The Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Americans for Safe Access (ASA) have filed a motion to intervene in a federal lawsuit by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors, which seeks to overturn Calfornia's ten-year-old medical marijuana law, the Compassionate Use Act (Proposition 215).

The ACLU sent two letters to the Supervisors demanding that they drop their lawsuit against the state; the three groups reiterated this demand publicly at a January 24 meeting of the Board of Supervisors.  When the supervisors refused, DPA, ACLU, and ASA filed a motion in federal district court to intervene in the county's lawsuit. The motion, if granted, would permit the three organizations, as well as medical marijuana patients, a prominent physician, and the campaign manager who helped steer Proposition 215 to electoral victory in 1996, to become named defendants to the lawsuit and to assist the California Attorney General's office in defending the law. The motion to intervene, in short, attempts to ensure that the people who are directly affected by San Diego's actions have a loud and clear voice in the legal proceedings.

In its lawsuit, San Diego County claims, among other things, that Proposition 215 violates federal law, including the United States' treaty obligations under 1961 Convention on Narcotic Drugs, amended in 1972.  These claims are without merit -- so much so that federal Justice Department lawyers refused to raise such claims in 1996, when California enacted its medical marijuana law, because they were sure to lose in a court of law.  Even more fundamentally, the intervening organizations argue that San Diego County has no standing to sue the state in federal court. As a result, DPA, ACLU, and ASA are hopeful that San Diego's lawsuit will soon be dismissed by the court.

"The Supervisors' decision to continue with the suit shows blatant disregard for the law and the will of their constituents," said Margaret Dooley of DPA in San Diego.

Reform groups recognize that this case is too important to leave in the hands of the state. "The stakes are too high for medical marijuana patients to depend on Governor Schwarzenegger and the Department of Health Services to defend their interests in court," said Allen Hopper, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project. "These patients and their doctors need to know that someone is looking out exclusively for their interests."

Thanks to the intervention, DPA, ACLU, and ASA will be able to do just that.

Supporting Documents:

• Demand letter  
• An initial letter sent by the ACLU to the San Diego Board of Supervisors on January 19, 2006 
• The legal complaint filed by the San Diego Board of Supervisors 
• The groups' motion to intervene and memorandum in support 
• Hopper's declaration in support of the motion to intervene 
• Elford's declaration in support of the motion 
• DPA Legal Director Daniel Abrahamson's declaration in support of the motion 
• Medical marijuana patient and hospice founder Valerie Corral's declaration in support of the motion 
• A July 2005 ACLU and DPA letter, which is an exhibit to the motion, to Governor Schwarzenegger and California Department of Health Services Director Sandra Shewry regarding implementation of the state's medical marijuana card program 
• The proposed answer to the motion