Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Federal Appeals Court Rejects Medical Marijuana
Breaking Legal News | 2007/03/14 20:29

Supporters of medical marijuana suffered another major setback today when an appeals court ruled that the federal government can still arrest and prosecute medical-marijuana patients even if they are protected by state law and even if their usage is deemed a “medical necessity.”

The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco decided unanimously against Oakland resident Angel Raich, who suffers from a variety of ailments including scoliosis, a brain tumor, and chronic nausea, even though her doctor testified that it was the only effective treatment to ease her pain and help her appetite. The judges indicated that Raich would possibly be able to avoid conviction under the medical necessity argument, but that she was not immune to arrest and prosecution nor was any other medical-marijuana patient who claimed medical necessity.

Raich’s case reached the Supreme Court in 2005, but the high court ruled that state laws providing for medical marijuana did not protect their citizens from federal prosecution. Currently, there are 11 states (including California) that have legalized medical marijuana. The Supreme Court then bumped the case back down to the appeals court, who ruled on a much narrower aspect of the case namely, whether or not absolute medical necessity precluded the government’s ability to prosecute these cases. According to the three-judge panel, it does not.

In a related story out of Oregon today, where medical pot has been legal since 1998, the state Senate passed a measure allowing employers to fire medical-marijuana patients who fail drug tests. The measure still has to be approved in the House and be signed by the governor. Oregon has 13,000 registered medical-marijuana users, and their supporters had been pushing for a bill that protected them from being fired. Instead, the opposite measure was passed. Supporters contend that a simple urine test, which would yield a positive result for as long as 30 days after ingestion of pot, does not accurately reflect whether or not an employee was impaired or intoxicated during work hours.

Despite the controversial nature of the medical-marijuana issue and the fact that voters in several states have overwhelmingly shown support for the measure the U.S. Justice Department has only intensified its prosecution of medical pot. An Associated Press report this past weekend noted that the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) was “embarking on a stepped-up effort targeting [medical-marijuana] clinics” they suspected of generating an inordinate amount of profit. On one day in January, the DEA raided 11 clinics in the Los Angeles area.

Since state laws are being ruled virtually meaningless by the court system and since the federal government seems intent on prosecuting these cases, it appears that amending the federal Controlled Substances Act may be the only true recourse for medical-marijuana supporters. However, the influence of the pharmaceutical and tobacco lobbies alone make this approach rather unlikely to succeed.



[PREV] [1] ..[7587][7588][7589][7590][7591][7592][7593][7594][7595].. [8292] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
New Hampshire courts hear 2 ..
PA high court orders countie..
Tight US House races in Cali..
North Carolina Attorney Gene..
Republicans take Senate majo..
What to know about the unpre..
A man who threatened to kill..
Ford cuts 2024 earnings guid..
Kenya’s deputy president pl..
South Korean court acquits f..
Supreme Court grapples with ..
Supreme Court leaves in plac..
Kentucky sheriff accused of ..
New rules regarding election..
North Carolina appeals court..


Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design