RULING COULD DOOM MEDICAL POT CLUBS

State Loses Its Arguments As A Judge Says Marijuana Is Subject To Federal Laws.

SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge Friday rejected California's attempt to
shield production and distribution of medical marijuana within its borders
from the disapproving eyes of U.S. pot prosecutors.

Providing marijuana is subject to U.S. regulation because it affects
commerce between the states, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer said in
turning down arguments made by the state attorney general's office. Federal
law prohibits pot for any purpose.

The ruling could doom medical marijuana cooperatives permitted under
California's Proposition 215, the 1996 initiative that made pot treatment
legal under state law for some seriously ill people.

The only question Breyer left open is whether he will issue a permanent
injunction against cooperatives in the Bay Area, the federal government's
present targets. Injunction violations are punishable by the judge as
contempt of court. Breyer's other option is to force the government to file
criminal charges and then try to persuade California juries to convict the
cooperatives.

A spokesman for the U.S. Department of Justice said that office hadn't seen
the ruling but was "pleased with what we have heard."

On the losing side of the case, Robert Raich, a lawyer for the Oakland
Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, said, "We will be appealing the first
opportunity we get."

The next court to consider the case is likely to be the 9th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals. The 9th Circuit, the highest court in the Western states,
ruled in the pot clubs' favor in an earlier, narrower Proposition 215 case
but was reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Bill Panzer, a lawyer for the Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana, said
another 9th Circuit victory for the cooperatives could prove more durable
than the last when it reaches the Supreme Court because of a "huge upswell"
of public opinion against methods used in the federal government's war on
drugs.

Taylor S. Carey, a special assistant California attorney general, said the
state may continue arguing its states' rights position as a friend of the
court in the upcoming appeals.

He said the position is in line with the U.S. Supreme Court's 1995 decision
that Congress exceeded its power to control commerce between the states
when it passed a law banning guns near schools.

Breyer's opinion relied instead on the high court's reasoning in 2000, when
it struck down the federal Violence Against Women Act. The justices said
the federal government had no power to regulate in-state noneconomic
activity such as crimes against women, though it could regulate in-state
economic activity.

"Unlike violence, the manufacture and distribution of marijuana is economic
activity," Breyer wrote.

He also rejected all arguments made by lawyers representing the
cooperatives, ruling, for example, that even if some patients have a
fundamental constitutional right to treat themselves with marijuana, those
who give or sell them marijuana have no such legal cover.