AP -- DEA not interested in pursuing patients

Cal NORML has received numerous inquiries from panicked MMJ
patients worried that they will be prosecuted by the feds following
the Raich decision. This article notes that federal officials,
including SF DEA field office director Javier Pena, are disclaiming
any interest in pursuing individual patients. This accords with the
experience in California and other medical marijuana states in the
years before the Ninth Circuit's Raich ruling. Federal enforcement
has been overwhelmingly targeted at larger organizations & providers,
except for a handful of accidental victims and other heroic souls who
dared to make waves by publicly flouting federal authority. Cal
NORML does not expect federal policy in this regard to change.
- D. Gieringer,Cal NORML

Court: Patients May Not Use Pot Legally

By MARK SHERMAN
.c The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) - Anyone who lights up a joint for medicinal purposes
isn't likely to be pursued by federal authorities, despite a Supreme
Court ruling that these marijuana users could face federal charges,
people on both sides of the issue say.

In a 6-3 decision, the court on Monday said those who smoke marijuana
because their doctors recommend it to ease pain can be prosecuted for
violating federal drug laws, overriding medical marijuana statutes in
10 states.

While the justices expressed sympathy for two seriously ill
California women who brought the case, the majority agreed that
federal agents may arrest even sick people who use the drug as well
as the people who grow pot for them.

The ruling could be an early test of the compassion Attorney General
Alberto Gonzales promised to bring to the Justice Department
following the tenure of John Ashcroft.

Gonzales and his aides were silent on the ruling Monday, but several
Bush administration officials said individual users have little
reason to worry. ``We have never targeted the sick and dying, but
rather criminals engaged in drug trafficking,'' Drug Enforcement
Administration spokesman Bill Grant said.

Yet Ashcroft's Justice Department moved aggressively following the
Supreme Court's first decision against medical marijuana in 2001,
seizing individuals' marijuana and raiding their suppliers.

The lawsuit that led to Monday's ruling, in fact, resulted from a
raid by DEA agents and local sheriff's deputies on a garden near
Oroville, Calif., where Diane Monson was cultivating six pot plants.

``I'm going to have to be prepared to be arrested,'' said Monson, an
accountant who has degenerative spine disease and grows her own
marijuana plants.

Javier Pena, the DEA agent in charge of the San Francisco field
division, said Monday his agency took part in the raid only at the
request of local authorities.

California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said Monday that ``people
shouldn't panic ... there aren't going to be many changes.''

Local and state officers handle nearly all marijuana prosecutions and
must still follow any state laws that protect patients.

The ruling does not strike down California's law, or similar ones in
Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and
Washington state. However, it may hurt efforts to pass laws in other
states because the federal government's prosecution authority trumps
states' wishes.

It was unclear whether any medical marijuana users ever have been
arrested by federal agents. They typically are involved only when the
quantities are substantial.

Tom Riley, spokesman for the White House drug policy office, said
federal prisoners convicted of marijuana possession had on average
more than 100 pounds.

Growers of large amounts of medical marijuana and people who are
outspoken in their use of it could face heightened scrutiny.

``From an enforcement standpoint, the federal government is not going
to be crashing into people's homes trying to determine what type of
medicine they're taking,'' said Asa Hutchinson, a former DEA
administrator. ``They have historically concentrated on suppliers and
people who flaunt the law. There should not be any change from that
circumstance.''

Allen St. Pierre, executive director of NORML, which favors
legalization of marijuana, said the benchmark for federal
intervention has been 50 plants.

But he said the larger point is that the ruling could stymie efforts
in other states to pass laws allowing for the use of medical
marijuana.

The Bush administration, like the Clinton White House before it, has
taken a hard stand against state medical marijuana laws, arguing that
such statutes could undermine the fight against illegal drugs. John
Walters, director of national drug control policy, defended the
government's ban. ``Science and research have not determined that
smoking marijuana is safe or effective,'' he said.

St. Pierre said the decision points up a large difference between the
administration and the public.

``The disconnect is so wide here,'' St. Pierre said. ``In no
circumstance where voters have the opportunity to weigh in have they
said no to medical marijuana.''

Justice John Paul Stevens, an 85-year-old cancer survivor, said the
Constitution allows federal regulation of homegrown marijuana as
interstate commerce. But he noted the court was not passing judgment
on the potential medical benefits of marijuana.

And Congress could change federal law if it desires, Stevens said,
although that is not considered likely.

The case is Gonzales v. Raich, 03-1454.

On the Net:

The ruling in Gonzales v. Raich is available at:

<http://wid.ap.org/documents/scotus/050606raich.pdf>http://wid.ap.org/documents/scotus/050606raich.pdf