First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
News Story
 
Justices reject government's appeal on medical marijuana

By The Associated Press
10.14.03

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court today rejected an appeal that jeopardized state medical-marijuana laws that allow ill patients to smoke pot if they have a doctor's recommendation.

Justices turned down the Bush administration's request to consider whether the federal government can punish doctors for recommending or perhaps even talking about the benefits of the drug to sick patients. An appeals court said the government could not punish such speech.

Nine states have laws legalizing marijuana for patients with physician recommendations or prescriptions: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington, and 35 states have passed legislation recognizing marijuana's medicinal value. But federal law bans the use of the drug under any circumstances.

The case, Walters v. Conant, gave the high court an opportunity to review its second medical-marijuana case in two years. The last one involved cannabis clubs.

This one presented a more difficult issue, pitting free-speech rights of doctors against government's power to stop physicians from encouraging illegal drug use. A ruling for the administration would have made the state medical-marijuana laws unusable.

Some California doctors and patients, in filings at the Supreme Court, compared doctor information on pot to physicians' advice on "red wine to reduce the risk of heart disease, Vitamin C, acupuncture, or chicken soup."

The administration, which has taken a hard stand against the state laws, argued that public heath — not the free-speech rights of doctors or patients — was at stake.

"The provision of medical advice — whether it be that the patient take aspirin or vitamin C, lose or gain weight, exercise or rest, smoke or refrain from smoking marijuana — is not pure speech. It is the conduct of the practice of medicine. As such, it is subject to reasonable regulation," Solicitor General Theodore Olson said in court papers.

Some people had expected the Supreme Court to step into the case, which comes from California, the battleground over the subject.

Keith Vines, a prosecutor in San Francisco who used marijuana to overcome HIV-related illnesses, was among those who challenged a policy put in place during the Clinton administration. That policy requires the revocation of federal prescription licenses of doctors who recommend marijuana.

"If the government is zipping them up, and we're not being told about options, that's negligence," Vines said.

Policy supporters contend that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration must be allowed to protect the public.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said physicians should be able to speak candidly with patients without fear of government sanctions, but they can be punished if they actually help patients obtain the drug.

Doctors fear losing their prescription-writing powers, which would put them out of business.


Previous
Doctors can dispense advice on marijuana, 9th Circuit says
Federal appeals panel finds that physicians have First Amendment right to speak candidly with patients about marijuana without fear of government sanctions. 10.30.02

Related

High court refuses several First Amendment cases

Justices' decision not to hear appeals means victory for Idaho newspaper, Chicago peddler, defeat for California salutatorian, Florida judge, Indiana attorney. 10.07.03

Court concludes 2003-04 First Amendment docket
First Amendment Center Web site offers 2003-04 docket sheet, extensive case data, analysis; experts available for interviews. 07.01.04

Hawaii high court snuffs out man's religious arguments for pot use
But dissenting justice says privacy rights guaranteed by state constitution should allow people to smoke marijuana in their homes. 10.01.07

Campaign-finance, theology cases to be watched closely
By Tony Mauro McConnell v. FEC, Locke v. Davey most important cases on Court's short 2003-04 First Amendment docket. 10.06.03

Courts prescribe free speech for doctors, patients
By Ken Paulson High court upholds physicians' First Amendment right to discuss possible benefits of medical marijuana with their patients without risking federal prosecution. 10.26.03

News summary page
View the latest news stories throughout the First Amendment Center Online.

print this   Print


Last system update: Thursday, November 13, 2008 | 23:27:44
 SEARCH  MORE
About this site
About the First Amendment
About the First Amendment Center
Video/RSS/podcasts
First Amendment programs
State of the First Amendment
reports

First Reports
Supreme Court
Experts
Columnists
First Amendment publications
First Amendment Center history
Glossary
Freedom Singsā„¢
Events
First Amendment
Schools

Congressional Research Service reports
Guest editorials
FOI material
The First Amendment
Library

Lesson plans
freedomforum.org
Newseum
Contact us
Privacy statement
Related links