norml19 - Page 7

 thus unconstitutional, requiring the affirmance of
 the trial court ruling for the plaintiff-appellee.
 7o NEED FOR ADD!TXONAL ARGUME_
 The DPF_s amicus brief argues for the
 resolution of the case on non-constitutional,
 statutory grounds. The ACLU ___.i_QU_ brief argues
 that the constitutional due process liberty
 interests of the terminally-ill outweigh the
 state's interest in preventing the prescription of
 marijuana°
 The appelleeSs brief argues_ that, under the
 heightened scrutiny of the state constitutiones
 equal protection provisions: The state interest
 is insufficiently compelling to permit the
 infringement of his rights6 to alleviate his own
 suffering_ ors to be protected from discrimination
 in medical treatment, due to a health condition
 (and its unique palliative remedy) over which he
 has no control.
 The amicus-applicantes enclosed brief
 presents a separate point. NORML argues that,
 even under the lowest possible standard of
 constitutional analysis ("mere rationality'q): The
 5