By Laura Barron-Lopez
Published: October 14, 2009

By Laura Barron-Lopez

For the Daily Titan

The line between legal and illegal has always been blurry when it comes to marijuana. The federal law undoubtedly states it is illegal, while certain state laws have legalized it for medical purposes.

The federal government enforces the Controlled Substances Act, which acknowledges no difference between recreational and medical use of marijuana.

Laurie Levenson, an Attorney Representative to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth District and a professor of law at Loyola Marymount University, distinguished the difference between federal law and California state law regarding marijuana.

“Under Proposition 215, the voters said if it’s just personal medical use and personal possession of marijuana then they don’t want to treat it like any other crime, “ Levenson said.

California Proposition 215, titled the Compassionate Use Act, was implemented in 1996 and provides protection for those patients who use marijuana for medical purposes as well as the physicians who prescribed the drug.

The act clearly ensures protection for those who use it as the law abides and none are “subject to criminal prosecution or sanction,” as stated by the American Alliance for Medical Cannabis.

Although it is illegal on the federal level, “the new attorney general Eric Holder put out a new memo saying that he wasn’t going to be like the Ashcroft – Gonzalez regime and wasn’t going to do marijuana cases unless they found large amounts for distribution,” Levenson said.

The federal law is the authority and is explained under the supremacy clause, which states that, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”

However, only under the extreme circumstances and abuses of marijuana will the federal government step in.

Scott Spitzer, professor of political science at Cal State Fullerton brought up the question of “what will happen though when federal agents decide to come to the states who allow use and distribution and attempt to stop it.”

Were that to occur, the state would be in violation of federal law and would have to abide by them.

Marijuana is used primarily to reduce nausea, a side effect of AIDS and cancer treatments. For glaucoma patients marijuana would relieve pressure on the eye, for those plagued with epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, spinal chord injuries, as well as other medical issues it would help control muscle spasms, pains and seizures.

There is a pill form of marijuana and the question is raised as to why that can be used. However, it is currently only available to cancer and AIDS patients. This pill is called Marinol and is consists of Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) one of the chemicals in marijuana. As of right now it is also impossible to get a standard prescription for marijuana.

Therefore, there is no adequate system in place to regulate marijuana and state and federal levels have been unable to find a way to successfully incorporate the use, growing and distribution of marijuana.

Spitzer said, “Marijuana is so connected to the drug trade and cartels. It’s the matter of where do you purchase it and sell it. What do you expose yourself to? And that’s potentially violent. Were we able to control it in the same manner we have alcohol then it could be a possibility to legalize it.”

Despite the federal law, 13 of the 50 states have legalized the use of medical marijuana.

“So the bottom line is the state system is a lot more lenient than the federal system but the federal normally don’t get involved unless we are dealing with major suppliers, “ Levenson said.