HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

''Conant v. Walters'', 309 F.3d 629 (9th Cir. 2002), is a legal case decided by the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (in case citations, 9th Cir.) is the U.S. federal court of appeals that has appellate jurisdiction over the U.S. district courts in the following federal judicial districts: * District ...
, which affirmed the right of physicians to recommend
medical marijuana Medical cannabis, or medical marijuana (MMJ), is cannabis and cannabinoids that are prescribed by physicians for their patients. The use of cannabis as medicine has not been rigorously tested due to production and governmental restrictions ...
. The Court of Appeals affirmed the earlier decision of the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California The United States District Court for the Northern District of California (in case citations, N.D. Cal.) is the federal United States district court whose jurisdiction comprises the following counties of California: Alameda, Contra Costa, Del ...
, which was filed under the caption ''Conant v. McCaffrey''. Though the case involved chronic patients with untreatable diseases, the decision does not name these conditions as a prerequisite, nor does it limit drugs which may or may not be illegal.


Background

The plaintiffs created a
class action suit A class action, also known as a class-action lawsuit, class suit, or representative action, is a type of lawsuit where one of the parties is a group of people who are represented collectively by a member or members of that group. The class action ...
on behalf of licensed California physicians treating patients with any of several severe and chronic conditions who discuss, recommend, or approve the medical use of marijuana for medical reasons. The class also includes all such patients. The named plaintiffs include eleven physicians, a physician group, an AIDS patient organization, and six patients with terminal illnesses, including one who died during the course of the suit. The case arose from two events: the November 1996 passage of California Proposition 215 which authorized medical marijuana, and a December 30, 1996 response to the law by the director of the
Office of National Drug Control Policy The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) is a component of the Executive Office of the President of the United States. The Director of the ONDCP, colloquially known as the Drug Czar, heads the office. "Drug Czar" was a term first used ...
which said The statement accompanied authorization for the U.S. Inspector General for Health and Human Services to exclude individuals from participation in Medicare and Medicaid programs, such as physicians who recommend marijuana to patients for medical purposes. Clarification two months later affirmed that mere discussion of any drugs with a patient was not grounds for sanction, but affirmed that physicians "may not intentionally provide their patients with oral or written statements in order to enable them to obtain controlled substances in violation of federal law."


District Court decision

The district court's decision acknowledged that the government has a legitimate concern that physicians might recommend marijuana in bad faith. However, physicians in good faith using honest medical judgment should not fear DEA sanctions. Furthermore,


Court of Appeals decision

The government appealed the District Court decision to the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (in case citations, 9th Cir.) is the U.S. federal court of appeals that has appellate jurisdiction over the U.S. district courts in the following federal judicial districts: * District o ...
, which issued its decision in 2002. Again the doctors and patients won and the federal government lost, while Judge
Alex Kozinski Alex Kozinski (; born July 23, 1950) is a Romanian-American jurist and lawyer who was a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from 1985 to 2017. He was a prominent and inf ...
's concurrence also brought in the First Amendment right of patients to hear accurate information from their doctors, and the state of California's right to make its own laws without being subverted by federal
commandeering Commandeering is an act of appropriation by the military or police whereby they take possession of the property of a member of the public. In the United States In United States law, it also refers to federal government actions which would force ...
. The ruling set a precedent protecting doctors, patients, and state medical marijuana programs in the ten states of the Ninth Circuit. The government again appealed the case, but the Supreme Court declined to take the appeal in a brief notice dated October 14, 2003..


See also

*
Cannabis in Oregon Cannabis in Oregon is legal for both Medical cannabis in the United States, medical and Legalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States, recreational use. In recent decades, the U.S. state of Oregon has had a number of legislative, leg ...
*
List of class action lawsuits This page has a list of lawsuits brought as class actions. Class action lawsuits Lawsuits related to class action {, class="wikitable sortable" ! Lawsuit !! Subject of lawsuit !! Court of decision !! Year of decision , - , '' AT&T Mobility v. ...


References


External links

* {{Cannabis in the United States United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit cases United States District Court for the Northern District of California cases Class action lawsuits Cannabis law reform in the United States 2002 in United States case law 2002 in cannabis