Dea V Dch - Subpoena Hearing Rescheduled For Feb 1

[Iceman081]

Great brief, they really bring up some great points sounds like they did lot's of research, too bad these points couldn't of been filed by our AG, the person that swore an oath to protect our rights!!!

[master.caregiver]

think you got them with this one

[Eric L. VanDussen]

ASA challenges federal government's effort to get records of Michigan medical marijuana users

 

GRAND RAPIDS PRESS – January 27, 2011: http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/01/medical-marijuana_advocates_ch.html

 

Americans for Safe Access, a national medical-marijuana advocacy group, today filed briefs in the case where the federal government is seeking state-held records of seven medical-marijuana users.

 

This is the third group asking to be heard in the case after state Attorney General Bill Schuette, an opponent of medical marijuana, said the state would release the information upon a judge's order. The state Department of Community Health, which administers the program, last summer resisted a subpoena by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

 

The DEA requested the information as part of a drug investigation in the Lansing area, records showed.

 

The state has been reluctant to release the records fearing it would violate privacy protections in the medical-marijuana law.

 

A hearing is Tuesday in U.S. District Court. Originally, a judge was to act on a request by federal prosecutors to enforce the subpoena earlier this month.

 

Americans for Safe Access considers itself the “nation's largest member-based organization of patients, medical professionals, scientists and concerned citizens working to promote safe and legal access to marijuana for therapeutic use and research.”

 

This case is being watched across the country.

 

Grand Rapids attorney Bruce Block, who has focused on marijuana cases, wrote on behalf of the organization: “If the federal government succeeds, medical marijuana patients in Michigan and throughout the rest of the United States will be deterred from becoming legal medical-marijuana patients in the states in which they reside.

 

“This will be deleterious to the health of thousands, yet the Michigan Department of Community Health has not addressed these issues, has not argued the merits of whether or not these documents must be produced, but rather has acquiesced to the demand – so long as this court will somehow cloak it with immunity when it violates the law.”

 

He said that the DEA is seeking “documents of the most intimate nature – medical records of sick and dying patients.”

 

Under the law, the state holds a confidential list of of qualifying patients and caregivers, who can grow marijuana. The Department of Community Health can only tell law enforcement if a registration card is valid.

 

While marijuana remains illegal under federal law, prosecutors say they are not targeting legal users of the drug.

 

Assistant U.S. Attorney John Bruha said that “ Department of Justice policy discourages expenditure of investigative or prosecutorial resources on individuals or caregivers 'whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana.'”

 

Block said that if information is released from the registry, it “would open a Pandora's Box,” and become “an easy source of information the federal government could access by subpoena of an agent whenever it desired.”

 

Such access would essentially “nullify” the program, Block wrote.

 

E-mail John Agar: jagar@grpress.com

[imiubu]

Obviously, Jesse Williams knew from the beginning that the standing issue was going to be a hurdle. He plans to reply to the U.S. Attorney's response with a memorandum of law by Friday.

 

What I found most interesting in the U.S. Attorney's response was that on pg 19 they say, "... as narrowed ... No dosage or medical information is being sought here."

 

Then, on pg's 19-20, they go on to say, "For purposes of this investigation, however, the DEA does not need nor care about the target’s medical information. Although the description of the information sought by the subpoena is broad enough to include medical information, the DEA will voluntarily narrow the subpoena to exclude any medical certifications. Neither the application form for a patient or caregiver registration card, nor the cards themselves, contain any medical information other than the name of the certifying physician. ... There is no physician-patient privilege as to that information."

 

They U.S. Attorney is clearly conceding that the subpoena at issue was overly broad by acknowledging that the DEA will "voluntarily narrow the subpoena." (I think that's a big win, even if nothing else is accomplished!)

 

However, they don't explain why they need the certifying doctor(s)' name(s), or why they need to know the names of the patients who have assigned the seven targets as their caregivers.

 

At the most, they should only be entitled to redacted ID cards that only show the patient and caregiver identification numbers and the issued dates.

 

Lastly, I think everyone should be calling AG Schuette's office and asking why his office didn't compel the DEA to "narrow the subpoena" and why the MACC, CPU and ASA are being forced to do his job for him.

Does the use of the word 'target/s' scream a message to anyone?

[lawyercaregiver]

Nice Work! :goodjob:

 

I would have focused more on the 10th Amendment. This judge is a Republican Bush appointee and that is the type of language he can understand. I just have a bad feeling about this one.

 

Also not sure if standing is established. There is definitely a possible economic injury for the intervenors but wouldn't, for example, the membership of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association be intervenors with a more specific articulable interest (and a wider base to fund this long legal battle...).

[kruztydj]

Being watched around the country is a under statement. Are we still planning a rally at the courthouse on this ?? In my eyes this is prolly the most important case to date on this law and it should be shot down. Will it be ??? Not if we dont stick togeather thats for dam sure.

[Eric L. VanDussen]

[rafaeltoral]

I like how the ASA brief brought the Oregon ruling into the fray.

 

How could this judge NOT deny the subpoena?

[Iceman081]

I like how the ASA brief brought the Oregon ruling into the fray.

 

How could this judge NOT deny the subpoena?

A federal grand jury and a federal judge are very different, as I was told a federal judge does not have to rule on precedent from a federal grand jury. I sure hope he does though, their are many good arguments being brought before this judge each brief seems to bring up more arguments to quash. We still have one more to read from MACC, lets hope they bring up even more good arguments.

[LongHairBri]

The DEA motion is weak. Confidential doesn't mean confidential? Did they even buy that? The court has to quash

[Eric L. VanDussen]

[rafaeltoral]

"How many times does the court have to hear the same arguments"

 

Sounds like a couple of two year old with hands over ears, shaking their heads, refusing to listen to reason and logic.

[rafaeltoral]

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/michigan/miwdce/1:2010mc00109/65112/

[+EdwardGlen]

No response from our AG, Bill Schuette?

 

 

 

 

AG Schuettee

"If ordered by the Judge,I will turn over the records"

 

http://michiganmessenger.com/45573/state-will-turn-over-confidential-medical-pot-information-if-ordered-by-fed-court

[+EdwardGlen]

The Constitution was a great idea but today's politicians are against anything to do with hemp.

 

 

(Walk like an Egyptian)

[Danielshemp]

Was there a ruling on this case?