Medical marijuana

Medical marijuana remains a controversial topic, but synthetic THC, dronabinol, marketed under the trade name Marinol, has been available by prescription since 1986. The dronabinol analog nabilone is another THC prescription drug marketed under the name Cesamet. Marinol and Cesamet, taken as capsules, have Food Drug Administration approval as an antinausea agent and appetite stimulant (for AIDS patients), but they are also prescribed for depression and muscle spasms. In 2005, Canada was the first country to approve Sativex, a cannabis spray that relieves pain in people with multiple sclerosis. 

MAPS - supporting research with MDMA, psychedelics and medical marijuana since 1986... 

MAPS has sponsored efforts to initiate FDA-approved clinical trials, is studying the use of vaporizers to heat marijuana but not bum it, and is seeking pemiission to start a medical marijuana production facility. 

In recent years federal authorities have pressured doctors not even to discuss medical marijuana as an option for their patients. They sought to revoke an offending doctor s license to prescribe federally controlled narcotics. Such an action would make it virmally impossible for many doctors to practice medicine in their specialty. However, in October 2002, a federal appeals court in San Erancisco ruled that such a sanction violates the constimtional right of doctors and patients to discuss health matters freely. About a year later the Supreme Court let the decision stand. The decision does not affect the illegality of actually prescribing medical marijuana, however. 

The cooperative had also argued that even if the necessity defense is not allowed, the Controlled Substances Act exceeds the power of Congress under the constitution s Commerce Clause, and that enforcing this law against medical marijuana patients would deprive them of the right to due process and infringe on liberties guaranteed by the Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments. However, because these constitutional issues were not raised earlier in the appeals process, the Court declined to consider them. 

This ruling suggests that the necessity defense is unlikely to be permitted in federal court, even when bolstered by a local community s or even state s decision to support medical marijuana use. However, substantive constitutional challenges to federal drug regulations may be more successful. See the case of Raich v. Ashcroft, discussed later. In that case the question is whether the constitutional power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce properly extends to local, noncommercial medical use of marijuana. 

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. 

This decision probably seems to have had more of a political impact than a legal one. It has energized medical marijuana advocates as well as supporters of jury nullification—the idea that jurors should be able to decide whether a law is being fairly applied in a particular situation. Barring the acknowledgement of a medical necessity defense, the well-established principle that federal laws take precedence when in conflict with state laws means that the medical marijuana dispute would have to be ultimately resolved on the national level. 

In a defeat for medical marijuana advocates, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that the federal Controlled Substances Act precludes a medical necessity defense on the part of the Oakland, California, Cannabis Buyers Club. February Officials at the popular drug education program DARE admit that some of the techniques they have been using may be ineffective. They begin a process of reviewing research and revising the curriculum. 

Federal authorities close several medical marijuana clubs, mainly in California. Operators such as Ed Rosenthal in Oakland, California, are arrested and charged under federal laws, which do not recognize the smoked form of marijuana as a medical drug. 

January California medical marijuana activist Ed Rosenthal is convicted in federal court of growing marijuana and of conspiracy. Many of the jurors, who had not been allowed to hear that Rosenthal had permission from the state to operate his dispensary, react angrily after the verdict. Rosenthal does not receive any jail time. 

October 14 The U.S. Supreme Court lets stand an appeals court decision that doctors and patients have a constitutional right to discuss all health-related matters, including medical marijuana. Federal authorities had sought to revoke prescription licenses for physicians who discussed the matter. 

Phrases should be put in quotes if you want them to be matched as phrases rather than as individual words. Examples include needle exchange, harm reduction, and medical 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. 

Randall, Blanchard, IV. Medical Use of Marijuana Policy and Regulatory Issues. Washington, D.C. Congressional Research Service, 2002. Describes the development of the medical marijuana issue and summarizes and analyzes policy issues. Government regulatory decisions, congressional proposals, and state ballot initiatives are also discussed. 

Koch, Kathy. Medical Marijuana. CQ Researcher, August 20, 1999, pp. 705-728. Covers the medical marijuana movement, state initiatives, and the question of legality of cannabis buyers clubs. 

Drug War Facts Medical Marijuana. Common Sense for Drug Policy. Available online. URL http //www.drugwarfacts.org/medicalm.htm. Updated on September 12, 2003. Provides facts and statistics (with sources) on the implementation of medical marijuana programs in the United States and testimony by experts as to marijuana s effectiveness as a medicine. 

Medical Marijuana Program. State of Oregon, Department of Health and Human Services. Available online. URL http //www.ohd.hr.state.or. us/mm/index.c m Downloaded on January 8, 2004. Provides basic facts and answers to frequently asked questions about Oregon s medical marijuana program. 

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. 

The decriminalization and legalization of marijuana are intricately woven into the medical marijuana movement. Essentially, it is a debate over the value of marijuana s medicinal properties compared with the risks posed by its use. NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, has been in the forefront of this 30-year controversy since they first petitioned in 1972 to move marijuana to a Schedule II category. NORML and other proponents of medical marijuana maintain that when compared with drugs such as heroin and cocaine, marijuana is not only safe but holds great potential as a prescription drug. 

As part of its support for the legalization of medical marijuana, NORML advocates the complete decriminalization of marijuana, a step that would remove all penalties for the private possession and the responsible use of marijuana by adults. Under this scenario, private marijuana users, including those with serious medical conditions, would not be arrested, but large-scale commercial sellers would still be violating drug laws. NORML also calls for the development of a legally controlled market for marijuana in which adult consumers could buy marijuana for personal use from safe, legal sources. 

Many prominent people and organizations have supported the legalization of medical marijuana, including the American Public Health Association, former U.S. Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders, national associations of prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys, and the editorial boards of numerous newspapers, among others. Public opinion polls conducted by TIME/CNN in October 2002 report that approximately 80 percent of the American public supports patient access... 

In some areas there are medical Marijuana Buyers Clubs, where people who are seriously ill join together to buy the drug even though they know they are breaking the law. 

Medical Marijuana Gets the High Sign," Health, November-December, 1996, p. 23. 

---