Court’s Medical Marijuana Ruling a First Step
The recent Supreme Court ruling on the medical use of marijuana is a definite step in the right direction, but there seems to be widespread confusion on what the ruling actually says. The Supremes upheld a lower court in permitting doctors and patients to freely discuss the use of marijuana for medical purposes, without federal punishment for doing so. A recent federal law had threatened to yank a physician’s license to prescribe medications if he recommended “medical pot” to his patient.The ruling does not repeal the federal laws on the growing, distribution, or use of marijuana for any reason — including medical. Even in the seven Western states within the 9th Circuit, which had passed laws approving the use of cannabis for therapeutic purposes, the federal anti-pot laws still override the states’ permission.
Additionally, this latest ruling only applies to the Western states in the 9th Circuit. Maine and Colorado also have passed “medical pot laws” but are not included, as they are in other court jurisdictions.
The federal statute being challenged said that even a doctor-patient discussion recommending pot’s potential benefits was illegal. The administration’s position was that such talk subverts government efforts to stamp out pot smoking, which it regards as dangerous to society. The court disagreed, finding that the law violated the First Amendment and also interfered with the privacy of the patient-physician relationship.
It’s good to see some rationality being exercised. If a patient and his or her doc can’t have a candid talk, who can?
(For an excellent discussion, see The New York Times or the Los Angeles Times of Oct. 15.)
Sandy Bartlett
Community Education Coordinator, AIDS Services of Austin
This article appears in November 14 • 2003.