Marijuana distribution

Medical marijuana activist and writer Ed Rosenthal had been authorized to distribute marijuana to persons claiming medical need for the drug. He operated one of several marijuana clubs that provided marijuana to patients. California voters had earlier passed a ballot proposition authorizing the distribution of marijuana to persons suffering from glaucoma, AIDS, cancer, and other diseases whose doctors documented their need for the drug. The city of Oakland, California, had also authorized Rosenthal to distribute marijuana. 

Doyle, Charles. Marijuana for Medical Purposes The Supreme Courtis Decision in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and Related Legal Issues. Washington, D.C. Congressional Research Service, 2002. Summarizes the Supreme Court s latest medical marijuana decision, which refused to recognize a medical necessity defense for cultivating or distributing marijuana. The existence of state laws sanctioning medical marijuana have no federal effect. Related constimtional issues that may still come before the Court are summarized. 

For these reasons, we hold that medical necessity is not a defense to manufacturing and distributing marijuana. The Court of Appeals erred when it held that medical necessity is a legally cognizable defense. 190 F.3d, at 1114. It further erred when it instructed the District Court on remand to consider the criteria for a medical necessity exemption, and, should it modify the injunction, to set forth those criteria in the modification order. Id., at 1115. 

One of the justices, Stephen G. Breyer, declined to rule on the case because his brother, a U.S. district judge, had issued two of the original rulings that barred California cannabis buyers cooperatives from distributing marijuana. These rulings started the chain of events that brought the case to the Supreme Court. 

The body is composed of about 70% water by weight. The fluid portion of the blood (plasma) accounts for 6 liters or about 4% of that total. Intracellular water constitutes about 41 % while interstitial (between cells) fluid is 13%. The rest is extracellular. Therefore solubility in water will be an important factor in drug distribution. Fat depots within adipose and other fatty tissues are also important in that they can sequester lipophilic molecules and release them very slowly back into the general blood circulation. This is the case with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive component of marijuana. It shows two periods of presence in the blood the first immediately after consumption and the second a more lingering presence for up to 27 days after use. 

Marijuana had not been included under the Harrison Act. The Marijuana Tax Act brought the plant under federal regulation, also using the form of a tax law. The essential feature was that a tax was imposed on the manufacture and distribution of marijuana. Because a growing number of states had already made possession of marijuana illegal, a dealer or user faced a Catch-22 either pay the ta.x and thereby furnish evidence of intent to violate the state law, or not pay the tax and be subject to being charged with a federal tax offense. 

This decision established a firm constitutional basis for federal requirements being imposed on the distribution of drugs and upheld the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1914, which would be the main instrument for federal control of dangerous drugs until the passage of the Controlled Substances Act in 1970. (Congress would also use its taxation power to control drugs in the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937.)... 

The Controlled Substances Act, 84 Stat. 1242, 21 U.S.C. 801 etseq., prohibits the manufacture and distribution of various drugs, including marijuana. In this case, we must decide whether there is a medical necessity exception to these prohibitions. We hold that there is not. 

The Controlled Substances Act provides that, [ejxcept as authorized by this subchapter, it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally. .. to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, a controlled substance. 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1). The subchapter, in turn, establishes exceptions. For marijuana (and other... 

Finally, the Cooperative contends that we should construe the Controlled Substances Act to include a medical necessity defense in order to avoid what it considers to be difficult constitutional questions. In particular, the Cooperative asserts that, shorn of a medical necessity defense, the statute exceeds Congress Commerce Clause powers, violates the substantive due process rights of patients, and offends the fundamental liberties of the people under the Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments. As the Cooperative acknowledges, however, the canon of constitutional avoidance has no application in the absence of statutory ambiguity. Because we have no doubt that the Controlled Substances Act cannot bear a medical necessity defense to distributions of marijuana, we do not find guidance in this avoidance principle. Nor do we consider the underlying constitutional issues today. Because the Court of Appeals did not address these claims, we decline to do so in the first instance. 

The answer, according to the court, is no, since the Controlled Substance Act defines Schedule I drugs as those with no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. The ruling allows state laws permitting the personal use and cultivation of medical marijuana to stand, but prohibits the kind of organized distribution that the cooperatives had engaged in, since, the court reasoned, these organizations cannot claim a medical necessity for marijuana use. 

Marijuana is a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act whose possession and distribution is for-... 

In 2000, the UCR estimated 1.6 million arrests for drug violations in the United States among all age groups. The UCR defines drug violations as state and/or local offenses related to the unlawful sale, purchase, distribution, manufacture, cultivation, possession, or use of a narcotic drug. These reports consider marijuana a narcotic drug. 

Multidrug distribution rings (with cocaine, LSD, marijuana, hydromorphone, diazepam, and anabolic steroids),... 

The medical use of marijuana is not new. Five thousand years ago, the legendary Chinese Emperor Shen Nung was said to have prescribed marijuana for ailments such as gout, malaria, rheumatism, and even gas pains. — Until 1937, Americans considered marijuana a recognized medicine in good standing, distributed by leading pharmaceutical firms, and on sale at many pharmacies..—... 

It was once a patriotic duty for an American farmer to grow marijuana (hemp). In 1942 a film called Hemp for Victory was produced and distributed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to encourage U.S. farmers to grow cannabis for much-needed hemp products, particularly rope. During World War II, narcotic drug use reached its twentieth-century low point in the United States. This was due to a continual decline in use as well as diminished supply due to disrupted international transportation. 

The CSA centralized federal regulations into one statute and separated marijuana from addicting drugs. At the federal level both simple possession and nonprofit distribution of small amounts of marijuana were changed from felonies to misdemeanors. In addition, first-time offenders could have their criminal records expunged. Many states copied these federal efforts, and within a few years all but Nevada had reduced simple possession of marijuana to a misdemeanor. 

In addition to narcotics and marijuana, the nonmedical use of anabolic steroids became increasingly popular during the 1980s. This was particularly true for athletes seeking to increase skeletal muscle mass and performance, as discussed previously. The Omnibus Anti-Substance Abuse Act of 1988 made the unlawful distribution of anabolic steroids across state lines a felony under federal law, punishable by 1 to 3 years in prison and a fine of up to 250,000. State laws governing the possession and distribution of anabolic drugs vary, but a conviction in most states carries a stiff fine and imprisonment. 

It is the character of Kennedy s friends rather than his own low personal standard of morality that explains why as a leader of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee he has come forward as the leading sponsor of federal legalization of marijuana and why he has given his approval to decriminalization of heroin "for experimental purposes." The job of the Kennedy dynasty is to usher in British dope and the criminals who distribute it — through the front door. 

---