Clement concludes his rebuttal with his best argument: California law undermines enforcement of the entire federal drug regime. There is no way to distinguish between those in genuine medical need and those who are exploiting the system. He cites a case mentioned in the briefs in which a man was busted with pot in his backpack, his pocket, his other pocket, and another pocket. And some scales. The appellate court nevertheless found that he might have legitimately been buying the pot for medicinal reasons; he was just carrying the scales to "keep from being ripped off."I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
But one thing is certain: Angel McClary Raich should start packing, and hope she can find compassion somewhere else.
Update: Jason Kuznicki covers the breadth and depth of the legal aspects of the case.
Update Update: Jim Lindgren of the Volokh Conspiracy is cautiously optimistic.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.