norml21 - Page 71

 (emphasis added).
 By the Supreme Court's own admission, empirical or
 scientific support is to be expected for legislation which
 infringes a constitutionally protected right (such as those under
 the Ninth Amendment)° It is only because obscene materials had
 been previously and specifically determined to be devoid of all
 redeeming social value and outside any constitutional protection
 that the court in Paris could proclaim its support for the
 principle of presumptive constitutionality.
 The importance of scientific evidence has been recognized in
 the context of several constitutional challenges to statutes
 which make possession of allegedly _'harmless" drugs criminal, as
 the defendant does here. In many of these cases_ the courts
 concluded that absent a showing of harm, the criminalization of
 such conduct was constitutionally prohibited. In People v.
 Sinclair, 387 Micho 91_ 194 NoW.2d 878 (1972), a possession of
 marijuana casel Justice Kavanaugh (concurring) wrote:
 I find that our statute violated the Federal
 and State Constitution in that it is an
 impermissible intrusion on the fundamental
 rights to liberty and the pursuit of
 happiness, and is an unwarranted
 interference with the right to possess and
 use private property.
 Ido at 896.
 Writing the majority opinion in the case of State Vo Kantor,
 493 P.2d 306, (Haw. 1972), Justice Evinson similarly observed the
 71