"Although
not determinative, it is noteworthy that on at least two occasions,
proposals to create a medical necessity defense for marijuana possession
were deferred in the South Dakota Legislature until the forty first
day. See Senate Bill 73, 76th Session, South Dakota Legislature, 2001; House Bill 1120, 76th Session, South Dakota Legislature, 2001. In the South Dakota Legislature, deferring a bill until the forty-first day of session is tantamount to tabling the bill."
Okay, if it's not determinative, why the fuck do they even mention it? Are they blowing a kiss to the eminent infallibility of the legislature? The above paragraph comprises the closing words of a SoDak Supreme Court decision that asserts that South Dakota Law does not allow a person to use a remedy that clearly benefits him and that says dying is a lesser harm than using cannabis to stay alive.
They could have done the right thing, but they chose to pretend the legislature recognizes a constitutional right.
http://www.sdjudicial.com/sc/scopiniondetail.aspx?ID=1203
No comments:
Post a Comment
Compose a username. We will delete comments posted under the name, "Anonymous." It's tedious and boring to view comments posted under "Anonymous."
If you don't want to register with Blogger, that's fine; just click the little circle in front of "Name/URL," then write something in the box that appears. Even your actual name if you like it.
You'll also have to write in the letters/numbers that appear in the image box to prove you are human. Thanks for humoring us. The comments will be much more entertaining with a variety of user handles.
If you have trouble reading the words you have to type in before you publish comments, click the recycle button until something comes up that you can read.