Thursday, November 8, 2007

Medicinal marijuana

http://www6.comcast.net/news/articles/health/2007/11/06/Medical.Marijuana/


Above is a link to recent health news article. The story began with an individual who was fired from his job after he failed a drug test, even though his doctor provided a note stating his use was medicinal in a state where medicinal marijuana is legal. This is clearly discrimination. The individual sued to get his job back. However, the Supreme Court found that the firing was just as the individual was using an illegal drug. In 2005, the Supreme Court decided that anyone using marijuana for medicinal uses are still subject to legal repercussions if caught.

What is the purpose of legalizing something if discrimination against those who utilize that legalization is still legal? How can we prosecute people for doing something legal? How do we uphold blatant discrimination against someone who is following the law? The laws are put in the states hands – if the Supreme Court is going to override the state’s laws, what is the point of having state laws to begin with?

3 comments:

wooddragon said...

You're right, this is completely ridiculous. However, when the individual informed the company of the medicinal use, the company had the opportunity to do the right thing, and it didn't. This case did not have to be decided in the courts.

SCallahan said...

This is shocking to me, I can't understand how the Court is justified in its decision. And I also agree with the previous comment, that this could have been handled before going to court.

Unknown said...

The medical marijuana issue is one of the most perplexing and frustrating I've seen in recent years. I suppose if this employee had tested positive for OxyContin, he'd still have his job--without a note from his doc even being necessary.

It seems utterly senseless to pass a law that fails to protect those it was specifically written for.

Obviously the High Court makes allowances for personal perspective to enter into review of legal cases--it would appear to have been a done deal based solely on the law.
Unbelievable.