Court Turns Down Medical Use Of Marijuana Protection Of Public From Perils Of Drug Use Outweighs Cancer Patient’s Right To Relief, Justices Say In 8-1 Decision

The state Supreme Court on Thursday declined to legalize the medical use of marijuana, saying the relief of a cancer patient’s agony doesn’t outweigh the government’s responsibility to protect citizens from the perils of drug use.

The 8-1 decision reverses a Pierce County judge’s earlier ruling that struck down the state’s ban on the medical use of marijuana. Justice Richard Sanders filed the lone dissent, accusing the state of “merciless” conduct.

It’s a victory for anti-drug crusaders who viewed Ralph Seeley’s request as an open door to legalizing all sorts of drugs. However, a physician campaigning for a marijuana initiative offered for the November ballot predicted the ruling will generate support among the public to change the law.

Seeley, a Tacoma attorney diagnosed 11 years ago with chordoma, a rare form of bone cancer, had argued that his constitutional rights were being violated by federal and state laws that allow doctors to prescribe cocaine and opium, but not marijuana.

The state offered its sympathies, but said his plight does not transcend the Legislature’s broader responsibility to protect the health, safety and welfare of all Washington’s citizens.

Justice Barbara Madsen, author of the high court’s majority opinion, sided with the state, noting that the Washington Constitution requires the Legislature to enact laws to regulate the sale of drugs and medicine.

The medical use of marijuana is prohibited under both federal and state statutes, she wrote. She said various federal and state courts have found that the rights of privacy and personal liberty do not establish a fundamental right to drug treatment free of government police power.

Madsen also noted that lawmakers considered scientific evidence of therapies that have proven to be safer and more effective than leaf marijuana when they outlawed use of the drug.

Seeley, who was out of town Thursday and could not be reached immediately for comment, found only one advocate on the high court.

“I wonder how many minutes of Seeley’s agony the Legislature and/or the majority of this court would endure before seeing the light,” Sanders wrote in his dissent. “Words are insufficient to convey the needless suffering which the merciless State has imposed.”

Not surprisingly, the ruling drew mixed reactions.

Lt. Gov. Brad Owen, one of the state’s most vocal drug foes, called it an appropriate ruling in the best interests of the people. He said any decision to legalize the medical use of marijuana should come from the federal Food and Drug Administration after thorough scientific analysis.

“What we’ve said all along is that if in fact there is a medical value to marijuana, it needs to take the same route that cocaine took, that morphine took, so we know the good and the bad about it,” Owen said.

Seeley has acknowledged the lack of data, but said anecdotal evidence cannot be ignored.

The ruling marked a setback for various groups that have long sought to help people relieve their suffering from painful and terminal illnesses. They had viewed the 1995 ruling by Pierce County Superior Court Judge Rosanne Buckner as a major step forward, only to see the high court reverse it.