U.S. Supreme Court,
Criminal
Oct. 8, 2020
Supreme Court should consider the ‘pattern of nonenforcement’ when it comes to medical cannabis
Thirty-three states and the District of Columbia have recognized the importance of allowing access to medical cannabis. But even individuals living in those states are not free and clear to use the treatment that they need without fear of legal repercussion. The federal Controlled Substances Act continues to loom over them.
Brett Schuman
Partner
Goodwin Procter LLP
Email: bschuman@goodwinlaw.com
Brett Schuman is the chair of the firm's San Francisco office and is the co-chair of the firm's cannabis practice.
Jennifer Briggs Fisher
Partner
Goodwin Procter LLP
Phone: (415) 733-6000
Email: jfisher@goodwinlaw.com
Jennifer is a partner in the firm's San Francisco office and a co-leader of the firm's cannabis practice. Andrew Kim is an associate in Goodwin's Washington D.C. office and is a member of the firm's appellate litigation practice.
Andrew Kim
Associate
Goodwin Procter LLP
Email: andrewkim@goodwinlaw.com
Andrew is an associate in the firm's Washington D.C. office and is a member of the firm's appellate litigation practice.
Millions of Americans rely on cannabis as an essential, if not lifesaving, medical treatment. Studies have confirmed that cannabis and cannabis derivatives are effective in treating chronic pain, certain forms of nausea, sleep disorders, and epilepsy. And the list of therapeutic benefits only grows year after year. At the same time, cannabis has been demonized for political, and reportedly racist, reasons -- starting with Harry Anslinger, who served as commissioner of...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In