Pot Wars Round 2, Judge tosses out health board decision on medical pot

wow. That is big news! n/t

---

by: Jambalaya @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 16:12:44 PM CST

It is ALWAYS cause for celebration

when the other side has to ante up for the attorney fees!

Way to go.  

"The only way you could be worse is if you were Wade Norris." Ralphie

---

by: Middle of the Road @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 16:41:37 PM CST

Reason?

Did the judge rule that the board's new rule violated our constitution or that the board's public notice was fatally flawed?  Or both?

I think that if the judge's main concern was over public meeting fairness issues, then the board shall soon have a public meeting and re-issue the same rule.

---

by: telltale @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 16:49:38 PM CST

public notice was violated

You are probably correct about the net effect, but then the actual issue will be litigated.

This is the problem when you have conflicting regulations, statutes (federal & state) and constitutional provisions.

---

by: Danny the Red (hair) @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 16:55:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

wait a gosh darn minute...

...are you suggesting that this whole litigation matter will change nothing?  That the same rule, or change to the rule, will likely be in effect in another month?  So, the net effect of this lawsuit is nothing more than the state paying some lawyer fees and nothing more?  Where are my rosary beads???

---

by: Jambalaya @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 18:12:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sounded like the judge put a human face on the significance of his ruling...

Medical marijuana attorney Rob Corry, though, argued today that the Court of Appeals opinion applies only to cases prosecuted before the state adopted its caregiver definition this summer. In sharp exchanges with Colorado First Assistant Attorney General Anne Holton, Naves sided with Corry's interpretation of the ruling, saying the state wasn't justified in holding an emergency hearing and excluding patients' voices.

"How can you not consider the impact on the health of Mr. LaGoy when they changed the rules?" Naves asked.

"Your honor," Holton responded, "I think it's important to keep in mind that this is a temporary rule."

"It's not temporary," Naves replied, "for Mr. LaGoy."

---

by: Canines @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 21:43:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Possibly the board will reissue the same rule...

But, then again, the state board of health will have to actually listen to testimony this next time about why the facts of the recent court case don't warrant a change in the rules (as the judge indicated in the article above). And they'll have to listen to testimony again from several hundred patients. And the board will have to explain itself credibly in the glare of the media.

As it's often said, it takes a big person to admit that he or she was wrong. We'll find out what size and dimensions the members of the board of health are, after this next hearing.

---

by: Canines @ Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 07:52:58 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Congratulations WLJ!

Keep you red eyes on the ball:-)

This battle is far from over.

"I can tolerate chaos, I'm just not sure chaos can tolerate me" Dylan

---

by: Sir Robin @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 18:07:08 PM CST

Jailing people for reefer is insane

The wr on drugs is lost. Peole are doing hrd time for over an ounce while medical marijuana is sld by the bushel.

The only legacy that prohibition gave the USA is organized crime, and stock car racing.

Ken Buck: a man of Mr. Rove and Dick Cheney. The road forward does not use reverse.

---

by: Ray Springfield @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 19:21:27 PM CST

What Were They Smoking?

The sheer incompetence of the Board of Health forces the question: What were they smoking?

"Why should you go to jail for a crime someone else noticed," Bob Loblaw

---

by: caroman @ Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:23:51 AM CST

Hells Yeah!

Good news.  One more step in the goal towards getting the gummint outta of our way!

---

by: schnack @ Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 12:22:55 PM CST