Home : Drug Policy : Marijuana Law Reform

San Diego v. NORML - ACLU Brief to California Supreme Court (09/24/2008)
The ACLU's brief to the California Supreme Court urging that the Court reject the appeal of two California counties challenging the validity of the State's medical marijuana laws. San Diego and San Bernardino Counties are appealing the July 31, 2008 ruling of the California Court of Appeal, which held that California’s medical marijuana laws are entirely legitimate.

Santa Cruz v. Mukasey - Order Denying Government Motion to Dismiss (08/20/2008)
A ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, denying the federal government's motion to dismiss the case and holding that the U.S. Constitution bars deliberate subversion by the federal government of state medical marijuana laws.

French v. County of Eddy, et al. - Affidavit of David Edmondson (02/14/2008)
An affidavit submitted by a local law enforcement official that states that the seizure of medical marijuana from a local paraplegic man, “was done at the direction of and under the guidance and control of the [Drug Enforcement Administration] DEA.” The affidavit, submitted by David Edmondson, Commander of the Pecos Valley Drug Task Force, which conducted the seizure on September 4, 2007, makes clear that the federal government directed local law enforcement to seize the medical marijuana of a patient fully authorized to use the medicine under state law.

San Diego v. CA - City of San Diego Amicus Brief (12/06/2007)
A friend of the court brief submitted by the City of San Diego opposing the County of San Diego's attempt to overturn California's medical marijuana laws due to their conflict with federal law.

Santa Cruz v. Mukasey - Second Amended Complaint (11/28/2007)
Representing the City and County of Santa Cruz, California, as well as a local medical marijuana hospice, WAMM, the ACLU argues that the federal government's intentional subversion of state medical marijuana laws violates the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

County of Santa Cruz v. Gonzales - Order Granting Motion to Dismiss (08/30/2007)
Consistent with the Ninth Circuit’s March 2007 ruling in Raich v. Gonzales, Judge Jeremy Fogel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, dismissed outright a number of claims made of behalf of the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM). Importantly, however, two of the issues raised by WAMM and the County and City of Santa Cruz remain alive: (1) the ability of patients to raise a medical necessity defense in the face of federal prosecution, and (2) the claim that the federal government may have violated the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Santa Barbara v. Poet - Final Ruling (07/10/2007)
A ruling by the California Superior Court dismissing the City of Santa Barbara's challenge of a voter enacted initiative that makes marijuana use the lowest law enforcement priority.

Santa Barbara v. Poet - (Anti-SLAPP) Motion to Strike (05/07/2007)
The ACLU's motion to dismiss the City of Santa Barbara's lawsuit against Heather Poet due to the suit's violation of California's ban on strategic lawsuits against public participation (“SLAPP”). Poet is the sponsor of a recently passed ballot initiative that makes marijuana use Santa Barbara's lowest law enforcement priority.

ACLU of Alaska v. State - ACLU Brief to Alaska Supreme Court (05/04/2007)
The ACLU's brief to the Alaska Supreme Court concerning whether the state may enter homes based solely on adults’ private possession of a small amount of marijuana. In May 2006, the Alaska legislature re-enacted a law that would criminalize private, adult marijuana possession – a law that the Alaska Supreme Court struck down in 1975. The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the law, arguing that the state constitution’s privacy provisions protect adults who use and possess marijuana in their homes from police surveillance, searches, arrest and prosecution. On July 10, 2006 a Juneau Superior Court judge struck down the legislature’s attempt to criminalize private, adult marijuana possession. The ACLU is asking the Supreme Court to affirm this lower court ruling.

ACLU v. Alaska - ACLU Brief in Reply to State's AK Supreme Court Appeal (04/18/2007)
The ACLU's brief to the Alaska Supreme Court asking that the Court affirm a state Superior Court ruling and dismiss the government's appeal. The ruling struck down as unconstitutional a newly enacted law prohibiting all marijuana possession, holding that the privacy protections afforded by the Alaska constitution protect adults who possess marijuana in their homes.

Santa Cruz v. Gonzales - Supplemental Brief in Support of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (04/18/2007)
A supplemental brief filed by plaintiffs examining the impact of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' dismissal of Gonzales v. Raich on this case. Santa Cruz v. Gonzales, which addresses the right of qualified patients to use medical marijuana and the right of states to provide for such use absent federal interference, was on hold pending the outcome of Raich.

In the Matter of Lyle Craker- Opinion and Recommended Ruling (02/12/2007)
The opinion and recommended ruling of DEA Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Bittner in support of Professor Lyle Craker's application to the DEA to grow marijuana. Judge Bittner concluded that it is in the public's interest for Craker to be permitted to grow marijuana for use in research into the plant's medical benefits.

San Diego v. CA- Final Ruling (12/06/2006)
A final ruling in favor of medical marijuana patients represented by the ACLU, Drug Policy Alliance and Americans for Safe Access. The ruling strikes down San Diego, San Bernardino and Merced counties' legal challenge to the validity of California's medical marijuana laws, rejecting the counties' contention that state medical marijuana laws are invalid due to the federal prohibition of marijuana.

San Diego v. NORML- Tentative Ruling on Motion for Judgment (11/16/2006)
A tentative ruling in favor of medical marijuana patients represented by the ACLU, Drug Policy Alliance and Americans for Safe Access. The ruling strikes down San Diego, San Bernardino and Merced counties' legal challenge to the validity of California's medical marijuana laws, rejecting the counties' contention that state medical marijuana laws are invalid due to the federal prohibition of marijuana.

San Diego v. NORML- Intervenors' Memo in Reply to Motion for Judgment (11/03/2006)
A motion filed on behalf of medical marijuana patients by the ACLU, Drug Policy Alliance and Americans for Safe Access in San Diego, San Bernardino and Merced counties' legal challenge to the validity of California's medical marijuana laws.

San Diego v. California - Motion for Judgment on Pleadings (09/01/2006)
A motion seeking a ruling on pleadings filed on behalf of medical marijuana patients, caregivers and doctors by the ACLU, Drug Policy Alliance and Americans for Safe Access in San Diego, San Bernardino and Merced counties legal challenge to the validity of California's medical marijuana laws.

ACLU v. Alaska Order on States Motion to Dismiss (07/11/2006)
ACLU v. Alaska Order on States Motion to Dismiss

San Diego, et al. v. California, et al. - Motion to Intervene and Proposed Complaint (07/07/2006)
A motion to intervene and proposed complaint filed by the ACLU, Drug Policy Alliance and Americans for Safe Access in San Diego, San Bernardino and Merced counties legal challenge to the validity of California's medical marijuana laws.

ACLU of AK v. State - Statement of Undisputed Facts (06/30/2006)
A record of the undisputed facts at hand in the ACLU's challenge of an Alaska law that would make it illegal for adults to possess small amounts of marijuana in the privacy of their homes.

ACLU of Alaska v. State - Motion for Summary Judgment (06/30/2006)
The ACLU of Alaska's motion seeking a ruling striking down as unconstitutional a state law that would criminalize private, adult possession of marijuana in the home.