420
Founder
Please tune in to C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" on Monday morning, when I will be discussing the historic medical marijuana case the U.S. Supreme Court will be hearing that day. My appearance is scheduled to air from 7:45 to 8:30 a.m. Eastern time and may repeat later in the day.
The Supreme Court case, Ashcroft v. Raich, was first launched in October 2002, when two medical marijuana patients -- Angel Raich and Diane Monson -- and two caregivers filed a motion asking a federal court to forbid the DEA from arresting them under federal law. They argued that their home use and cultivation of medical marijuana, which is legal under California state law, aren't commercial in nature and do not involve interstate commerce ... and therefore the federal government does not have the constitutional authority to prohibit what they're doing.
The U.S. district court in northern California ruled against Raich in
March 2003, but then the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed
and ruled in favor of Raich in December 2003, shocking the nation. As
a result, Raich, Monson, and patients in similar circumstances have
been legally allowed to use medical marijuana under both state and
federal law in Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, and
Washington since December 2003.
The Marijuana Policy Project's grants program provided the majority of
the funding for this litigation, which is only the second medical
marijuana case ever to reach the Supreme Court.
The Bush administration appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
If the Court rules in favor of Raich, the federal government would be
blocked from arresting medical marijuana patients whose activities are
legal under state law anywhere in the country. If Raich loses,
however, it would not overturn the laws now protecting the right of 57
million Americans living in Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii,
Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington to use medical
marijuana legally under state law.
In short, if our side wins the case, the federal government's war on
medical marijuana will be largely over, and the 40 states without
medical marijuana laws will quickly start to pass such laws. If our
side loses the case, however, we will be no worse off than we were
before the litigation was launched -- medical marijuana would be legal
under certain state laws but not federal law.
According to annual statistics released by the FBI and the U.S.
Sentencing Commission, 99% of all marijuana arrests are made by state
and local authorities under state law; only 1% of marijuana arrests
are made by the DEA and other federal authorities under federal law.
Because of this criminal justice reality, MPP will continue to focus
on making medical marijuana legal from state to state -- just as we
did this year in Montana and Vermont -- regardless of what the Supreme
Court rules. (A ruling is expected sometime in the winter or spring.)
If you'd like to help MPP keep fighting battles like these -- battles
that have a dramatic effect on the marijuana laws across the
nation -- please visit Marijuana Policy Project - We Change Laws! to make a
financial contribution today.
Sincerely,
Rob Kampia
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.
The Supreme Court case, Ashcroft v. Raich, was first launched in October 2002, when two medical marijuana patients -- Angel Raich and Diane Monson -- and two caregivers filed a motion asking a federal court to forbid the DEA from arresting them under federal law. They argued that their home use and cultivation of medical marijuana, which is legal under California state law, aren't commercial in nature and do not involve interstate commerce ... and therefore the federal government does not have the constitutional authority to prohibit what they're doing.
The U.S. district court in northern California ruled against Raich in
March 2003, but then the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed
and ruled in favor of Raich in December 2003, shocking the nation. As
a result, Raich, Monson, and patients in similar circumstances have
been legally allowed to use medical marijuana under both state and
federal law in Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, and
Washington since December 2003.
The Marijuana Policy Project's grants program provided the majority of
the funding for this litigation, which is only the second medical
marijuana case ever to reach the Supreme Court.
The Bush administration appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
If the Court rules in favor of Raich, the federal government would be
blocked from arresting medical marijuana patients whose activities are
legal under state law anywhere in the country. If Raich loses,
however, it would not overturn the laws now protecting the right of 57
million Americans living in Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii,
Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington to use medical
marijuana legally under state law.
In short, if our side wins the case, the federal government's war on
medical marijuana will be largely over, and the 40 states without
medical marijuana laws will quickly start to pass such laws. If our
side loses the case, however, we will be no worse off than we were
before the litigation was launched -- medical marijuana would be legal
under certain state laws but not federal law.
According to annual statistics released by the FBI and the U.S.
Sentencing Commission, 99% of all marijuana arrests are made by state
and local authorities under state law; only 1% of marijuana arrests
are made by the DEA and other federal authorities under federal law.
Because of this criminal justice reality, MPP will continue to focus
on making medical marijuana legal from state to state -- just as we
did this year in Montana and Vermont -- regardless of what the Supreme
Court rules. (A ruling is expected sometime in the winter or spring.)
If you'd like to help MPP keep fighting battles like these -- battles
that have a dramatic effect on the marijuana laws across the
nation -- please visit Marijuana Policy Project - We Change Laws! to make a
financial contribution today.
Sincerely,
Rob Kampia
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.
