Truth in Trials Act Introduced in Congress

From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 15:17:24 MDT

  • Next message: Charles Hixson: "Re: Help with a Minimum Wage Model"

    The Truth in Trials Act described below would allow criminal drug defendants
    the ability to cite their state laws with respect to medical
    marijuana in their legal defense in court against federal drug
    charges.
     
    The huge relative proportion of democratic sponsors of this
    bill suggests, to me, that the GOP is hypocritical with
    respect to states' rights. What happened to GOP party principles?
     
    Either you're FOR states' rights or your AGIN' 'em! The GOP can't
    have it both ways.
     
    Of course Republican Ron Paul of TX once again stands out as a
    shining light.

    -gts
     
    >> Dear Friend:
    >>
    >> Yesterday, at a press conference on Capitol Hill, Rob Kampia,
    >> executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project, along with
    >> Representatives Sam Farr (D-CA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), and Barney Frank
    >> (D-MA), introduced a new congressional medical marijuana bill, the
    >> Truth in Trials Act. (Please see
    >> http://www.mpp.org/releases/nr041003.html for our news release about
    >> the event.) This bill already has strong support. In addition to the
    >> three members listed above and Representative Dana Rohrabacher
    >> (R-CA), who was scheduled but unable to attend the event, there are
    >> 25 other original cosponsors of the bill.
    >>
    >> Please help keep the momentum for this bill going by sending a fax to
    >> your U.S. representative. We have pre-written faxes for you to send
    >> at http://www.mpp.org/USA/action.html .
    >>
    >> Even in a time of war, there was a strong turnout by the media at
    >> yesterday's press conference. Reporters from the Associated Press,
    >> Reuters, and Congressional Quarterly, as well as a camera crew from
    >> CBS News, were just a few of those who were in attendance. The
    >> Reuters article is pasted below. Additional coverage is available at
    >> http://www.mpp.org/USA/news.html .
    >>
    >> With Rep. Farr serving as the lead sponsor, the original cosponsors
    >> of the Truth in Trials Act -- which has been given the
    >> bill number H.R. 1717 -- are:
    >
    >> Howard Berman ............ (D-CA)
    >> Lois Capps ............... (D-CA)
    >> Ed Case.................. (D-HI)
    >> Peter DeFazio ............ (D-OR)
    >> Anna Eshoo ............... (D-CA)
    >> Bob Filner ............... (D-CA)
    >> Barney Frank ............. (D-MA)
    >> Maurice Hinchey .......... (D-NY)
    >> Michael Honda ............ (D-CA)
    >> Tom Lantos ............... (D-CA)
    >> Barbara Lee.............. (D-CA)
    >> Jim McDermott ............ (D-WA)
    >> George Miller ............ (D-CA)
    >> Jerrold Nadler ........... (D-NY)
    >> Ron Paul ................. (R-TX)
    >> Dana Rohrabacher ......... (R-CA)
    >> Lucille Roybal-Allard .... (D-CA)
    >> Linda Sanchez ............ (D-CA)
    >> Bernard Sanders .......... (I-VT)
    >> Jan Schakowsky ........... (D-IL)
    >> Adam Schiff .............. (D-CA)
    >> Brad Sherman ............. (D-CA)
    >> Pete Stark ............... (D-CA)
    >> Ellen Tauscher ........... (D-CA)
    >> Diane Watson ............. (D-CA)
    >> Henry Waxman ............. (D-CA)
    >> Robert Wexler ............ (D-FL)
    >> Lynn Woolsey ............. (D-CA)
    >
    >> If you were one of the thousands of subscribers to send a fax to your
    >> representative over the past two months, thank you. As evidenced by
    >> the large number of original cosponsors, it really seemed to make a
    >> difference.
    >>
    >> If your representative is not listed above, or if you are not sure,
    >> please visit ttp://www.mpp.org/USA/action.html to urge him or her to
    >> become a cosponsor of H.R. 1717. It will only take two minutes of
    >> your time, but is very important to the cause. Many of our
    >> subscribers have requested to see the text of the bill.
    >> Unfortunately, the text is not yet available, but we will have it
    >> posted on http://www.mpp.org/USA sometime next week. Thank you again
    >> for supporting us in this effort. With your help, we will continue
    >> fighting for this bill until its eventual passage. Steve Fox
    >> Director of Government Relations Marijuana Policy Project
    >> Washington, D.C. P.S. To make a financial donation to the Marijuana
    >> Policy Project's congressional lobbying work, please visit
    >> http://www.mpp.org/USA/donate.html today. Thank you ...
    >
    >>
    > ======================================================================
    >> Reuters: Bill Allows Medical Marijuana Defense in Drug Cases by Todd
    >> Zwillich, Reuters Health April 10, 2003, 5:29 PM EST WASHINGTON --
    >> U.S. lawmakers have launched an effort that would allow defendants
    >> from states with legalized medical marijuana to use "medical
    >> necessity" as a defense against federal drug charges. A bill
    >> introduced in the U.S. House Thursday and backed by pro-medical
    >> marijuana groups would apply to California and seven other states
    >> where medical marijuana is legal. The measure gives defendants
    >> accused of growing or distributing marijuana in violation of federal
    >> drug laws the right to inform juries that they were acting legally in
    >> their state. Supporters touted the proposal as a way to protect the
    >> democratic process in states where voters or legislators
    >> approve measures backing medical marijuana.
    >> "This is about due process. It's not about pot," said Rep.
    >> Sam Farr, D-Calif., who co-authored the measure with Rep. Dana
    >> Rohrbacher, R-Calif.
    >>
    >> The bill was motivated by the conviction of Ed Rosenthal, an
    >> Oakland-based marijuana activist who was found guilty in January of
    >> violating federal drug laws. Rosenthal was licensed by Oakland to
    >> grow and distribute cannabis under a California medical marijuana
    >> statute, but the judge in his case prevented Rosenthal's attorney
    >> from informing the jury that the action was legal in that state.
    >> Marney Craig, who was a juror in Rosenthal's case, said that
    >> she regretted voting to convict him. During the case, jurors
    >> were only informed that Rosenthal grew marijuana and not that
    >> he had been licensed to do so.
    >> "We rendered a verdict that was wrong. We convicted a man who
    >> was not criminal," Craig said.
    >> The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that "medical necessity"
    >> cannot be used as a valid defense against federal marijuana charges.
    >> Thursday's proposal would change a key part of the federal
    >> Controlled Substances Act to allow state laws to become a factor in
    >> federal drug cases. Seven other states -- Alaska, Hawaii, Washington,
    >> Oregon, Nevada, Colorado, and Maine -- have lawssimilar to
    >> California's. Maryland has a proposed medical marijuana law
    >> pending. Voters in the District
    >> of Columbia also approved a medical marijuana referendum
    >> several years ago, though the Congress hasprevented local
    >> officials from implementing the measure.
    >> Federal anti-drug officials remain vehemently opposed to
    >> efforts to spread legalized medical marijuana throughout the
    >> states. John Walters, the director of the White House Office
    >> of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), has campaigned
    >> heavily against legalization referenda in several states.
    >> Dr. Andrea Barthwell, ONDCP's deputy director for demand
    >> reduction, said that the bill threatens to undermine federal
    >> drug laws that are in place to protect public health, even if voters
    >> in some states have spoken differently.
    >> "We recognize that federal law trumps state law in this
    >> area," she said in an interview.
    >> The bill's chances of passing in the Republican-controlled
    >> House are likely to hinge on support from GOP members from
    >> the handful of states where medical marijuana is allowed.
    >> Some Republicans have backed the bill on the grounds that it
    >> helps prevent the federal government from intruding on state laws.
    >> But it remained unclear Thursday how many GOP members would
    >> support the bill. Rep. David Dryer, R-Calif., said in an
    >> interview that he backs states' rights "in general," but that
    >> he has not yet taken a position on the bill.
    >> Rep. Mary Bono, another California Republican, said that she
    >> has yet to see the bill's details. "I think that if the state
    >> has spoken, then I'd want to support the state on that," she said.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 11 2003 - 15:24:05 MDT