Judge sides with Americans for Safe Access, ACLU and drug Policy Alliance in saying California can protect patients 

A San Diego Superior Court judge handed a critical victory to medical marijuana patients nationwide Dec. 7, 2006, affirming the ability and authority of states to exempt qualified patients from criminal penalties, despite federal policy that prohibits all cannabis use.

Following oral arguments by the Americans for Safe Access, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Drug Policy Alliance, Judge William Nevitt confirmed the validity of California’s medical marijuana laws, rejecting the contention of San Diego, San Bernardino and Merced counties that such laws are made invalid by federal law.    

“The judge agreed with us that there is no real conflict between federal and state law, and that the state’s voluntary ID cards program does not interfere with the purpose of Prop. 215,” said Joe Elford, chief counsel for Americans for Safe Access (ASA). “This ruling upholds both the will of the voters and the legislature’s attempt to help implement it. The protections provided to patients under state law have been confirmed.”

Since the judge’s ruling, Merced county officials have announced that they will be implementing the ID card program immediately. San Diego and San Bernardino counties have said they will appeal the decision.   

The Medical Marijuana Program act, enacted by the state legislature in 2003 as SB420, requires counties to implement an identification card program that allows law enforcement to properly identify legitimate patients. The judge ruled that SB420 does not alter the intent of the Compassionate Use Act, passed by voters as Proposition 215, which allows qualified patients with a doctor’s recommendation to use medical marijuana. Voter initiatives cannot be substantially changed or overturned by the legislature.

PATIENT VICTORY:

Joe Elford, Chief counsel for Americans for Safe Access in their battles with San Diego county and other jurisdictions that are out of compliance with state laws, announces the recent favorable court ruling.

Oaksterdam News photo courtesy of ASA.  

“This is a vital win for patients and a resounding step forward for the medical marijuana movement,” said Adam Wolf, an attorney with the ACLU who joined ASA’s Joe Elford in arguing the case. “This case, the first and only frontal assault on medical marijuana laws in the nation, has been soundly rejected. The victory here saves state medical marijuana laws from a cruel and ill-founded suit by a handful of rogue counties.”    

The California Attorney General’s office argued in parallel with ASA, the ACLU, and Drug Policy Alliance (DPA)

“The judge agreed with us that there is no real conflict between federal and state law, and that the state’s voluntary ID cards program does not interfere with the purpose of Prop 215.” — Joe Elford

that state medical marijuana laws are not rendered invalid by conflicting federal statutes – consistent with the opinions of the attorneys general of several other states, including Colorado, Hawaii and Oregon, which permit medical use of cannabis.

“The ruling is a triumph for not only patients and the rule of law, but for the democratic process as well,” said Tamar Todd, an attorney for DPA. “Americans need not march in lock step with the federal government’s failed drug war”   

The case originated from a lawsuit initially brought by San Diego County, and later joined by San Bernardino and Merced counties, against the state of California. ASA, the ACLU and DPA intervened in the proceedings on behalf of qualified patients and their caregivers and doctors in order to assure adequate representation of those most impacted by the case.   

The groups represented Wendy Christakes, William Britt and Yvonne Westbrook, Californians who use physician-recommended cannabis to treat medical conditions and their side-effects, including chronic pain and sciatica, multiple sclerosis, rectal cancer, epilepsy and post-polio syndrome.    

The groups also represented Pamela Sakuda, a patient who passed away after the lawsuit was filed, as well as Sakuda’s spouse and caregiver, Norbert Litzinger and Dr. Stephen O’Brien, a physician who specializes in HIV/AIDS treatment in Oakland, California, and believes that many of his seriously ill patients benefit from the medical use of cannabis.

“For the tens of thousands of seriously ill Californians who depend on medical marijuana, this victory could not be more significant,” said Steph Sherer, ASA executive director. “We just wish Pam had lived to see this.”    

In addition to being co-counsel, ASA was also a party to the proceedings on behalf of its membership, which includes thousands of medical marijuana patients, caregivers and physicians residing in California. The Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM) was represented by the groups as well. WAMM is a medical marijuana collective and hospice located in Santa Cruz, California, whose 250 members, the majority of whom are terminally ill, use cannabis to treat a range of conditions.

* Dolphin is communications director for Americans for Safe Access. The groups’ legal papers are online at AmericansForSafeAccess.org/briefbank. The ruling issued by Judge William Nevitt is available at safeaccessnow.org/downloads/SD_Ruling.pdf.