[666]

A landmark decision for all Californian's quietly made history on August 20th in a Santa Cruz courtroom.
As It Stands, we can score this as a successful round for state's rights.
California voters may finally get what they asked for a dozen years ago.

Judge says Feds violated 10th Amendment by subverting state marijuana laws
As It Stands by Dave Stancliff/For the Times-Standard 09/14/2008
http://www.times-standard.com/othervoices/ci_10461558


A landmark decision for all Californian's quietly made history on August 20th in a Santa Cruz courtroom.

For the first time since 1996, when the Compassionate Use Act was passed, the federal authorities have been charged with violating the 10th Amendment for harassing medical marijuana patients and state authorities.

The case of Santa Cruz vs. Mukasey, was heard by U.S. District Court Judge ****** Fogel, who said the Bush Administration's request to dismiss a lawsuit by Santa Cruz city and county officials, and the Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM), wasn't going to happen.

In a recent telephone interview with Alan Hopper, an ACLU counsel familiar with the case, I asked him what came next?

”The plaintiff will get a get a court-ordered discovery document that will allow them to get documents, and even depositions, from the federal authorities to support their claims,” he explained.

So now it's the city, county, and WAMM's turn to prove their case against the federal government. The court has recognized a concerted effort by the federal government to sabotage state medical marijuana laws, which violates the U.S. Constitution. The significance of this ruling, the first of its kind, cannot be overstated.

California voters may finally get what they asked for a dozen years ago. When the court said that the federal government had gone out of its way to arrest and prosecute some of the most legitimate doctors, patients, caregivers, and dispensary owners that had been working with state and local officials, it finally drew a line-in-the sand.

An example of the federal authorities violations was their pursuit of WAMM. This non-profit group has been around for many years, and has been fully supported by the city and county of Santa Cruz. They have been referred to, by officials, as the model medical marijuana patient's collective.

The group was functioning so smoothly that the city even allowed them to hold regular meetings to distribute marijuana to its patients on the steps of city hall! The federal agents still went after them, which brought about this court decision.

When the ACLU filed this lawsuit to stop them from targeting medical marijuana providers and patients, they opened a door that may finally lead to no federal interference in California's medical marijuana law.

We must not forget that medical marijuana brings in about $100 million each year in tax revenue. Conferring total legitimacy to the law will allow this cash flow to continue, and hopefully, increase over time.

When the judge ruled the feds were threatening physicians who recommended marijuana, he set the stage for regaining patient's rights. The ruling clearly pointed out that the feds were also threatening government officials who issue medical marijuana cards, and interfered with municipal zoning plans.

In the summation, the court found that, “There was a calculated pattern of selective arrests and prosecutions by the federal government with the intent to render California's medical marijuana laws impossible to implement and therefore forced Californian's and their political subdivisions to re-criminalize medical marijuana.”

In a recent column, I mentioned California's Attorney General Jerry Brown had passed out an 11-page directive that all law agencies were to go by. I expressed concern that the federal authorities would ignore those guidelines, but upon finding out about this recent ruling I now have some cause for hope.

It sure sounded like Hopper was looking forward to the next phase, and he seemed confident that positive change lay ahead. Asked which presidential candidate would be more amenable to upholding medical marijuana laws, he cleverly replied that he thought they both would be willing to work for change. He could be right too. This is a year of change.

This on-going battle with the federal authorities ignoring California's laws has been well-documented in the past. Why hasn't there been more coverage for such an epic ruling? Its potential as breakthrough legislation is something all Californian's should know about in my opinion.

The war against medical marijuana hasn't been won yet, but this could be the breakthrough everybody's waited for. At the core of the war waged by the federal government against the voter's will, is the failed War on Drugs by the Bush Administration. It's about time someone told them to back off.

As It Stands, we can score this as a successful round for state's rights.


666

[sandyacres]

Originally Posted by 666

In the summation, the court found that, “There was a calculated pattern of selective arrests and prosecutions by the federal government with the intent to render California's medical marijuana laws impossible to implement and therefore forced Californian's and their political subdivisions to re-criminalize medical marijuana.”

If anything brings these guys down, it will be this...

THEY CANNOT USURP THE RIGHTS OF CALIFORNIANS TO PASS THEIR OWN LAWS...it's called legislative self determination.

AND BUSH IS A FLIP-FLOPER! (And so is Bob Barr, for the matter) Read this Washington Post article from 1999:

Bush: Marijuana Laws Up to States
By Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 22, 1999; Page B7

Republican presidential front-runner George W. Bush says he believes individual states should choose whether to ban the use of marijuana for medical purposes, but is stopping short of saying the District should enjoy that privilege.

The Texas governor, who in recent weeks has distanced himself from several positions taken by conservative Republicans in Congress, said that when it came to congressional efforts to ban a medical marijuana law here, he was in Congress's corner.

Campaigning in Seattle on Saturday, Bush answered questions about medical marijuana laws by saying, "I believe each state can choose that decision as they so choose."

The GOP presidential front-runner opposes the medical use of marijuana himself, his campaign spokesman said yesterday. Bush added that he felt certain that no attempt would be successful in his own state.

As for the District, Bush spokesman Scott McClellan said yesterday that "D.C. laws are subject to congressional review."

Although Bush supports congressional influence in D.C. decisions, his support of states' rights on the medical marijuana issue conflicts with many GOP lawmakers' belief that such laws undermine anti-drug efforts.

House and Senate leaders this fall are seeking to prevent the District from enacting a medical marijuana law, even though 69 percent of D.C. votes approved such a measure last year.

No other presidential candidate has opposed medical use of marijuana while saying states should decide the issue.

R. Keith Stroup, executive director for the National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws in Washington, which has backed D.C.'s drug initiative, said he was "delighted" by Bush's support of state authority.

"Governor Bush is at least being consistent," Stroup said. "Republicans frequently talk about devolution, returning power to the states. . . . It is encouraging to hear him indicate that he would leave this decision to them."

Besides the District, voters in Alaska, Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon and Washington have approved state laws permitting the possession, use, cultivation and distribution of marijuana if recommended by a physician for serious illness.

Advocates say the drug can relieve the symptoms of AIDS, cancer and other illnesses. Opponents maintain that patients have other alternatives and that legalizing drugs sets a dangerous precedent, particularly for children.

In September 1998, the full House voted 310 to 93 in favor of a nonbinding resolution opposing marijuana legalization for medical use among the states.

Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.), a vocal critic of the D.C. initiative, said yesterday that the White House national drug policy director, Barry R. McCaffrey, supported the House vote.

Barr said that Bush "has staked out a position to the left of the Clinton administration, which is a very odd place for a Republican presidential candidate to be."

President Clinton has vetoed the District's $4.7 billion budget--in part because of a provision sponsored by Barr to overturn D.C. marijuana legislation--on reasoning similar to Bush's.

"We oppose these initiatives, and we oppose legislation to make marijuana legal," White House spokesman Jake Siewert said yesterday, "but on a number of areas, Congress infringed on the right of D.C. to govern itself."

© 1999 The Washington Post Company

Thanks for posting these articles. I'm very interested in knowing a rough time line for the ACLU/WAMM lawsuit.

[kennabis]

As It Stands, we can score this as a successful round for state's rights.

vijaya!!!

[Jeffster]

Thanks for the good news post. It seems like the MMJ movement got a really big boost from this decision, and I hope and pray this keeps going in our community's favor.

[666]

Originally Posted by sandyacres

...
Bush: Marijuana Laws Up to States
By Spencer S. Hsu Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 22, 1999; Page B7
...
Campaigning in Seattle on Saturday, Bush answered questions about medical marijuana laws by saying, "I believe each state can choose that decision as they so choose."

The GOP presidential front-runner opposes the medical use of marijuana himself, his campaign spokesman said yesterday. Bush added that he felt certain that no attempt would be successful in his own state.
....

Thanks Sandyacres!!!

I tell people about this all the time when they talk of voting for McCain.

I say, "McCain is worst then BUSH on MMJ because at least Bush TALKED like he would leave it up to statess rights, where as McCain WANTS IT STOPPED and makes no bones about it!"

See my feeling is that;

a.) Bush has left 'us' alone, basicly, no blitz raids from one end of the state to the other. Whch he could do (look at what happend when SD called the Fed in - SLAM!)

b.) McCain wants to stamp it out, he goes beyonds Bush lack of belife he's on the 'its a gate way drug' and sure isn't talkin states rights for the last bunch of people who asked him.

c.) Obama is taken a 'hard' pro-stand, putting it in writing with ASA and Norml and walking the fine line with the anti-drug people by making MMJ a medicne (GOOD) VS. "dope" = dope that needs stamping out.

Anyway ALL OTHER ISSUES ASIDE (this IS a MMJ place right?) Obama seems to be the safest choice if MMJ is the issue. As to the other guy, he lacks total compassion and went and dumped his wife the moment she got sick, so where does that leave him with 'us' and MMJ? - watch any of the vidios "Must be better drugs" "I don't belive in it" "I will contiuned the raids." "We don't bust sick people PROVET IT - I don't belive you no one who is busted is really sick!" "Its a gate way drug, no one has proven it works as a medicen and we have better REAL medicen around the AMA tells me so!"

Compair and contrast that with Bush's lie ... McCain don't care enough about us to lie to us. I think you can trust him to screw us over if he and Sara get in - oh ya buddy. Can we trust Obama? I don't know - I'll take my chances with Obama when the other guy (McCain) is so anit-MMJ he rails on and on about it! (Bush didn't do that).


666

[DSW90049]

This is a creative legal argument and it just might work.
It will take creative thinking to get the feds to leave CA to do what its voters have mandated.
Oh yes, it will also take the election of Obama/Biden as Pres and not McCain and the Hunter Princess NutJob from the frozen north.

Get everybody you know to get out and vote.

This one counts because this Prez gets to appoint LOTS of federal judges including hopefully a few to the Supremes. There isn't a reason on God's Green Earth why the MMJ movement cannot win this thing- in the courts, and, as a matter of constitutional law. I congratulate the creative legal minds behind this and so much other good work!

[sandyacres]

Originally Posted by 666

Anyway ALL OTHER ISSUES ASIDE (this IS a MMJ place right?) Obama seems to be the safest choice if MMJ is the issue.

I'm with you on that. Along with making health care more affordable and accessible, Obama's inclination towards a more reasonable approach on medical marijuana is one of the biggest reasons why I'm voting for him. We have got to change some things in this country and a more compassionate approach, in my opinion, is what this country needs right now. After 8 years of Bush, I feel abused and neglected, like a prisoner in my own country. I think we could all use a little compassion. When Bush referenced the "angry left" in his speech at RNC convention, I though to my self, I'm not that far to the left, but I am ANGRY. Every American has the right to be.

Peace.

[gopers]

If you look up the Federalist Papers and look at our Bill of Rights. A state can pass any law, as long as it does not infringe upon another states commerce! We can't export MMJ, our state laws are there and the feds. can't walk all over them according to 2 great documents. Thats why abortion's and death penalties are cases the Supreme Court hates to look at. The states have their own rights and can pass any law as long as it does not fringe upon the commerce of any other state.

In another thread, I had posted the Federalist Papers and the Bill of Rights. I won't do it here. Its easy to find, but it is alot of reading!

I wish our chicken of a govenor and atty. general would fight the feds.

[sandyacres]

Originally Posted by gopers

I wish our chicken of a govenor and atty. general would fight the feds.

Not to mention THE SPEAKER OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES! I cannot believe that the woman who controls the agenda in the United States House of Representatives has not addressed this issue. In fact, when she was asked about it in Denver, she said people need to contact their legislators. Huh? When she sets the agenda! I don't get it. She just needs to find one or two low-profile programs that Bush really likes and cut the funding for them, threaten to cut the budget of the Executive Office of the President, things like that. Instead she just sits there and WINES on every TV interview she does. Democrats are going to have to learn to play hardball or the Republicans will continue to set the agenda on this issue. Hell, her office is in San Francisco...has there ever been a protest there? Or protest there everyday for 30 days? I suspect a bunch of sick patients on her door step everyday wouldn't look so good.

[bubblepeak]

We are living in surreal times. It is how people control their environment. Sarah Paulin is downright frightening with McCain!

Read this article to see what is likely to happen if McCain/Paulin wins.

Send this to everybody who you know!

http://www.bestcyrano.org/THOMASPAINE/?p=963#comment-24922

I even left a comment there. It's obvious on which one is mine.

[gopers]

Originally Posted by sandyacres

Not to mention THE SPEAKER OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES! I cannot believe that the woman who controls the agenda in the United States House of Representatives has not addressed this issue. In fact, when she was asked about it in Denver, she said people need to contact their legislators. Huh? When she sets the agenda! I don't get it. She just needs to find one or two low-profile programs that Bush really likes and cut the funding for them, threaten to cut the budget of the Executive Office of the President, things like that. Instead she just sits there and WINES on every TV interview she does. Democrats are going to have to learn to play hardball or the Republicans will continue to set the agenda on this issue. Hell, her office is in San Francisco...has there ever been a protest there? Or protest there everyday for 30 days? I suspect a bunch of sick patients on her door step everyday wouldn't look so good.

Sandy you are 100% right about the Whiner if the House.

Originally Posted by bubblepeak

We are living in surreal times. It is how people control their environment. Sarah Paulin is downright frightening with McCain!

Read this article to see what is likely to happen if McCain/Paulin wins.

Send this to everybody who you know!

http://www.bestcyrano.org/THOMASPAINE/?p=963#comment-24922

I even left a comment there. It's obvious on which one is mine.

Bubble, The Islamist Facist do want to kill Americans. If you don't think so, you have alot to learn. Does this mean we should hate Muslims? No, but our country as a whole, we have to be vigilant and go after all who are respocible for the 9-11 attacks.

I would love to go back to the 1700's and ask Thomas Paine if he would please become a veagan. If I could only video record his response that would be cool. How do you think he would respond? In todays world I believe that if you chhose to be vegitarian or veagan then thats cool, but, I should not be told by anyone of what I can or can't eat.

[Oldog4tz]

Originally Posted by gopers

The Islamist Facist

I assume you refer to Robertson, Falwell, Dobson, et al.as "Christianist Facists"?

[gopers]

Originally Posted by Oldog4tz

I assume you refer to Robertson, Falwell, Dobson, et al.as "Christianist Facists"?

Um, Ok. WTF are you talking about Olddog!

You and I may not like what all that the christian fundamentalist in this country have said or done politically, but have they blown up and killed many innocent civilians all in the name of God or Jesus Christ?

No!

Who blew up the Marine Barracks in Beirut in 1984?
Who blew up the US military barracks in Saudia Arabia in 1994?
Who blew up the Pan Am 747 over Scotland?
Who Blew up 2 embassies in Africa in1998?
Who blew up our Destroyer in Oman in 1998?
Who tried to blow up the WTC Tower 1 in 1993?
Who flew 2 jetliners into the WTC Towers 1 & 2 in 2001?
Who flew a jetliner into the Pentagon in 2001?
Who tried to fly a jetliner into the Capital Building in DC in 2001, but were stopped by some brave souls!?

Why don't you go to this site and tell me what Christians in the US and for that matter any other religion is doing this?
http://www.stophonourkillings.com/in...ticle&sid=2316

Or why don't Muslims like this guy get media attention. Well?
http://www.aifdemocracy.org/

Oh, I know why, is it because he's not radical?

How about this editorial from that right wing paper called the Boston Globe....
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...radical_islam/

Oh, on the subject of CAIR go here to read about their Federal Court case,
and look! The ACLU are defending them. Yes that group, All Criminals Love Us!
What is ironic is a couple of things here, the MSM is not reporting this, and the lead legal team from the ACLU does not have anyone on it with Jewish names defending them! Why is that?
Go here....http://www.investigativeproject.org/profile/172

And last but not least, the group of students who at a college student fair probably wont have a table next to the Jewish Student Union is this group!
http://www.a-rab.net/about

So Dog don't talk to me about Facists or I will start talking about the MILLIONS of people who were killed by a group people who the '60's peace nics loved, that people power group called, communist!

[Oldog4tz]

Guess what !! there are still communists - me for instance :partysmile:

[gopers]

As long as I am alive, this country will never be run by communist.

I won't put up with that bullshit.

Thats why in our colleges today, they don't teach what the communist did to over 30 million people in a 50 year span. The wackos who are teaching them are in love with that bullshit! Uncle Joe wiped out over 20 million of his own citizens, I think that made Adolf jealous.

[palmspringsbum]

In the topix comments on the article someone pointed out that there is no federal courthouse in Santa Cruz, and they are right. Fogel does not hold court here.