Medical Cannabis: Voices from the Frontlines
Thanks Rep. Lofgren!
On behalf of ASA, and all of our members, supporters and chapters in the San Jose region: Thank You Congresswoman Lofgren!!
In the wake of new federal raid activity, U.S. Representative Zoe Lofgren (CA-16) has added her name to the growing list of cosponsors on the Truth in Trials Act. For those of you who are counting: that brings the total to 30 (and she is also the 8th member of the House Judiciary Committee to provide support)!!
What about your Congress-critter? Has s/he joined as a cosponsor of Truth? If you have 2 minutes, please call to your U.S. Representative’s office and ask for his or her co-sponsorship of H.R. 3939, The Truth in Trials Act. You can reach the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121. For ideas about what to say when you call, check out ASA’s Action page (and follow-up with an email while you’re there!).
LA Times on ASA Lawsuit
Americans for Safe Access (ASA) filed a lawsuit today challenging the flawed medical cannabis ordinance recently adopted by the City of Los Angeles. We hope that City Councilmembers will still vote to change some of the most onerous provisions of that ordinance, but we must use every tool at our disposal to protect patients’ access – including litigation.
One plaintiff talked with reporters from the Los Angeles Times about the lawsuit:
The suit alleges the city ordinance violates state law, and it seeks a court injunction and restraining order to stop the measure from being enforced. In the suit, dispensary operators object to the “onerous restrictions” of the law that is scheduled to take effect March 14, such as a rule that gives them only seven days to relocate to 1,000 feet away from schools, parks and places of worship but does not provide maps to show where they are allowed under the law.
“We want to work with the city to comply with its regulations, but such unreasonable requirements make compliance impossible,” Yamileth Bolanos, operator of the PureLife Alternative Wellness Center, said in a statement.
ASA will keep fighting for patients in court and at City Hall. We have already scored big victories by persuading Councilmembers not to ban collectives or sales of cannabis. Now we have more work to do to make this ordinance work. I hope all of you will join me in asking City Councilmembers to make some big improvements in the ordinance in the weeks and months to come.
U.S. Rep. Jared Polis Speaks Out
Following DEA arrests at medical marijuana facilities in Colorado, U.S. Representative Jared Polis has sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.
In the letter, Rep. Polis wants to know “whether [DEA] Agent Sweetin’s comments that DEA will ‘arrest everybody’ remains United States policy.”
In comments on the website Squared State, where Congressman Polis publicly shared his letter, he referred to the DEA agents involved as “rogue agents:”
The DEA must do more to stop their rogue agents from harassing and raiding our medical marijuana dispensaries, which are legal under state law.
The full letter:
February 23, 2010
Attorney General Eric Holder
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Dear Attorney General Holder:
As you know, the voters in my state legalized marijuana for medical use, and placed it in the Colorado Constitution, Article XVIII § 14, the Supreme Law of Colorado.
The Department of Justice is to be commended for issuing formal written guidelines on October 19, 2009, clarifying that federal resources should not be used against people in compliance with state law in states that have legalized marijuana for medical use. When drug czar Gil Kerlikowske was in Colorado recently, I thanked him for taking this step and respecting our state law.
Despite these formal guidelines, Friday, February 12, 2010, agents from the U.S. Department of Justice’s Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) raided the home of medical marijuana caregiver Chris Bartkowicz in Highlands Ranch, Colorado. In a news article in the Denver Post the next day, the lead DEA agent in the raid, Jeffrey Sweetin, claimed “We’re still going to continue to investigate and arrest people…Technically, every dispensary in the state is in blatant violation of federal law,” he said. “The time is coming when we go into a dispensary, we find out what their profit is, we seize the building and we arrest everybody. They’re violating federal law; they’re at risk of arrest and imprisonment.”
Agent Sweetin’s comment that “we arrest everybody” is of great concern to me and to the people of Colorado, who overwhelmingly voted to allow medical marijuana. Coloradans suffering from debilitating medical conditions, many of them disabled, elderly, veterans, or otherwise vulnerable people, have expressed their concern to me that the DEA will come into medical marijuana dispensaries, which are legal under Colorado law, and “arrest everybody” present. Although Agent Sweetin reportedly has backed away from his comments, he has yet to issue a written clarification or resign, thus the widespread panic in Colorado continues.
On May 14, 2009, Mr. Kerlikowske told the Wall Street Journal: “Regardless of how you try to explain to people it’s a ‘war on drugs’ or a ‘war on a product,’ people see a war as a war on them,” he said. “We’re not at war with people in this country.” The actions and commentary of Mr. Sweetin are inconsistent with the idea of not waging war against the people of the State of Colorado and are a contradiction to your agency’s laudable policies.
On Saturday, February 13, 2010, local Attorney Robert J. Corry, Jr. submitted a formal complaint regarding the raid and subsequent comments by Sweetin to the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Inspector General, which is tasked with investigating “waste, fraud, abuse, or misconduct” from Justice officials. I ask you to instruct the Inspector General to respond promptly to Mr. Corry’s complaint.
On Tuesday, February 17, 2010, Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Colorado David Gaouette announced his office’s intention to criminally charge Mr. Bartkowicz in federal court. In order to ensure a fair trial for Mr. Bartkowicz, it is essential that the confusion about administration policy caused by the actions of Agent Sweetin be resolved ahead of jury selection in this case. A response to Mr. Corry’s complaint would serve as point of clarity.
I again applaud your policy. Treating drug policy as primarily an issue of public health, as opposed to an issue of criminal justice, is both practical and compassionate and it has been and will continue to be supported by the voters of Colorado. Please clarify for me in writing whether Agent Sweetin’s comments that DEA will “arrest everybody” remains United States policy. Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Jared Polis
Member of Congress
cc: President Barack Obama
“It’s over, Mr. Epis”
On Monday, Bryan Epis was taken into custody to serve the remainder of his 10 year sentence. Despite an order from the U.S. Deputy Attorney General to federal prosecutors to stop wasting resources by focusing on medical marijuana patients and providers, Mr. Epis will spend the next 7 years in federal prison.
Mr. Epis was arrested, investigated, tried, sentenced, imprisoned, retried, and resentenced over the past 12 years. In that length of time, medical marijuana advocates have forged ahead with state-based victories across the country; meanwhile, federal law has remained unchanged and federal policy is creeping forward at a snail’s pace.
Federal policy, according to the headlines, has changed for the better, but consider this: while roughly a quarter of our nation’s population lives in a state that recognizes the medical value of cannabis, there are over 100 federal defendants who are currently facing pending charges. In addition, the complacency driven by incomplete, inaccurate reporting and coverage of federal policy just fuels the fire. Federal lawmakers no longer feel a sense of urgency, due in part to the memo from the U.S. Deputy Attorney General, and due in part to promises made by U.S. Attorney General Holder. Mr. Epis’ imprisonment highlights that this fight is nowhere near over, and the raids on laboratories in Colorado make it clear that while the tactics and targets may be changing, federal policy is FAR from changed.
Take your outrage & fear and turn them into action. Call your U.S. Representative’s office to urge his or her co-sponsorship of H.R. 3939, The Truth in Trials Act. You can reach the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121. For ideas about what to say when you call, check out ASA’s Action page (and send an email while you’re there!).
A Groundbreaking Day for Medical Marijuana
It was a groundbreaking day for medical marijuana. Proclamations on marijuana’s therapeutic benefits came from two medical organizations, one in California and the other in Iowa. The University of California’s Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR) presented a report today to the state legislature regarding the first clinical trials on smoked cannabis (marijuana) in the United States in more than 20 years. CMCR found that:
“reasonable evidence [exists] that cannabis is a promising treatment in selected pain syndromes caused by injury or diseases of the nervous system, and possibly for painful muscle spasticity due to multiple sclerosis.”
Given that some of the studies have already appeared in peer-reviewed medical journals, such as Neurology, the report was not really news to many who are fighting to get federal recognition of medical marijuana. In fact, the CMCR data can simply be added to the already-existing scores of studies conducted around the world that clearly show marijuana’s medical efficacy. In addition to observing the obvious, we should be asking why the federal government continues to resist further medical marijuana research. Why is CMCR the only entity conducting such research and why has it taken 20 years to come this far? Learn more about the government’s obstruction to medical marijuana research here. It’s long past time to break the federal logjam on research and to invest in the promise of medical marijuana.
In other news, the Iowa Board of Pharmacy (IBP), by its actions today has undoubtedly brought us closer to the goal of expanded research and the reclassification of marijuana. In a unanimous vote, the IBP recommended that the state move marijuana from a dangerous drug with no medical use (Schedule I) to one with medical benefits (Schedule II). The IBP also called for the formation of a task force, made up of patients, medical professionals, and law enforcement officers, to develop a medical marijuana law for Iowa.
The IBP vote was not an accident, but a planned and well-executed campaign by advocates that included a lawsuit forcing the Board to address the issue. According to the Des Moines Register, “The board last fall held a series of hearings around the state, at which most speakers spoke in favor of medical marijuana.” That support was put into concrete terms this week with a Register poll that found, “64 percent of Iowans support allowing patients to use marijuana if their doctors approve.” It looks like Iowa is well on its way to adopting one of the next medical marijuana laws.
California and Iowa, both trendsetters in their own right, have set the stage and provided us all with a sensible direction on medical marijuana: conduct more research and use the research that already exists to reclassify marijuana as a medicine.
Iowa poll numbers on medical marijuana
From the Des Moines Register:
Iowa Poll: Iowans give thumbs up to medicinal marijuana
Nearly two-thirds of Iowans think patients should be allowed to use marijuana as medicine if their doctors approve, a new Iowa Poll shows. However, fewer than a third of Iowans want to make the drug legal for people who just want to get high, the poll shows.
Fourteen states have decided to allow medical uses of marijuana. The Iowa Board of Pharmacy plans to decide on Wednesday whether to recommend that the Iowa Legislature follow suit…
Iowa Poll: Iowans give thumbs up to medicinal marijuanaMedical Marijuana Week: Sat 2/13 – Sun 2/21
Medical Marijuana Week focuses public attention on the need for safe access to medical marijuana. Activists and organizations across the country are using Medical Marijuana Week to educate the community and get active. ASA allies, chapters, affiliates, ambassadors, and activists are holding events and activities that help with their local goals.
For ways you can get involved — and local event listings — go to:
DC Council Takes a Snow Day
ASA Associate Director Don Morgan and I traveled to Washington, DC, this week to speak to the City Council about proposed regulations for medical cannabis dispensaries in the District and work with the staff at our National Office. The City Council here is developing regulations for dispensaries after Congress voted in December to lift the ban against a medical cannabis initiative passed by the voters of Washington, DC, in 1998. Unfortunately, we arrived in the middle of a record setting blizzard – one that snarled traffic and closed government offices. The City Council canceled tomorrow’s hearing in light of the storm. We’re disappointed about the cancelation, but we are making good use of our time here. Tomorrow, Don Morgan and I will trudge back through deep snow for a third day of work with ASA Executive Director Steph Sherer. I hope we have a chance to get back here to talk to elected officials in the future… when the snow melts, of course!
New York State Republicans support medical marijuana
From The New York Times:
Medical marijuana’s support among voters in New York State is so solid that even a substantial majority of Republicans favor its legalization…
Media Reacts to LA Regulations
Critical media coverage was one of the factors that influenced the Los Angeles City Council to adopt a controversial ordinance that may regulate most of the city’s medical cannabis collectives out of existence. Advocates fear only a handful of collectives can meet the tough location restrictions, tight registration timelines, and complicated record keeping and reporting requirements.
KCET’s So Cal Connect continued their coverage of the long regulatory debate with this installment, which discuss the anticipated legal fallout from ordinance.
ASA media coverage on California court decision
ASA’s analysis of the People vs. Kelly (pdf) California Supreme Court decision was covered in the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Oakland Tribune, and San Francisco Chronicle last week.
“The California Supreme Court did the right thing by abolishing limits on medical marijuana possession and cultivation,” said Joe Elford, the top lawyer for the marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access. “At the same time, the Court may have left too much discretion to law enforcement in deciding what are reasonable amounts of medicine for patients to possess and cultivate.”
“In one sense this is a call to patients to enroll in the ID card program if they want to be immune from arrest and prosecution,” said Kris Hermes with Americans for Safe Access, a medical marijuana advocacy organization.
Kris Hermes, spokesman for Oakland-based Americans for Safe Access, said the court’s ruling also renders unconstitutional many city and county ordinances that impose possession and cultivation limits. Oakland, for example, had set limits of up to 72 indoor plants with up to 32 square feet of canopy, or up to 20 outdoor plants at any stage of development, and as much as 3 pounds of dried marijuana.
The numerical limits provided some guidance to police and patients, and their invalidation “may have left too much discretion to law enforcement in deciding what are reasonable amounts,” said Joe Elford, lawyer for Americans for Safe Access.
California Supreme Court Strikes Limits for Medical Marijuana Patients
San Francisco, CA — The California Supreme Court issued a unanimous published decision today in People v. Kelly, striking down what it considered unconstitutional legislative limits on how much medical marijuana patients can possess and cultivate. Today’s decision also affirms protection from arrest and prosecution for patients who both possess a state-issued identification card and comply with state or local personal use guidelines.
Baby Steps on “Truth”…
In the wake of New Jersey becoming the 14th state to sanction the use of cannabis for therapeutic purposes, U.S. Representative Donald Payne (NJ-10) added his name to the list of co-sponsors on the Truth in Trials bill.
What about your Congress-critter? How about ringing in the New Year with a call to your U.S. Representative’s office to urge his or her co-sponsorship of H.R. 3939, The Truth in Trials Act. You can reach the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121. For ideas about what to say when you call, check out ASA’s Action page (and send an email while you’re there!).
San Diego Court Orders Return of Medicine
(This is a guest blog from Eugene Davidovich at San Diego ASA)
Sebastian Maselli was a founding member of Healing Dragon Collective which was raided on September 9, 2009 part of Bonnie Dumanis’ effort to eradicate safe access to medical marijuana in San Diego County. He was arrested, property seized, and life dismantled. Four months after the raid, and with no charges filed against him, Sebastian decided to begin the fight to get his property back. Sebastian researched the ASA National website where he found a return of property motion, after a little encouragement and help from friends and family, Sebastian completed it and submitted it to the court.
San Diego ASA caught up with Sebastian to discuss what happened on 9/9/9 as well as other issues related to the raids in September.
Sebastian wrote San Diego ASA: “I am happy to report that my motion was granted by the judge! I have a piece of paper stating: “All property belonging to “defendant” to be returned by 02/08/10.”
LA Police Chief Says Collectives Don’t Attract Crime
Chief Beck with LA Mayor
Los Angeles Police Department Chief Charlie Beck told reporters at the Daily News that medical cannabis collectives do not attract crime, adding that “Banks are more likely to get robbed than medical marijuana dispensaries.” The Los Angeles City Council should consider the Chief’s words carefully as they make final decisions about regulations for hundreds of patients’ associations in the city on Tuesday. If adopted as written, the ordinance may make finding a suitable location almost impossible.
Responding the concern from Neighborhood Councils, law enforcement, and the media, the City Attorney and Councilmembers have created tough location restrictions for collectives. Collectives cannot be adjacent to, across the street from, or across an ally from any residential use. The Council will decide on Tuesday if the facilities should be 500 or 1,000 feet from a laundry list of sensitive uses – schools, public parks, public libraries, religious institutions, licensed child care facilities, youth centers, substance abuse rehabilitation centers, or other medical cannabis collectives.
Even the best case scenario under the proposed regulations is not good news for patients in Los Angeles. Most of the city’s collectives will be forced to close, and it is unlikely many will find a new property that meets the tough requirements. One solution may be to allow a “Good Neighbor” exception for any collective that has not been the subject of community complaints. That would let conscientious collectives stay in their existing location and avoid an interruption in service for patients.
We will find out on Tuesday if the City Council hears Chief Beck’s analysis and adopts rules that treat collectives like health care facilities with a proven track record as good neighbors, or like public nuisances. Patients and advocates hope cooler heads will prevail.
The Los Angeles City council meets at 10:00 AM on Tuesday, January 19, in Room 340 at City Hall.
LA City Council Delays Final Vote
LA City Hall
The Los Angeles City Council delayed final approval of regulations for medical cannabis collectives until Tuesday. Councilmembers want more time to study a report by the Planning Department and new ordinance language provided by the City Attorney less than one hour before this morning’s meeting. The debate about the regulations seems to be winding up, with only a few contentious issues left to resolve – including where collectives can locate and how many will be allowed.
The 51-page report from the Planning Department showed the acreage available for collectives under differing regulatory schemes. In most cases, requiring buffer zones between a laundry list of sensitive uses and residential uses would eliminate most opportunities. For example, the report shows that requiring collectives to more than 500 feet from sensitive uses and any property used as a residence would mean that only four of the 137 collectives registered before the city’s moratorium could remain open.
President Garcetti cautioned his colleagues about approving tough location requirements without being realistic about the outcomes. “If we pretend there are going to be seventy [collectives] and there are really oly eight, shame on us,” Garcetti said. In response, the Council approved a motion to remove residential use form the list of sensitive uses, but approved a separate motion forbidding collectives from being located “on a lot abutting, across the street or alley from, or having a common corner with” any residential use, including mixed use properties.
The Council will decide on Tuesday whether they will require 500 or 1,000 feet between collectives and non-residential sensitive uses. These include schools, public parks, public libraries, religious institutions, licensed child care facilities, youth centers, substance abuse rehabilitation centers, or other medical cannabis collectives. Councilmember Paul Koretz observed that the lengthy report from the Planning Department did not consider the outcome for a 1,000-foot buffer zone from these uses, coupled with the restrictions on abutting residential uses.
The Council also debated how to distribute the seventy collectives allowed under a previous amendment throughout the city’s thirty five Community Plan Areas. The Community Plan Areas are smaller the City Council Districts, and the current draft anticipates dividing collectives proportionally based on population. There is also some controversy about how to deal with collectives that registered before the moratorium, but had to move as a result of DEA intimidation. Councilmember Rosendahl wants these displaced collectives to share a 180-day compliance grace period with those that did not relocate.
Americans for safe Access (ASA), the Greater Los Angeles Collective Alliance (GLACA), and other advocates will use the latest delay to keep asking Councilmembers for improvements that protect safe access. The City council is expected to vote on a final ordinance on Tuesday, 19.
Published Study Shows How Cannabis Inhibits Brain Cancer
(This is a guest blog by cannabis researcher and ASA Medical & Scientific Advisory Board Member Jahan Marcu)
As a member of ASA’s Medical & Scientific Advisory Board, I’ve been actively engaged in pursuing further evidence of the medical efficacy of cannabis-based medicine. Some of this work occurred while I was working at the California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute (CPMCRI), and yesterday the findings of that work were published by the peer-reviewed journal Molecular Cancer Therapeutics. With this study, we have shown that cannabis compounds can work together to inhibit glioblastoma (GBM), one of the nastiest and most aggressive of all brain cancers. GBM is the type of brain cancer that caused the recent death of Senator Ted Kennedy.
Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the most prevalent compound found in the cannabis (marijuana) plant. Many studies have focused on THC and its therapeutic qualities, however other compounds in the plant should not be overlooked from a medical and scientific standpoint. In fact, the recently published study illustrates how THC and other compounds (known as Cannabinoids) found in the cannabis plant work synergistically to kill cancer cells and reduce tumor size. The anti-cancer effect, which is mediated through the activation of cannabinoid receptors on cancer cells, has been shown through both in vitro and in vivo experimentation.
The other most abundant compound in the cannabis plant is Cannabidiol (CBD). One of the main findings of our research was how THC and CBD act synergistically to inhibit GBM brain cancer cell proliferation. The research team at CPMCRI, lead by Dr. Sean McAllister, discovered that a ratio of about 4:1 of THC to CBD resulted in a synergistic or enhanced killing effect. This THC and CBD combination was determined after assessing anti-cancer activity resulting from the interaction of THC with some of the more-than-70 cannabinoids found in the cannabis plant.
Interestingly, the individual doses of THC and CBD had little effect on the cancer cells or other proteins in the cells. However, when these two compounds were combined, the amount of cell death, or apoptosis, dramatically increased. And, as if this wasn’t enough, our research team discovered another potential breakthrough from the combined use of THC and CBD — a decrease in the protein known as ERK (extracellular signal-regulated kinase). The levels of ERK, often associated with cancer found in the body, were only affected by the combination of THC and CBD, suggesting that these compounds either converge on a shared pathway or together they activate a specific response in cancer cells.
Since these cannabinoids are relatively non-toxic and selectively kill cancer cells, large doses can be provided for in vivo studies. Hence, a direct injection to the site of the tumor or cancer, versus the more widely used methods of smoke or vapor inhalation, may be the most efficient for killing cancer cells. With more targeted applications, a much higher concentration of the active ingredients can be used without toxic side effects. We also speculate that other, non-cannabinoid components of the plant may also improve anti-cancer activity.
An improvement in the life expectancy of people with GBM has not occurred in 50 years, and because GBM is so aggressive and effective treatments have not yet been found, this study may represent a major breakthrough in the field. The next obvious step is further testing of how this combination of cannabinoids affects brain cancer and finding ways to put this important discovery to use.
ASA Legal Work Pays Off
The outcome of legal victories by Americans for Safe Access (ASA) could be seen again last week, when Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge William Sterling ruled that the California Highway Patrol (CHP) must return sixty pounds of medical cannabis confiscated during a traffic stop. ASA successfully sued the CHP to stop illegal confiscation of medical cannabis in 2005; and secured the right to return of property, regardless of federal law, when the US Supreme Court refused to overturn our victory Garden Grove v. Superior Court in 2008.
The defendant in this week’s case argued he was transporting the confiscated medicine for his collective in Venice. The judge disagreed with an expert witness from the CHP, who argued that only a Primary Caregiver can transport medicine under state law. The judge acknowledged that any member of a collective or cooperative could transport medicine on behalf of other members.
Cities and counties still working to develop and implement regulations for medical cannabis should take note of decisions like this, which acknowledge the broad immunities offered to collectives and cooperatives under the Medical Marijuana Program Act (SB 420). Patients involved in collective cultivation can maintain storefronts to provide medicine to members (and be reimbursed for doing so), grow medicine, possess enough for members, and transport it. Local regulations should respect these collective immunities – not try to roll them back with onerous restrictions.
Colorado legal voices criticizes state legislation
Denver attorneys Jessica and Robert J. Corry, Jr., air their criticisms of new proposed medical marijuana legislation in Colorado in a write-up for The Huffington Post:
As we have both publicly concluded in recent weeks, the medical marijuana community is not opposed to reasonable regulations designed to help patients, but will oppose those that will restrict supply or quality.
