Court upholds ban on medical marijuana
Court Alerts
[##_1L|1074716531.gif|width="100" height="100" alt=""|_##]A California woman with an inoperable brain tumor may not smoke marijuana to ease her pain even though California voters have approved its medicinal use, a U.S. appeals court ruled on Wednesday. In a much-watched test case, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found there is no fundamental right to marijuana for medical purposes. The ruling agreed with a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
The split three-judge opinion from Judge Harry Pregerson expressed sympathy for some arguments by plaintiff Angel Raich, 41, an Oakland resident whose doctor testified she could die if she stopped smoking pot. But the ruling backed the 1970 federal Controlled Substances Act barring marijuana.
Raich, who suffers from many ailments, says marijuana keeps her alive by easing pain and bolstering appetite.
"Today I found out I am basically a dead man walking," Raich, who once worked as an accountant and massage therapist, told Reuters. "Today the court said I don't have the constitutional right to basically stay alive."
The mother of two said U.S. officials had never moved to arrest her or bar her from using marijuana and said she would continue to do so every two hours. "I'm damned if I do, damned if I don't," she said.
Raich said she would lobby Congress in Washington to change U.S. law. The court said use of the drug for medical purposes was gaining support but federal law still banned it.
"We agree with Raich that medical and conventional wisdom that recognizes the use of marijuana for medical purposes is gaining traction in the law as well," the judge wrote.
The ruling acknowledged the law could change if legislators reconsider the issue.
"Although that day has not yet dawned, considering that during the last 10 years 11 states have legalized the use of medical marijuana, that day may be upon on us sooner than expected," Pregerson said.
Voters in California, the nation's most populous state, became the first to approve medical marijuana in 1996, putting it in direct conflict with federal law. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has admitting using marijuana in the past.
Related listings
-
Chiquita to pay $25M to settle terrorism claims
Court Alerts 03/15/2007Chiquita Brands International, Inc. has reached a plea agreement with the US Justice Department to settle claims that Chiquita paid approximately $1.7 million to a Colombian terrorist group between 1997 and 2004 to protect banana harvesting operation...
-
USS Cole families civil suit against Sudan begins
Court Alerts 03/14/2007Testimony began Tuesday in the trial of a civil suit brought against Sudan by families of US military personnel killed in the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole. The families say Sudan has provided material support to al Qaeda since 1991, without which the...
-
Wastewater for snow nixed by US appeals court
Court Alerts 03/13/2007A plan for a local ski resort to use treated wastewater for snowmaking has been rejected by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, which said the plan will pollute the sites and violate Native American rights under the Religious Restoration Act of 1993...

Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.