Monday, July 10, 2006

Good news in Alaska - Superior Court summary judgment supports Ravin decision For those late to the game, in Ravin, the Alaska State Supreme Court ruled that the state constitution's privacy provision took precedence over the government's "need" to search people's homes for small amounts of marijuana. In other words, marijuana is not dangerous enough to justify an invasion of privacy for small amounts. This got Governor Frank Murkowski's knickers in a twist, and he's been going all nuts trying to find a way to get the police back into people's homes, so he held some ridiculous show hearing trying to claim that marijuana is more dangerous now, and finally got the legislature to pass a law "re-criminalizing" small amounts of marijuana. The ACLU has led the charge to fight this despicable back door effort to overturn Ravin (joined by anonymous plaintiffs Jane Doe and Jane Roe). Today, Superior Court Judge Patricia Collins granted summary declaratory judgment in favor of the ACLU, meaning that unless and until the State Supreme Court overturns it, Ravin is the law in Alaska, not Frank Murkowski. The state suggests that, in effect, Ravin does not extend constitutional protection to the personal use of small quantities of marijuana by adults in the privacy of the home, but, rather, provides a framework for trial courts to determine, apparently on a case-by-case basis, whether current data about marijuana establishes that the government has a sufficient interest in prohibiting possession of small amounts of marijuana by adults in the home. As did the Alaska Court of Appeals in its opinion on rehearing in Noy v. State, this court rejects that interpretation of Ravin. [...] As the court of appeals found in Noy, "both in the Ravin opinion itself and in the supreme court's later description of Ravin, the Alaska Supreme Court has repeatedly and consistently chararacterized the Ravin decision as announcing a constitutional limitation on the government authority to enact legislation prohibiting the possession of marijuana in the privacy of one's home. Ravin is a decision by this state's highest court on the government's authority to enact legislation prohibiting the possession of small amounts of marijuana in the privacy of one's home. That decision is the law until and unless the supreme court takes contrary action. [...] Plaintiffs' motion for summary declaratory judgment is GRANTED to the extent set forth in this decision. [...] Today's full ruling (pdf large file, about 1 meg) Other files: The ACLU's legal complaint The ACLU's motion seeking to immediately block implementation of the law A memorandum in support of the motion A letter previously sent by the ACLU to Alaska Attorney General Marquez explaining the constitutional basis for its legal challenge [Big thanks to Dan!] 10:11:15 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Speaking of liars... Karen Tandy I know others have addressed this, but I have to at least mention it. On June 28, there was an excellent, thoughtful, and intelligent letter in the Denver Post called One Soccer Mom's Take on the Drug War. Well, naturally, DEA head Karen Tandy felt the need to respond with Another Soccer Mom's Take on the Drug War. And it is a vile piece of attempted deception. Marijuana is against the law because it's a dangerous, addictive drug. This is a health issue. According to the American Lung Association, marijuana smoke contains 50 to 70 percent more cancer-causing material than cigarette smoke. Feel free to read the rest of the letter. It's all ridiculous (and others have debunked it point by point). But let's take a moment to focus on this section. This is a lie. Period. Karen Tandy knows full well that the studies have shown marijuana does not cause cancer. It doesn't matter if that was a true attribution to the American Lung Association or not. The only purpose for writing that was to imply that marijuana causes cancer -- something Karen Tandy knows not to be true. That makes it a lie, and a despicable one. This is a public official, paid by our tax dollars, lying to the American people about cancer. This should be, at the very least, a fireable offense. Don't let the fact that they do it all the time blunt your outrage. 9:43:45 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []