Supreme Court to hear marijuana issues...

Both sides of the marijuana debate are watching the Supreme Court very carefully, as it hears arguments Monday on its use as medicine.

On one side is a California woman named Angel Raich, who took up the drug to ease the pain of a brain tumor and other ailments. Raich has the support of her doctor and a California medical marijuana law.

The question is whether that's enough to protect Raich from the federal government, which makes no exceptions for the seriously ill in its war on drugs.

The Justice Department argues marijuana is a dangerous drug. And Republican Congressman Mark Souder of Indiana said if you can't control marijuana, you can't control drugs and if you can't control drugs, you can't control crime.

Justices will consider whether the federal law that bans marijuana possession can be enforced in ten states. Those states allow people to use marijuana if their doctors agree.

WASHINGTON -- The marijuana she smokes every two waking hours makes life bearable for Angel Raich. It eases the pain from an inoperable brain tumor, scoliosis and other disabilities. It's the only thing her doctors will prescribe, because she has severe allergies that cause violent reactions to traditional medicine.

In Oakland, Calif., where Raich lives, that's no problem. A 1996 state law permits patients to grow and smoke marijuana on doctors' recommendations.

But today, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case that is likely to settle a conflict between that California law and a 1970 federal ban on illegal drugs.

The Justice Department says federal authority is supreme in this matter, and the Drug Enforcement Administration already has raided one California patient's house and destroyed her cannabis plants. If the court favors the government's view, more raids would follow in the 11 states that have legalized medical marijuana -- Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.

Antidrug groups support the federal government, saying approving medical marijuana could boost support for the recreational use of drugs.

Raich and her supporters say medical marijuana is a matter for the states to decide, and for doctors to decide for their patients.

"Without cannabis, my life would be a death sentence," Raich, 39, says on a Web site about her struggle. "Cannabis was responsible for getting me out of my wheelchair and restoring mobility on the whole right side of my body."

The case is one of the most watched on the Supreme Court's docket this term, one that involves the justices in a high-profile social issue and tests court conservatives' commitment to a line of decisions that restrain federal intrusion into state matters.

It began in California in 2002, when DEA officers raided the Oroville home of Diane Monson, who was growing marijuana to ease back pain. The raid -- and several others -- was tied to a crackdown on medical marijuana inspired in part by the war on terrorism.

Monson, 47, joined Raich in suing to prevent the government from enforcing federal drug laws against those who use marijuana for medical purposes.

A federal district court sided with the government, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said it was a state issue in which the federal government shouldn't have authority.

The court said the intrastate, noncommercial cultivation of marijuana for medical purposes wasn't the same as growing it to sell for recreational use.

The Justice Department then appealed to the Supreme Court.

A decision is expected by July.

I have never advocated the use of illegal drugs but I have for a long time advocated the legalization of marijuana. Not because I want to use it but because it has proven effective in many cases to relieve pain that no other drugs are able to. While some might argue it is a gateway drug I would disagree and say that alcohol is more likely filling that role. In fact I see marijuana as less dangerous then alcohol when it comes to intoxication. While both slow motor skills I would have to say that having been in the alcohol industry for years I know more people who got in trouble with alcohol then marijuana. There is a reason they call alcohol "liquid courage" yet I have never heard of a similar term applied to marijuana.

My biggest beef with this agrees with the 9th circuit that it is a states right issue and the federal government has no place sticking their nose into. OF course the 9th circuit is the most overturned circuit in the country. The 9th circuit is also the most liberal one in the judicial system. There is also additional revenue that can be generated through the legalization for medicinal purposes. Of course the biggest hurdle to overcome is not the court giving a nod, it is convincing doctors that it is a legitimate drug when used in the treatment of chronic pain.