    • 0
      AveryMoore  
    • ras_menelik:

      ras_melenik!

      Ah hah! Another propeller-headed science weenie!

      I'll bet that you think POX NEWS is less authoritative or competent to discuss medicine than various medical journals? That's probably impossible!

      Nobody but doctor-people read medical journals, and only when they aren't busy overbilling or they're prescribing the wrong meds. Any media "expert" will tell you POX never does that..

      Besides, who always gets higher viewer ratings, those Science journals, or THE POX?

      Now you know. If it comes from The POX that's all that matters.

      It's not so much a matter of careful and smart analysis of complex issues, but contagious opinion, self supported, and shouted to improve clarity of thought..

    • 3 years ago
  • ras_menelik
  • Abraham99
    • 0
      Abraham99  

    • I am in favor of it. I would vote yes.
      However, I would like them to do research on whether or not this kind of smoking causes lung cancer or breathing problems.

    • 3 years ago
  • jfill
  • JCunliffe
  • ras_menelik
  • AveryMoore
    • 0
      AveryMoore  

    • This is too perfect. A right-wing Supreme Court did this?

      I can see it now - as night falls across this languid nation - countless GOPer heads will read this news and detonate with a thought like Shock and Awe -

      "OMG! - They're ACTIVIST JUDGES! How can they be so Progressive! They're OURS!"

      Love it.

      Just love it. They followed the law.

    • 3 years ago
  • SHAWN_RITTIMAN
  • ras_menelik
  • MinneapolisMafia
  • BFAM_RVS
  • simplecj
  • ras_menelik
    • 0
      ras_menelik  

    • I know it's 14:42:0 but I feel the urge to 4:20 4:20 4:20 ALL DAY

      Yo nickname BUST-UM boy go talk to My Main Judge BEFORE YOU BUST MY DOOR AGAIN !!!

      or I'll take you to the Supreme Court, or what's left of you

      I'm talking to You Sheriff Tom & your now debunked CRIME FORCE!

    • 3 years ago
  • wirehedd
  • morirjedi
    • 0
      morirjedi  

    • They are so stupid. It is what the people want, the law, the White House and the upper courts. But law enforcement does not get new night vision by making drugs legal. Not locking up everyday citizens next to criminals does not get jails built. We need protection from the law not direction.

    • 3 years ago
  • lapedro
  • Conniepae
    • 0
      Conniepae  

    • President Obama should right the wrongs of Richard Nixon and remove cannabis hemp from the Dangerous Substance List and let the conversation begin.

      It's time to end the un-just war on cannabis hemp, using facts, not spinning disinformation. Disinformation should not be spun, it should be removed from the conversation. The truth and nothing but the truth. American laws should represent truth, not spun disinformation.

    • 3 years ago
  • unimatrix0
more from Community:
from the community

top videos