CA Supremes: Pot growing limits, bans UNCONSTITUTIONAL

[Bennyboy]

Source: Emerald Triangle News

California Supreme Court Voids California’s Medical Marijuana Growing Restrictions,
calling them UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
SAN FRANCISCO — A unanimous California Supreme Court has struck down a law that sought to impose limits on the amount of marijuana a medical patient can legally possess.

The California Supreme Court ruled today that over zealous state lawmakers were wrong to limit patients marijuana when they illegally changed provisions of the popular voter-approved Proposition 215. The 1996 measure allowed for patients with a doctor’s recommendation to possess an unspecified amount of marijuana.

(((SNIP)))

Read more: http://mendonews.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/breaking-news-california-medical-marijuana-limits-tossed-out/

---

Whoa boy...can of worms opened now...

[LiberalEsto]

1. Swell. We can all be happy and stoned

while our corporate overlords reduce us to serfdom.

[glinda]

12. That is the plan.

[butterfly77]

13. They are probably smoking it..

and probably taking more drugs than that..

[wryter2000]

2. Ooops. That's not SCOTUS

It's SCOSOC. Supreme Court of the State of California. You should change your subject line.

[eppur_se_muova]

3. That would be SCOCA, not SCOTUS. nt

[frog92969]

4. Somebody unreced this?

Do we have a social conservative in our midst?

[truedelphi]

6. Maybe their pot stash was missing? n/t

[Bennyboy]

5. Damn I blew it....sorry, CA Supremes....

Still though, this is going to be very strange the next six months around here...

[UrbScotty]

9. You can edit your post while you have time

You have until an hour after you started your post.

[Bennyboy]

11. Thanks...

I was worried about the five minute thing...

[Myrina]

7. Shit I was gonna say at least they did something right today ...

:smoke:

[Meldread]

8. Great News, any chance of this going to the SCOTUS?

I know there have been issues in CA with the Feds coming into the State causing problems for growers and consumers.

[Bennyboy]

10. You know, I think there is similar case

before the SCOTUS too and that led to my confusion....Or I may have been wrong about that...