The ongoing debate in the United States about the legality and use of medical marijuana (also known as medicinal cannabis) is intriguing. There are those who would like to prevent, control, or even outright ban the use of medical marijuana. On the other hand, there are those who advocate for the legalization of medical marijuana in order to treat a variety of medical conditions, including debilitating diseases like AIDS, cancer, epilepsy, and chronic acute pain. Thrown into this debate is the conflicting treatment of marijuana by state and federal law. Marijuana is an illegal drug under federal law. The Controlled Substances Act (CSA), enacted in 1970, which outlawed marijuana and declared that it had no accepted medical use, also classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug. Schedule I is the most dangerous category and includes heroin, LSD, and ecstasy. This classification has been upheld even in the face of radical social changes in favor of legalization. Most recently, in the 2005 case of Gonzales v. Raich, the United States Supreme Court held that it is illegal to use, sell, or possess marijuana for medical use, even if the medical use is approved by the state and is in compliance with state law.
Although many states follow this Supreme Court ruling, a growing number have legalized the use and cultivation of marijuana for medicinal purposes. There are laws authorizing some legal form of medical marijuana in twenty-three states. Yet, state laws do not provide a carte blanche to citizens. States limit the circumstances and conditions under which medical marijuana may be cultivated, possessed, and used. Even with these limitations, these state laws invariably contradict federal law, given that the latter makes it a crime to cultivate, possess, or use marijuana for any purpose.
Courts and legal scholars are grappling with the question of whether the CSA preempts state marijuana laws, thereby rendering those state laws legalizing marijuana void. Some courts have held medical marijuana statutes invalid under the theory that they are preempted by the CSA, while other courts have found that state laws are not preempted by the CSA and, as such, found some states medical marijuana laws to be enforceable.
Also, given the principle that federal law preempts state law, an important legal question now is the status of users of medical marijuana in states that do not conform to the federal law. The status of those medical marijuana users who are in compliance with state law in their use of marijuana, yet are in violation of federal law, is a tenuous one. Should the federal government enforce its own laws by investigating and prosecuting those who follow their state marijuana laws? Or should it exercise its investigatory and prosecutorial discretion and refrain from enforcing federal law? Another important issue is whether there is indeed momentum growing for deference towards state action, and if so, what should the role of the federal institutions, especially the Department of Justice (DOJ), be in shaping national policy?
This article will also examine the social, economic, and legal pros and cons of legalization of medical marijuana to highlight the effects of medical marijuana legalization on the economy of a state. In sum, this paper looks at the current conundrum medical marijuana is in as it is stuck in the legal conflicts between state and federal laws in order to extrapolate some conclusions about the legal future of medical marijuana.
Particular cases are examined in order to demonstrate the influence of marijuana policies as a whole. In sum, this paper evaluates how much truth there is to the argument that there will soon be an end to federal marijuana prohibition. Although recreational use of marijuana has been recently legalized in Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, and Washington D.C., the focus of this paper is on the legalization of medical marijuana. Part II traces the origins of medical marijuana. Part III examines U.S. federal law’s relationship with international laws regulating marijuana to determine whether the United States may be violating international law if it allows states to legalize marijuana. The chart in Part IV provides an overview of state medical marijuana laws, showing, among other things, what amounts are legally permitted to be carried and the conditions for possession. Part V looks at the rationale the states provide for adopting or prohibiting marijuana laws. Parts VI and VII note the state and federal perspectives as well as the case law shaping the debate. Finally, Part VIII looks at the California Compassionate Use Act to see if it is a standard that is viable and could be emulated in other states.