Jim Finnel
Fallen Cannabis Warrior & Ex News Moderator
Two heavyweights of the Colorado legal community faced off Wednesday at the University of Denver law school in a bare-knuckle debate over medical marijuana.
The bout pitted lawyer Rob Corry, one of the state's most fiery medical-marijuana advocates, against state Attorney General John Suthers, a staunch critic of the current system. Think of it as a rhetorical cannabis cage match held in a packed lecture hall before an audience that was a 2-to-1 mixture of law students and marijuana activists.
Questions and responses in the debate veered from the densely legal to the broadly philosophical to the cautiously predictive, but the leadoff question was a simple one: Do you believe Colorado's medical-marijuana system, approved at the polls in 2000, is what the voters wanted it to be?
Suthers said it isn't, arguing that the system is rife with fraud and that the proliferation of retail marijuana dispensaries far exceeds the limited criminal-law exemption and small-scale patient-and-caregiver model that voters were sold. Voters should be asked whether they want dispensaries, he said.
"It creates an affirmative (criminal) defense," Suthers said of the state's constitutional provision on medical marijuana. "It doesn't create an industry."
Corry, naturally, disagreed, saying it was a "canard" that voters didn't realize where the constitutional measure would lead.
"It does much more than create an affirmative defense," Corry said of the law's language. ". . . It mentions 'dispensing.' So if dispensing is OK, how can a dispensary not be OK?"
This being a debate at a law school, a good bit of discussion ventured deep into the stuff of leather- bound books. There was debate over the Supremacy Clause, the Commerce Clause and the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution — all pillars in the bridge between state and federal laws.
The lawyers sparred over the details of a state appeals-court decision, a U.S. Supreme Court decision and a U.S. Justice Department memo that offers guidance to federal prosecutors in medical-marijuana states.
Corry repeatedly tried to sting Suthers with his own words, quoting passages from one of Suthers' books and mentioning a lawsuit involving Suthers arguing that the new federal health care reform violates states' rights.
"The federal government needs to leave us alone and let us comply with our (state) constitution," Corry said.
Suthers, though, said his previous words lost their context when applied to medical marijuana. With the health care lawsuit, Suthers said, he is seeking to block further expansion of federal power.
He said the Supreme Court has already ruled that the federal government can regulate marijuana as interstate commerce even if that marijuana is grown, distributed and consumed entirely within a medical- marijuana state.
When a student pressed Corry on that point, Suthers said, "I appreciate very much a law student bringing some legal realism to the discussion here today."
Things grew tense toward the end when several marijuana activists at different times began screaming at Suthers. Suthers remained stoic but had a security escort when he left the room following the debate.
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: denverpost.com
Author: John Ingold
Copyright: 2010 The Denver Post
Contact: Contact Us - The Denver Post
Website: Medical-pot debate features Suthers, industry advocate - The Denver Post
• Thanks to MedicalNeed for submitting this article
The bout pitted lawyer Rob Corry, one of the state's most fiery medical-marijuana advocates, against state Attorney General John Suthers, a staunch critic of the current system. Think of it as a rhetorical cannabis cage match held in a packed lecture hall before an audience that was a 2-to-1 mixture of law students and marijuana activists.
Questions and responses in the debate veered from the densely legal to the broadly philosophical to the cautiously predictive, but the leadoff question was a simple one: Do you believe Colorado's medical-marijuana system, approved at the polls in 2000, is what the voters wanted it to be?
Suthers said it isn't, arguing that the system is rife with fraud and that the proliferation of retail marijuana dispensaries far exceeds the limited criminal-law exemption and small-scale patient-and-caregiver model that voters were sold. Voters should be asked whether they want dispensaries, he said.
"It creates an affirmative (criminal) defense," Suthers said of the state's constitutional provision on medical marijuana. "It doesn't create an industry."
Corry, naturally, disagreed, saying it was a "canard" that voters didn't realize where the constitutional measure would lead.
"It does much more than create an affirmative defense," Corry said of the law's language. ". . . It mentions 'dispensing.' So if dispensing is OK, how can a dispensary not be OK?"
This being a debate at a law school, a good bit of discussion ventured deep into the stuff of leather- bound books. There was debate over the Supremacy Clause, the Commerce Clause and the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution — all pillars in the bridge between state and federal laws.
The lawyers sparred over the details of a state appeals-court decision, a U.S. Supreme Court decision and a U.S. Justice Department memo that offers guidance to federal prosecutors in medical-marijuana states.
Corry repeatedly tried to sting Suthers with his own words, quoting passages from one of Suthers' books and mentioning a lawsuit involving Suthers arguing that the new federal health care reform violates states' rights.
"The federal government needs to leave us alone and let us comply with our (state) constitution," Corry said.
Suthers, though, said his previous words lost their context when applied to medical marijuana. With the health care lawsuit, Suthers said, he is seeking to block further expansion of federal power.
He said the Supreme Court has already ruled that the federal government can regulate marijuana as interstate commerce even if that marijuana is grown, distributed and consumed entirely within a medical- marijuana state.
When a student pressed Corry on that point, Suthers said, "I appreciate very much a law student bringing some legal realism to the discussion here today."
Things grew tense toward the end when several marijuana activists at different times began screaming at Suthers. Suthers remained stoic but had a security escort when he left the room following the debate.
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: denverpost.com
Author: John Ingold
Copyright: 2010 The Denver Post
Contact: Contact Us - The Denver Post
Website: Medical-pot debate features Suthers, industry advocate - The Denver Post
• Thanks to MedicalNeed for submitting this article
