norml17 - Page 20

Page 20 Previous , Next , Original Image
Return to Index

 the action irnpficate a "privilege" or "imrnuIfity?" (3) Does the action allegedly
 discriminate against an indi_dual or a class? (4) if so, is the discrh_nafion
 permJssib|e? 76
 The law prohibiting the use of marijuana even for medicinal purposes
 was passed by the legislature, and appears impervious to attack on the basis
 of the first prong of the test. However, access to desperately needed
 medicine is certainly a "privilege" accorded virtually everyone, and
 withholding the medicine from those who need it is clearly discriminatory,
 since whatever reasons for withholding it are present equally or more severely
 with drugs not proscribed 0°eo, marijuana is not physically addictive,
 morphine is, yet morphine is available and marijv_na is not). Additionally,
 the active ingredient of the drag is available to those whose digestive systems
 can absorb it, but not to those who 0roNcalIy) need the drug because their
 digestive systems are not functioning.
 This could also be phrased as an "immunity" issue. Those who need
 opiates, amphetimines, barbituates, and other often-abused drugs are iwanune
 from arrest for possession if they have a prescription. Those who need
 marijuana are not.
 To the final issue, "is the discrimination permissibIe," the balance-of-
 harms test should apply. What harm accrues to the state by permitting the
 therapeutic use of the drug? With the scientific evidence of therapeutic
 benefit that has been obtained since the drug was outlawed, any previous
 opinion in that regard would have m be reconsidered°
 Therefore, the |aw seems vulnerable to a well-researched attack on
 equal protection grounds, especially under the heightened protection of the
 state's privileges and immunities clause as contrasted to the equal protection
 clause of the I4th amendment.
 3. State COnStitutional and commo, n_.
 "This may reflect an intention to confer greater gotection from state
 government than the federal constitution affords from the federal government°
 76 _S___gz.55_C._r,_, 29I Or. 231,630 P.2d 810, _e_k_d_erAe,t_ 454 U.S. !994 (1981)o Summary of the four-
 part test is by Justice Utter in _.Iate_y_mil,h, _ note 71, at 228.

Previous , Next , Return to Index