Federal Position on Medical Marijuana Put Before Ninth Circuit

[medicvet]

This could be an important first step to decriminalization. I will be paying close attention to the results of this.

Federal hearing is latest battle on whether policy is based on science or politics

San Francisco, CA -- Medical marijuana advocates will get to argue before the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday, April 14th, the right to challenge an outdated position held by the federal government: "marijuana has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." The national advocacy group Americans for Safe Access (ASA) filed a lawsuit in February 2007 demanding that the federal government cease issuing misinformation and correct its statements on medical marijuana. "We welcome the Obama Administration's recently stated commitment to making policy decisions based on science, not politics," said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with ASA. "This case is designed to ensure that the federal government's policy on medical marijuana is not politically motivated."

What: Oral arguments in a case before the Ninth Circuit that challenges the government's position on medical marijuana
When: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 at 9:30am
Where: Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Courtroom 4 at 95 Seventh Street, San Francisco, CA

In order to challenge the government's position, advocates are using a little-known law called the Data Quality Act (DQA). The DQA requires federal agencies such as Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to rely on sound science when disseminating information to the public. One of the main issues in the case is whether citizens have a right to challenge government information believed to be inaccurate or based on faulty, unreliable data.

"The science to support medical marijuana is overwhelming," said ASA Executive Director Steph Sherer. "It's time for the federal government to acknowledge the efficacy of medical marijuana and stop holding science hostage to politics." On March 9, 2009, President Obama issued a memorandum to the heads of executive departments and agencies stating that, "The public must be able to trust the science and scientific process informing public policy decisions," and calling for "transparency in the preparation, identification, and use of scientific and technological information in policymaking."

The original DQA petition was filed in October of 2004, aimed at forcing the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) -- the FDA's parent agency -- to correct statements about the medical value of marijuana. After more than two years of delay by the federal government and a refusal to act on the petition, a lawsuit was filed in February of 2007. Despite a rejection by the federal district court in late 2007, Science Magazine published an editorial that year claiming that HHS had "violated its own DQA guidelines."

Preeminent legal scholar Alan Morrison, who founded Public Citizen's Litigation Group and who currently teaches at American University's Washington College of Law, is co-counsel in the case and will be arguing before the court on behalf ASA and patients across the country. "Citizens have a right to expect the government to be transparent and to use the best available information for policy decisions," said Morrison. "Unfortunately, so far, the government has been anything but transparent and has failed to produce any evidence for its policy statements on medical marijuana." In April 2006, while ASA was awaiting a response to the petition from HHS, the FDA issued a statement claiming that it conducted an "inter-agency review" and had "concluded that no sound scientific studies supported medical use of marijuana..." However, none of the alleged scientific evidence used to reach that conclusion was ever provided to ASA or the public.

http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=5707

[MetalMilitia]

Side question, You ever see the documentary "AKA Tommy Chong"

http://www.akatommychong.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A/k/a_Tommy_Chong

Also, I would like to point out all the states / senators and legal advocates for decimalization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decrimi..._United_States

Also just this week : http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...riminalization

Now I'm not all for legalizing other drugs, but marijuana time and time again fills up prisons with people smoking a plant. Wow.... pretty harsh. "But MM, pot leads to other drugs". No it fucking does't... It might lead you to the munchies in refrigerator land.... that's about it.

How alcohol can be legal and pot NOT is beyond me. Ever try to overdose on POT? Not that I have... LOL.... but I would find it rather impossible.

Just a scared government and a bunch of "support terrorists" bullshit behind it. So.... mr Bush, would we still be "Supporting terrorism" if we grew our own? Relating drugs to terrorists is what they want ya to think, and sadly it worked.

[medicvet]

I think I've seen that one before, thanks. I am a proud member and supporter of NORML, and also recently of the VMMA (Veterans for Medical Marijuana Access). The fact that people are in prison for marijuana, overcrowded prisons filled with people that have committed violent acts that they will let out early because of the overcrowding, and all the suffering that is happening that people that would benefit greatly from marijuana that won't take because it is illegal is sad.

Marijuana and hemp growing became illegal when the stamp tax for it to be sold stopped being made, and to have it without the tax was against the law. I think it's high time (no pun intended) to bring back the stamp tax and let people buy it. If nothing else, it sure would be good for the economy as well. The sooner the better, I say!

[MetalMilitia]

Well, speaking on the subject of just weed - if there was a way to test for impairing driving (similar to alcohol) and it was sold to 18+ or 21+.... What is the real problem there. I've never seen anyone overdose on weed, never heard of one, cause it's never happened. I've never seen anyone more stoned than just plain old stoned. If the THC level was administered or monitored and regulated, you could control the level of impairment (call it 40 proof or 100 proof) - Shit, we can start naming new flavors :)

Oh wait, you'd have to have moonshine laws and federalize it like booze. Meaning they would miss out on money if people were allowed to grow their own. You could charge $100 for a pack of 20 joints and my guess is the government would rake in the cash. The only problem they have it STOPPING the drug trade or home growing, which they can't even do otherwise. If you think marijuana smokers in some way support terrorism, you have a government bug up yer ass.

Quite honestly I would be more scared to drive in Florida ( with seniors on prescriptions ) than through a town called marijuanaville. These same assholes that think the planet is in danger, think we're in danger from the planet. Both are right, but both are fucking blind. It baffles the shit outta me.

[Freddy]

MA decriminalized pot in January as 65% of voters agreed. Now there are bills to legalize and tax it. Not sure they will fly, but the state does need the money.

[Cyranothe2nd]

9th Circuit is pretty liberal. I think this has a good chance...

[Mezurashi]

it will remain 'criminalized' as long as 'Intelligence and Security Agencies' need a source of Black Funds for their Black Ops (like the whole Air America thing from the 1960's).

keeping the 'secret budgets' really secret by using money from 'illegal trade' has been the way the Intelligence Organs have funded their 'Dark Ops' for decades now.

I don't see it changing soon - there has been a back and forth swing over decriminalization in Canada for over a deacde now. right now we're back into the Marijuana Leads To Terrorism Which Leads To Satan Worship kind of paradigm as far as the 'average' Canuck is concerned.

look for similar smear campaigns funded by the Republicans to appear on the local TV stations soon - they're the ones who stand to lose the most 'unaccountable' money should decriminalization come to pass.