Raids Defy U.S. President and Attorney General, and need your response!

We never expected that the DEA would defy the public statements of both the U.S. President and the Attorney General in such an arrogant and brazen way.

And yet yesterday, the Drug Enforcement Administration raided a legal, permitted San Francisco medical cannabis dispensing collective against the will of the President and the Department of Justice… and we need you to respond RIGHT NOW!

In early February national media attention exploded around statements from a White House spokesperson and from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, telling the press that DEA raids would no longer continue, and that an end to such raids, according to Holder, was “now U.S. policy.”

And DEA’s response?

They thumbed their noses at the President and immediately raided a legal dispensing collective and, according to the San Francisco Police, did not even inform local cops! DEA claimed that the permit-holding dispensary was “violating state law,” but went on to say that evidence was “under seal” and could not be shared with the public.

The DEA is out of line and out of control, and this raid is nothing if not vindictive. Even if there was a violation of state law:

1. Why where there no arrests?
2. Why were local cops not involved?
3. Why are United States Federal Agents interpreting and enforcing California state law without consulting California officials?
4. Why was the collective not given due process through the proper authorities, but rather ransacked with a “smash and grab” raid?

DEA has twisted the words of the U.S. Attorney General, and thought that by saying publicly “they violated state law” that they could continue raiding whenever they want. Well that doesn’t fly. We DEMAND that the DEA stop immediately, and that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reprimand DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart for her blatant insubordination and violation of the “new American policy.”

Now it’s up to you, and all it takes is two phone calls, one to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, and the other straight to the DEA.

Please call the U.S. Attorney General at (202) 353-1555 and say:

Hi, my name is _____________. First I want to thank you for your numerous public statements verifying the end of DEA raids on legal medical marijuana dispensaries in California. But on Wednesday the DEA went against your word and the word of the President of the United States by raiding a permitted dispensary in San Francisco. We respectfully demand that you issue a statement condemning and officially ending these raids until the Obama Administration has had a chance to review the new policy.

When you’re done, call the DEA at (202) 307-8000, ask for Administrator Michele Leonhart, and say:

Hi, my name is ___________. The U.S. Attorney General and the President of the United States have both made high-profile public statements, saying DEA raids on legal medical marijuana dispensaries is no longer U.S. policy. Yet your DEA raided a legal, permit-holding San Francisco dispensary yesterday, in conflict with these statements. This disgraceful and anti-democratic. Why is your agency not listening to the policy statements of our elected leaders and your boss? Is this how you’ll run DEA if you are appointed in the Obama Administration? We demand that you STOP it immediately!

Sincerely,

George Pappas
Field Coordinator
Americans for Safe AccessP.S. Please forward this message to all your friends and family so that we can generate a response big enough to get officials to act!

1. U.S. Attorney General Begins to Formulate Policy on Medical Cannabis Dispensaries

This week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder once again made public statements regarding the Obama Administration’s plans to re-prioritize U.S. policy on enforcement in states with medical cannabis laws.  In a question and answer session with reporters at the Justice Department, Holder announced that the new policy would focus DEA resources on intervening only in cases where dispensing collectives run afoul of both local and federal laws.  Its a statement that has very positive implications, but also opens the door for some concerns.

Both the U.S. Attorney General and the White House have been issuing similar statements since early February, when White House spokesperson Nick Shapiro first responded to DEA raids carried out by Bush Administration holdovers after President Obama’s January 20 inauguration.  The raids defied Obama’s campaign promises and prompted wide scale backlash from advocates and communities in California.  Shapiro said that the President expected the new DEA Administrator, when chosen, would review the policy with Obama’s positions and campaign promises in mind.

The most recent statements provide some indication that the administration has begun shaping the policy, and come alongside a national spotlight on the federal conflict that has arisen out of the high profile case of the 2007 raid and recent prosecution of former Morro Bay dispensary owner Charles C. Lynch, who will be sentenced on Monday morning in a federal court, and may see a minimum of 5 years in federal prison.  Just in the past week, Lynch was featured on ABC’s 20/20 with John Stossel, on a special segment on MSNBC with Al Roker, in a major article run by the Associated Presss, and a full page story in the New York Times.

While the President’s shift in policy will be the most significant progress from the Executive Branch on medical cannabis in at least 4 Presidential Administrations, there is still cause for some concern, mostly related to local enforcement.  Some DEA raids, including that of Lynch, were initiated by local law enforcement intent on circumventing state law.  For instance, San Luis Obispo County Sheriff Patrick Hedges investigated Charles C. Lynch for over a year, sending undercover agents to prompt Lynch’s employees to violate California law, which they never did.  After unsuccessfully encouraging Lynch to break the law, Sheriff Hedges then contacted DEA to come in and raid, despite the facility’s full support from the Morro Bay Mayor,  Chamber of Commerce, and other local officials.  ASA has documented similar enforcement tactics from law enforcement in Alameda County, San Diego, Riverside County, and other areas.  In the end, however, the continued public statements by top officials in the Obama Administration seem to signal a new and refreshing approach to public discourse over medical cannabis. They are speaking about it confidently, as if it is no longer an issue that federal politicians, especially U.S. Presidents, should be scared to address publicly.

2. American Canyon Reiterates Moratorium, Prepares for a Permanent Dispensary Ban

When a citizen approached City Hall for the proper permits to open a medical cannabis dispensing collective this week, the City of American Canyon not only denied the permit, but used it as an opportunity to extend its moratorium on dispensaries for up to another year.   The City Council has long been opposed to allowing dispensaries within city limits, and in the debate that ensued at this week’s meeting, there was present a good deal of inaccurate information being cited by City Council members and staff.

Many municipalities that address dispensary regulations sometimes find it difficult to separate fact from fiction.  For instance, though the potential applicant for city permits to open the facility was a respected mortgage broker, City Council member Cindy Coffey said she was opposed to the dispensary because she claimed that they are "notorious for not paying sales tax."  Aside from the fact that in 2007 medical cannabis dispensaries paid the State of California over $100 million in sales tax, because she based her opinion on rumors and unfounded assumptions, Councilwoman Coffey essentially accused the applicant of being an underhanded criminal and of trying to scam the state out of money, simply out of the applicants desire to open a legal collective and provide medical cannabis to those who need it in her community.

In addition, the City Attorney along with the Community Development Director co-wrote a memorandum to the city in which they claim that state and federal laws are in conflict with one another.  This is contrary to published dispensing collective guidelines from the California Attorney General, which affirmed their legality, and despite multiple rulings both in the U.S. Supreme Court and the California courts which affirm that no such conflict exists.  The city is preparing to draft a permanent ban on dispensaries, and community members in American Canyon should be aware that opportunities to fight the potential ban in the City Council will be here.

3. San Mateo, Sonoma Move to Regulate Access

At the Sonoma Planning Commission meeting this week, city planners presented a report on regulating medical cannabis dispensaries.  The document highlighted possible regulations that would limit the THC content in concentrates, restrict the number of patients allowed for a dispensary, and determine the municipal structure for reviewing applications and granting permits, among other restrictions.

At the meeting John Sugg, who has operated a medical cannabis dispensing collective in Santa Rosa for four years, voiced his concern about placing the Sheriff in charge of the program. "Most of the ordinance is strong and necessary," he said. "But I have a concern with putting the police chief in charge of managing applications and granting permits. It makes more sense to have that be the city manager."

Sugg’s collective, the Sonoma Patient Group, organized last summer as an unincorporated non-profit collective. Jewel Mathieson, wife of Sonoma Mayor Ken Brown, is an employee and member.  She addressed the commission, saying, "Members must be able to get their medication. We should stop the regulations on medicine and stop ignoring the desperate alcohol problem in the valley."

Sugg submitted his own ordinance recommendations to the Commission, prompting them to table the issue to their next regular meeting on April 9, at which they are expected to submit final recommendations to the city council.

Also – on Monday, the San Mateo City Council unanimously voted to introduce an ordinance that would regulate medical cannabis collectives.  The council will vote on the ordinance again at its next meeting, and if approved, it will go into effect 30 days later.

Under the proposed ordinance, collectives must register with the city and obtain a license from the police department, with all members providing their names, addresses and phone numbers.  The ordinance allows for indoor growth only, and requires that adequate security be provided. San Mateo residents who grow medical cannabis at home for their own use, or for other people living at the house, would not be subject to the rules.

Kris Hermes of Americans for Safe Access noted that registration requirements could be problematic.  "It is a function of self-incrimination to offer up your details pertaining to cultivation since it’s still illegal under federal law and local law enforcement has used information on patients to go to the federal government," he said. "They’re setting up, unfortunately, a situation where people will refuse to register and automatically become illegal as a result."

San Mateo residents are encouraged to contact City Council members to request the proposed ordinance, and weigh in with their thoughts before the next meeting.

On Wednesday, March 18, US Attorney General Eric Holder elaborated on his February 25 announcement of a “new American policy” regarding medical cannabis. Holder told reporters that the new policy means that the US Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) will only focus on those medical cannabis providers who use state law as a “shield” for illegal activity. This new policy implies that those medical cannabis patients who obey state law will be free from federal interference and intimidation.

This is more good news for patients in the thirteen states where medical cannabis is already legal, and patients and staff at California’s legal patients’ associations are certainly breathing easier this week. It remains to be seen, however, how adept federal and state law enforcement will be in distinguishing compliant organizations from those operating outside state law. Despite guidelines published by California Attorney General Jerry Brown last year, there is still a great deal of confusion among law enforcement and elected officials about the state of the law in California.

Video: ASA Media Specialist Kris Hermes speaking in San Francisco

Advocates will have their hands full educating officials like Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo, whose insistence that medical cannabis can not be acquired in storefront collectives flies in the face of the Attorney General’s position – and is hindering the city’s three-year effort to regulate hundreds of medical cannabis facilities already operating in Los Angeles. It will also be an uphill battle persuading California law enforcement officers, who have never supported medical cannabis rights, that some cannabis-related conduct is legal under state law. This misunderstanding led San Lois Obispo County Sheriff Pat Hedges to call in the DEA to bust Morro Bay collective operator Charles C. Lynch. Lynch is facing 5 to 20 years in federal prison, despite the fact that he scrupulously obeyed state and local law.

Patients and providers should temper their enthusiasm about Holder’s comments with caution about what may come next. We have to work hard to be sure that the “new American policy” works for patients and providers in the states. It is likely we will see less federal interference and intimidation, but more local scrutiny by police officers and Sheriffs with little understanding of the intricacies of our evolving state laws.

On March 23, convicted Morro Bay collective operator Charles C. Lynch will be sentenced in federal court for obeying California law. If you follow medical cannabis politics in California, Charles’ story is already familiar. He opened Central Coast Compassionate Caregivers (CCCC) in Morro Bay in 2006, with the blessing of the City Council and support of the community. San Luis Obispo County Sheriff Pat Hedges objected to his facility, however, and called in the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to bust Charles in 2007. He was convicted in 2008, after the judge disallowed any testimony about medical cannabis or state law. Now, he faces up to 100 years in federal prison – despite the fact that all of his conduct was legal under state law!

This story has become all too common for medical cannabis patients and providers in California. Charles is one of approximately one hundred people waiting for trial, sentencing, or serving time for medical cannabis “crimes.” But last night, the entire nation heard a report of what is about to happen to Charles C. Lynch, when ABC aired a segment on their popular news magazine, 20/20. John Stossel explained to viewers that Charles C. Lynch is a victim caught in the crossfire of a conflict between state and federal law – something most Americans have never considered.

Charles’ story illustrates that, until federal law is harmonized with the laws of the thirteen states that have already legalized medical cannabis, doing things by the book can land you in jail. That is an important message to send to Congress, since there are early signs of a developing policy in Washington, DC, which points towards tolerating state medical cannabis programs. The new President and Congress should be mindful of Charles and the other victims when codifying that policy. In is unconscionable to leave the victims of the failed policy in jail once the Federal Government comes to its senses on medical cannabis – especially not those who scrupulously obeyed the letter and spirit of the law.

Charles C. Lynch will be sentenced at the federal courthouse in Los Angeles on Monday, March 23, at 8:30 AM in Courtroom 10. I urge everyone in the Los Angeles area who sympathizes with his position to be there in court to support Charles and his family in the difficult time. I hope you will also keep working with Americans for Safe Access (ASA) to be sure no one has to follow in Charles’ footsteps.

Americans for Safe Access (ASA) is currently working with the Obama Administration to change federal policy with regard to medical cannabis (marijuana). So, it was with unbridled enthusiasm that I explained to the editorial department of the Los Angeles Times last week what it meant for the recently seated Attorney General Eric Holder to embrace a “new American policy.” As I extolled the virtues of suspending the federal government’s enforcement policy of raiding medical cannabis dispensaries in California, I also explained that we were not stopping there with what we expected from a new federal policy.

In advance of President Obama taking office, ASA put together a set of policy recommendations so that we had a vehicle to advance sensible changes to what has been an incredibly harmful strategy of attacking medical cannabis patients and undermining the laws of California and other states. With President Obama’s campaign promise that he “would not have the Justice Department prosecuting and raiding medical marijuana users,” advocates had something with which to hold the new president’s feet to the fire. It was further gratifying for the White House to make a statement to the Washington Times after President Obama took office clarifying that, “federal resources should not be used to circumvent state laws.” And, most recently, in a press conference on February 25th, Holder affirmed earlier statements in regard to suspending the use of Justice Department funds to enforce federal marijuana laws in states that have adopted protections for medical cannabis patients.

Therefore, it was with great excitement that I read in Monday’s Los Angeles Times an editorial that agreed with the direction of the Justice Department in this regard, but also stated the need to advance beyond simply suspending enforcement. If the new Administration wanted to curtail enforcement, why would it want to continue prosecuting the more than twenty pending federal cases involving medical cannabis? And, why would it want to let state law-abiding citizens languish in federal prison for sentences ranging from 5 to 20 years? And, why was the Justice Department still threatening landlords of medical cannabis providers with criminal prosecution and seizure of their property? The Times rightly concluded that, “Stopping the raids is certainly worthwhile…but as a long-term policy, it is unworkable,” and that, “The country needs a comprehensive policy, not just a wink and a nod.”

And, it was with even greater excitement that I read in today’s Los Angeles Times a follow-up editorial that the federal government should end its monopoly on the cultivation of medical cannabis used for research, which has created “a dearth of academic research into its therapeutic properties.” Again, the Times rightly concluded that instead of obstructing it, “the DEA should encourage cannabis research.”

It is opinions like that of the Los Angeles Times editorial board that will help push the Obama Administration into an era of common sense and compassion for our most vulnerable citizens. Medical marijuana is not a band-aid for otherwise effective treatment protocols; it is a treatment protocol itself. Likewise, Holder and the rest of the Obama Administration should not look to a band-aid-like quick fix for medical marijuana. It should develop the long-term comprehensive policies being called for by advocates and the Los Angeles Times alike.

1. ASA Forces DMV to Change Policy

In response to litigation by Americans for Safe Access, the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) issued a new policy this week, brining it in line with the state’s medical cannabis laws. The DMV Driver Safety Procedure Manual was revised to state that, “use of medicinal marijuana approved by a physician should be handled in the same manner as any other prescription medication which may affect safe driving.” The manual states that the existence of medical cannabis use “does not, in itself, constitute grounds for a license withdrawal action.”

ASA filed suit against the DMV on November 19, 2008 on behalf of Rose Johnson, a 53-year-old patient from Atwater, whose driver’s license was revoked because of her status as a legally qualified to use cannabis medicinally.  Despite Ms. Johnson’s clean driving record, not having caused an accident in 37 years of driving, the DMV revoked her license. According to the DMV, her license was revoked “because of…[an] addiction to, or habitual use of, [a] drug,” thereby rendering her unable to safely operate a motor vehicle, even though no evidence existed to substantiate this claim. In January of this year, as a result of ASA’s lawsuit and a positive driving test by Ms. Johnson, the DMV reinstated her license and issued the new policy before the case had a chance to be heard in Superior Court.

“The new DMV policy is a significant departure from how the agency approached medical marijuana in the past,” said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who represented Ms. Johnson in her claim against the DMV. “Drivers will no longer have their licenses suspended or revoked simply because of their status as medical marijuana patients.”

ASA has documented examples of the DMV policy of suspending and revoking the licenses simply for medical cannabis use in at at least 8 California counties, including Alameda, Butte, Contra Costa, Glenn, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, and Sonoma. The revocations by the DMV are often rationalized by calling the drivers “drug abusers” despite no evidence of the claim. “This DMV policy change represents a victory for patients, which puts us closer to full implementation of California’s medical marijuana law,” said Elford.

The DMV advised its Driver Safety employees of the policy change in a training session.

For more information visit ASA’s website.  http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/DMV_Policy.pdf ASA’s lawsuit against the DMV: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/DMV_Writ.pdf

2. San Bernardino Drops Charges in Marijuana Case Against Senior Citizen Cancer Patients

A year and a half ago, 74 year old cancer patient Rich McCabe and his wife JoAnne Cates were raided by the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department and brought up on charges of marijuana cultivation and sales, despite the fact that California Proposition 215 had been in place for over a decade at the time.  The Sheriff’s department went so far as to confiscate items such as a microwave and cash from a social security check, claiming that the two senior citizens were large scale drug  runners.   This week, those charges were finally dismissed by Judge Rodney Cortez at the San Bernardino County Superior Court.

The seniors faced three felony drug counts for using medical cannabis in compliance with state law and to ease the symptoms associated with cancer treatment and other conditions, putting community members up in arms.  ASA Affiliates, the Marijuana Anti-Prohibition Project in Palm Springs, hosted several events to raise money to help pay for the legal defense of McCabe and Cates.   And according to attorneys Zenia Gillig and Danny Schultz, who represented the couple, the willingness of San Bernardino County Deputy District Attorney Jamie Adams to listen to reason was critical in getting the charges dropped.

Nevertheless, the legal process was a financial hardship, putting the two qualified patients thousands of dollars into debt because the San Bernardino Sheriff wanted to arrest a sick elderly couple who were not breaking the law, only to see the charges dropped after a year and a half of legal struggles.  The San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors is spending a great deal of county resources in a long drawn out appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to fight the obligation of their health department to issue ID cards to those patients who are legally qualified to use medical cannabis.

In addition, a lawsuit has been filed against the county by Scott Bledsoe to compel San Bernardino to start issuing state-mandated medical marijuana ID cards and  to stop arresting qualified patients.

3. Palm Springs Moves Forward with Dispensing Collectives

The Palm Springs City Council passed an ordinance this week that allows two nonprofit medical cannabis dispensing collectives to operate in  industrial zones within city limits.

The ordinance, set to go into effect in 30 days,  will allow groups to apply and be evaluated by the City Manager and City Council, who will then rank all qualified applications and grant regulatory permits to the two applicants who come away with the highest rating.  The city has yet to announce a date when applications will be accepted, however, the measure will go into effect after 30 days, making Palm Springs the first city in Riverside County officially to allow medical cannabis dispensaries.  Local activists have been working for years to educate council members in the area of the need for safe access to cannabis.  Finally the consistent pressure and education of the city council has begun to pay off, as this ordinance is a milestone for medical cannabis progress in the Inland Empire.

The move by the Palm Springs Council comes after U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced last week that raids by the Drug Enforcement Administration on medical cannabis dispensaries in states that have passed relevant laws will not continue under the Obama Administration Justice Department.

Tony Bowles was a plaintiff in ASA’s successful lawsuit against the California Highway Patrol. He has taken action time and time again on behalf of patients in need of medical marijuana. He now lives in Silver Spring, Maryland, where he is working hard to help improve Maryland’s medical marijuana law. Tony can be reached at tonebowles@sbcglobal.net

Marylanders have much to be hopeful for this year with the introduction of legislation, by Delegate Henry Heller (D-Montgomery County) that creates a task force to study the issues related to medical marijuana throughout the state of Maryland, and the recent statement from the U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder backing President Obama’s campaign promise to end federal interference in states with medical marijuana laws, telling reporters that ending federal medical marijuana raids “is now American policy.”

This is very good news! These are major steps in the path to improving our state’s medical marijuana law. Currently, individuals in Maryland who possess a physician’s recommendation to use marijuana for therapeutic purposes are vulnerable to arrest and prosecution. Maryland chapters of Americans for Safe Access believe Maryland patients deserve real protections.

In his recent speech, President Obama stressed the importance of practicing efficient, cost-effective government.

Law enforcement is under increased budgetary pressure in these tough times.  Study commissions such as the one proposed in HB1339 allow the type of evaluation necessary to determine if a law is effectively using police, judicial, and tax-payer resources.   The proposed commission will examine the consequences and long term effects of the Darrell Putnam Compassionate Use Act: an open-ended, vague law.  Closing legislative loopholes not only protects Maryland citizens, but will reduce unnecessary expenditure and allow Maryland to weather the financial storm.

If the bill passes, the State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene would be required to staff a Governor-appointed task force to evaluate whether the current state law is effective, fair, and equally enforced across all state jurisdictions in addition to other issues concerning the limited, therapeutic use of cannabis. (Watch a video of Delegate Heller talking about HB 1339, approximately halfway through.)

Delegate Heller’s introduction of HB1339 is the culmination of Maryland ASA chapters organizing together and shows how hard work pays off.

Our goal is to improve Maryland’s medical marijuana law, and it’s important for us to get organized now. There is a lot of work to be done. This is a serious issue and every Marylander should know it could affect them. President Obama recently said, “We don’t do what’s easy, we do what’s necessary.”

The Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing on HB1339 March 24, 2009, at 1pm. This is fantastic news and puts this legislation on a SUPER fast track.  April 13th is the final day of the legislative session and our hearing is in less than 3 weeks.  There is not a lot of time, but I am confident we can pass this legislation and be much closer to securing safe and legal access for medical cannabis patients across the state.

It’s been a little over a year since I helped start the Montgomery County Chapter of Americans for Safe Access, and I’ve watched us grow from only having dozens to now having hundreds of Marylanders join us in support. In fact, every week I get calls from individuals that either have no knowledge of our states medical marijuana law, or others that say the law simply isn’t working for them. It’s become abundantly clear to me that Maryland’s medical marijuana law is Broken!

I look forward to working with many of you to fix our states broken medical marijuana law and hope you’ll join us in our efforts soon.

For years, we’ve received reports of medical marijuana patients having their driver’s licenses revoked simply for being patients.  In 2006, we filed a lawsuit against the DMV on behalf of Matt Vaughn to correct this.  The action resulted in the reinstatement of Vaughn’s license, but we did not get a policy change at that time.

Later, in 2008, we began receiving an alarming number of complaints from patients that licenses were being taken from them simply because they are patients.  This prompted us to file another lawsuit against the DMV, and this time we would insist on a formal written policy that would prevent from happening to patients in the future.

The case involves Rose Johnson, who is a 53-year-old woman who has not caused an accident in more than 37 years of driving.  Despite this, the DMV revoked her license because her "testimony establishes daily, ongoing marijuana use."  There was absolutely no evidenec that Ms. Johnson ever used marijuana before she drove of that her use of marijuana to treat pain associated with neck and back injuries in any way impaired her ability to drive.

The suit sought two things.  First, that Ms. Johnson get her license back, and, second, that the DMV implement a written policy instructing its hearing officers not to do this to patients in the future.  Ms. johnson got her license back on February 10, 2009, and on March 2, 2009, the DMV issued the following policy on Medical Marijuana:

The use of medicinal marijuana approved by a physician should be handled in the same manner as any other prescription medication which may affect safe driving. The hearing officer should inquire as to the frequency of use, time of use, and the relationship to driving as they would with the use of other prescribed medications.

As for the use of presciption medications, the manual states that such use "does not, in itself, constitute grounds for a license withdrawal action. There must be a link or connection to the individual’s ability to drive safely."  Thus, if this policy is followed, patients will not have their licenses revoked simply for being patients.

The DMV has tried to brush off this major victory for ASA by claiming that this was its policy all along.  We’ve got proof, however, that the written policy was the result of ASA’s lawsuit and, without it, DMV hearing officers were revoking licenses from patients.

1. U.S. Attorney General Confirms: No DEA Raids is “Now American Policy”

At a press conference on Feb 25, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder told reporters  that an end to federal interference in state medical cannabis laws, including raids on dispensaries, “is now American policy.”

The Attorney General’s comments reiterated the February 7th White House statement which responded to DEA raids in California after the President’s inauguration, and they indicate a sea change in the long-standing federal policy that prohibits the use of medical cannabis in the thirteen states that have enacted such laws.  Americans for Safe Access had been the leading organization in the country pushing for an end to this interference, and because of the calls, letters, and other pressure from our members like you, the President has heard our calls and responded.

At the press conference, a reporter asked questions about DEA raids at medical cannabis facilities in California, to which Holder replied, “What the president said during the campaign, you’ll be surprised to know, will be consistent with what we’ll be doing in law enforcement. He was my boss during the campaign. He is formally and technically and by law my boss now. What he said during the campaign is now American policy.”

Seventy-two million Americans live in states where medical cannabis is legal, but federal law prohibits its use under any circumstances. More than 100 Americans are currently facing prosecution, sentencing, or serving time in prison for medical cannabis offenses right now. ASA hopes the emerging change in federal policy will signal an end to prosecutions and bring those already serving time for medical cannabis offenses home to their families.

“There has been a lot of collateral damage in the federal campaign against medical marijuana patients,” said Steph Sherer, Executive Director of Americans for Safe Access, the nation’s largest medical cannabis advocacy organization. “We need to stop the prosecutions, bring the prisoners home, and begin working to eliminate the conflict between state and federal medical marijuana laws.”

ASA provided recommendations for a new national medical cannabis policy to President Obama and the 111th Congress earlier this year.  The reality of a U.S. President who is willing to listen to science and take seriously the suffering of patients has begun to set in across the country, leading to an increase it state level action and a growing sense of the progress in and out of California that will result from the President’s new policy.

2. San Diego Sting Operation Targets and Entraps Medical Cannabis Patients

San Diego city, county, and federal law enforcement leaders conducted a major drug sweep in military housing earlier this month, framing the 33 arrests, $19,000 in cash, seven guns and marijuana and narcotics seized as “protection for [our military] like they protect us.”  But as reporters began to take a closer look at the investigations, they found that the “sting” organized by District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis largely targeted and “set up” legal medical cannabis patients and patient collective deliveries.

An investigative review of court records and interviews with defendants found that at least 14 were legal medical-cannabis patients with no military connection, and that these individuals only went to military housing because they were told to go there by undercover drug agents trying to set them up.

“Operation Endless Summer” was a 3 month investigation that resulted in the arrest of at least 14 patients who thought they were supplying cannabis to chronically ill people. According to defendant Donna Lambert, the undercover agent presented himself as a legitimate patient. “Yes, he was verified. And yes, he had the appropriate paperwork.” she said. Lambert, who is a cancer survivor and who runs a dispensing collective, faces up to four years in prison if convicted.

Even the question of military involvement was suspect. “I’m not in the military, and not a single person I know tried to sell to the military,” said Lambert.

At a Feb. 10th news conference, Dumanis, San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne, and other officials claimed that the operation was a response to community complaints of drug dealing in the area.  However, court documents signed by investigators made no mention of any complaints about drug dealing from residents in the military neighborhoods.

Despite all of the evidence to the contrary and the highly suspect circumstances of the law enforcement action, District Attorney Dumanis stuck by her claim that all 33 suspects are serious drug offenders. “These were people who were preying on military housing, and the operation was designed to catch those people,” she said.

Dumanis came under fire last May after she ordered the arrests of 75 San Diego State University students, an action that made national news.  Scores of people were labeled as serious drug offenders even though charges were never filed or eventually dismissed against at least 14 suspects, and most of the others received probation or diversion programs after admitting they sold or possessed only modest amounts of drugs.

3. Nevada County Approves Patient ID Cards

Nevada County supervisors this week finally approved initiating the state-mandated medical cannabis ID card program that will provide state issued ID cards to those patients who are qualified to use medical cannabis under California law.

The volunteer program was passed in a state law in 2003 with the intent of protecting chronically ill individuals from unnecessary arrests and making medical cannabis encounters easier on law enforcement. However, the program has received opposition from some holdout counties who did not want to provide the ID’s to the patient and instead chose not to follow state law.

San Diego and San Bernardino Counties filed suit against the state of California to avoid issuing th simple ideas, spending enormous sums of taxpayer dollars in a case litigated by Americans For Safe Access that affirmed the rights of patients throughout the California court system.  The CA Supreme Court refused to hear the case, because of the lack of any justification to the counties’ claim.

Since these court rulings, which have affirmed that the counties must abide by state law, a few have still refused, prompting ASA to file suit against Solano County.

At the Tuesday board meeting, at least one patient who uses medical cannabis spoke, expressing relief that supervisors had finally approved the program — five years after it was made a state law.

4. State by State Update

Maine Dispensaries on the Ballot
Thanks to the hard work of hundreds of signature gatherers across the State of Maine, we have qualified our proposed ballot initiative for the November 2009 election. This means that Maine voters will now have the chance to vote in support of the rights of qualified patients to have full access to their medicine.

New Jersey Senate Approves Bill
This week, the Coalition for Medical Marijuana – New Jersey (CMMNJ) of the New Jersey Senate voted to pass the New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act, 22-16. A companion bill, A804, is currently in the Assembly Health Committee, which held hearings on the bill last May, but had not called it for a vote. If the assembly passes the legislation, Gov. Jon Corzine (D) has promised to sign it into law, making New Jersey the 14th state to enact a medical cannabis law.

Montana Senate Moves Supports
Thanks to the work of ASA Affiliate Patients and Families United, the Montana Senate passed SB 326 on “third reading,” the critical final step needed to “transmit” the bill to the House in time for the second-half of the legislative session that begins next Monday.  This brings to an end all marijuana-related legislative action during the first half of the session.

Thanks to hundreds of Montanans who have gotten involved and helped with persistence – Patients & Families United has earned a near-perfect record of success so far, with only one disappointment to date:
·         We killed SB 212, the “patient blood-letting bill,” with a unanimous vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
·         We killed HB 473 with a tied vote in the House Judiciary Committee.
·         We killed HB 267, the prescription drug database monitoring bill.
·         We failed to pass HB 73, which received a tie vote in the House Health Committee.
·         The Senate passed SB 326, the most ambitious medical marijuana bill ever introduced in the Montana Legislature.

Colorado Board of Health to Impose Caregiver Limits

The Colorado Health Department is acting to restrict patient access to medical cannabis.   On March 18, 2009, the Colorado Board of Health will be considering a proposed regulation change which would prohibit a medical marijuana patient from designating a particular individual as his or her caregiver if that particular caregiver has already been designated as such by five other medical marijuana patients (“Five Patient Policy”).  The establishment of such a Policy is not in the best interest of the patient and is likely to result in serious, negative health consequences for these ill Coloradans. Sensible Colorado is organizing patients in opposition to the Board of Health Action.