Laserfiche WebLink
refuses to acknowledge medical uses for <br />cannabis, has meant that Americans have <br />turned to state-based solutions. The laws vot- <br />ers and legislators have passed are intended <br />to mitigate the effects of the federal govern- <br />ment's prohibition on medical cannabis by <br />allowing qualified patients to use it without <br />state or local interference. Beginning with <br />California in 1996, voters passed initiatives in <br />eight states plus the District of Columbia -- <br />Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Montana, Nevada, <br />Oregon, and Washington. State legislatures <br />followed suit, with elected officials in Hawaii, <br />Maryland, Rhode Island, and Vermont taking <br />action to protect patients from criminal penal- <br />ty, and the California legislature amending its <br />voter initiative in 2003. <br />Momentum for these state-level provisions for <br />compassionate use and safe access has contin- <br />ued to build as more research on the thera- <br />peutic uses of cannabis is published. And the <br />public advocacy of well-known cannabis <br />patients such as the Emmy-winning talkshow <br />host Montel Williams has also increased public <br />awareness and created political pressure for <br />compassionate state and local solutions. <br />Twice in the past decade the U.S. Supreme <br />Court has taken up the question. In the most <br />recent case, Gonzales v. Raich, a split court <br />upheld the ability of federal officials to prose- <br />cute patients if they so choose, but did not <br />overturn state laws. In the wake of that deci- <br />sion, the attorneys general of California, <br />Hawaii, Oregon, and Colorado all issued legal <br />opinions or statements reaffirming their <br />state's medical cannabis laws. The duty of <br />state and local law enforcement is to the <br />enforcement and implementation of state, <br />not federal, law. <br />HISTORY OF MEDICAL CANNABIS IN <br />CALIFORNIA <br />Local officials and voters in California have <br />recognized the needs of medical cannabis <br />patients in their communities and have taken <br />action, even before voters made it legal in <br />1996. In 1991, 80% of San Francisco voters <br />supported Proposition P, a ballot initiative <br />which recommended anon-enforcement poli- <br />cy for the medical use, cultivation and distri- <br />bution of marijuana. In 1992, citing both the <br />interests of their constituency and the <br />endorsement of therapeutic use by the <br />California Medical Association, the San <br />Francisco Board of Supervisors adopted a res- <br />olution urging the mayor and district attorney <br />to accept letters from recommending physi- <br />cians (Resolution No. 141-98). In 1993, the <br />Sonoma Board of Supervisors approved a res- <br />olution mirroring a Senate Joint Resolution <br />passed earlier that year, noting that a UN <br />committee had called for cannabis to be <br />made available by prescription and calling on <br />"Federal and State representatives to support <br />returning [cannabis] preparations to the list of <br />available medicines which can be prescribed <br />by licensed physicians" (Resolution No. 93-1547). <br />Since 1996 when 56% of California voters <br />approved the Compassionate Use Act (CUA), <br />public support for safe and legal access to <br />medical cannabis has only increased. A <br />statewide Field poll in 2004 found that "three <br />in four voters (74%) favors implementation of <br />the law. Voter support for the implementa- <br />tion of Prop. 215 cuts across all partisan, ideo- <br />logical and age subgroups of the state." <br />(field.com/fieldpol Ionl ine/subscri bers/RIs2105.pdf) <br />Even before the release of that Field poll, <br />state legislators recognized that there is both <br />strong support among voters for implement- <br />ing the safe and legal access promised by the <br />Compassionate Use Act (CUA) and little direc- <br />tion as to how local officials should proceed. <br />This led to the drafting and passage of Senate <br />Bill 420 in 2003, which amended the CUA to <br />spell out more clearly the obligations of local <br />officials for implementation. <br />WHAT IS A CANNABIS DISPENSARY? <br />The majority of medical marijuana (cannabis) <br />patients cannot cultivate their medicine for <br />themselves or find a caregiver to grow it for <br />them. Most of California's estimated 200,000 <br />patients obtain their medicine from a Medical <br />For more information, see vwvw_AmencansForSafeAaess.org or contact [he ASA office at 1-888-929-4367 or 510-251-1856_ <br />4 <br />