Petition filed with Supreme Court to challenge 1284

I agree that MMJ invites all sorts of deceptions and logic contortions. Still, though I think MMJ is a stop on the road to legalization, and I'm happy we're here. I do think it is tedious to maintain the "medical" veneer and look forward to the time when adults can purchase and use marijuana for any reason they choose. It is indeed intellectually dishonest to maintain the position that only certain sick people should be allowed safe access when we all use this drug for recreation as well as for its proven medicinal effects.

I feel a headache coming on. It should arrive around the time the BCS championship game kicks off. wink wink nudge nudge.

Personally I agree with BOTH filings!!:thumbsup:

"ENSHRINED" in the Constitution. Is a perfect way to describe it. As, being in the Constitution means it is the HIGHEST LAW, also referred to as THE LAW OF THE LAND!

ANY law which alters, or contradicts the Constitution is illegal UNDER the Constitution. According to the U.S. Constitution (The nationwide "Law of the land").

ALL local governments can regulate INSIDE the Constitutional restraints, but CAN NOT "legally" ignore them. The ONLY way to change what is said in the Constitution is to vote to CHANGE the Constitution!!:thumbsup:

As usual, Highpop has it all wrong. YES gambling IS in the Colorado Constitution. However the amendment ALSO says,.. Where, when, how large, and what KIND of gambling is allowed!! Therefore restricting if, or where Harra's can build IS part of the Constitution.

IF, WHERE or HOW a dispensary is regulated is NOT in the Constitution. So it CAN be regulated.

HOWEVER,.. The Doctor bans, Caregiver regulation, Patient Record keeping, Outright banning of certain growers, do to being of "questionable character", Forcing growers to pay out to "privately owned" security companies, Employing "Gestapo type" surveillance, forcing background checks looking for persons of "questionable character" and BANNING them from ever even WORKING in the industry, and BANNING home delivery are ALL not legal under the Constitution. Every one of these (and likely more) are specifically banned in Amendment 20's wording! Or Constitutional Employment rights!

Do you think when Alcohol prohibition ended, that people who made alcoholic beverages DURING prohibition were outright banned from ever being involved in the very business being legalized? :wtf: NO, because THAT would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!

The people who supported these bills, and passed them (without the people's vote). Knew before they passed the bills (because the crowds TOLD them), That WE "the people" were AGAINST it! THAT is why they have been SO defensive and "against" MMJ (other then their own mmj businesses of course)! They took the "Kids and users just want to get stoned" side immediately after passing the bill!! Acting as though it protected the kids! BECAUSE they KNEW in court it would likely NOT stand up against the State Constitution. By taking that stand, fighting the regulation was looked at (and deemed on the news) AS trying to get drugs to users and kids!:mad:

So, you CAN change it Highpop, all you have to do is CHANGE THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT!! Unfortunately our Local, State and Federal "officials" love to regulate outside their legal power. Because WE never (or at least rarely ever) fight it. Most often WE don't even realize what they are doing!!

I use the term "WE" meaning the bulk of the U.S. people. As for myself (and a growing population) Politics IS my Football!!:thumbsup: I could not care less if ANY sports team wins OR looses. However I'll cheer on ANY politician who fights for my rights. I'll also FIGHT against any politician who LIES, or IGNORES the "law of the land". I REALLY hate the 90% which say one thing, and vote the other way!!

That's called Treason!!:cursing:

According to the U.S. Constitution, States are Countries joined under an END-ABLE agreement(hence the term "UNITED STATES"). Meaning if the Country as a whole goes against the State or it's ideals. The state can choose to leave the union all together. Giving States authority OVER the "Federal" government.

THIS Country was supposed to be ruled from the BOTTOM UP!! Not from an unruly Central Government!:beatdeadhorse:

So, WAY to go on the court filings!!:thumbsup: I'm ALWAYS for forcing the government to live by the same rules WE are supposed to live under! I was wondering how long it would take to get something going on this!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighPopalorum

I agree that MMJ invites all sorts of deceptions and logic contortions. Still, though I think MMJ is a stop on the road to legalization, and I'm happy we're here. I do think it is tedious to maintain the "medical" veneer and look forward to the time when adults can purchase and use marijuana for any reason they choose. It is indeed intellectually dishonest to maintain the position that only certain sick people should be allowed safe access when we all use this drug for recreation as well as for its proven medicinal effects.

I feel a headache coming on. It should arrive around the time the BCS championship game kicks off. wink wink nudge nudge.

---

Feel free to medicate at your leisure. Unfortunately, I am randomly tested at work, so I'll have to rely on you to medicate for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vancefish

Personally I agree with BOTH filings!!:thumbsup:

"ENSHRINED" in the Constitution. Is a perfect way to describe it. As, being in the Constitution means it is the HIGHEST LAW, also referred to as THE LAW OF THE LAND!

ANY law which alters, or contradicts the Constitution is illegal UNDER the Constitution. According to the U.S. Constitution (The nationwide "Law of the land").

ALL local governments can regulate INSIDE the Constitutional restraints, but CAN NOT "legally" ignore them. The ONLY way to change what is said in the Constitution is to vote to CHANGE the Constitution!!:thumbsup:

As usual, Highpop has it all wrong. YES gambling IS in the Colorado Constitution. However the amendment ALSO says,.. Where, when, how large, and what KIND of gambling is allowed!! Therefore restricting if, or where Harra's can build IS part of the Constitution.

IF, WHERE or HOW a dispensary is regulated is NOT in the Constitution. So it CAN be regulated.

HOWEVER,.. The Doctor bans, Caregiver regulation, Patient Record keeping, Outright banning of certain growers, do to being of "questionable character", Forcing growers to pay out to "privately owned" security companies, Employing "Gestapo type" surveillance, forcing background checks looking for persons of "questionable character" and BANNING them from ever even WORKING in the industry, and BANNING home delivery are ALL not legal under the Constitution. Every one of these (and likely more) are specifically banned in Amendment 20's wording! Or Constitutional Employment rights!

Do you think when Alcohol prohibition ended, that people who made alcoholic beverages DURING prohibition were outright banned from ever being involved in the very business being legalized? :wtf: NO, because THAT would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!

The people who supported these bills, and passed them (without the people's vote). Knew before they passed the bills (because the crowds TOLD them), That WE "the people" were AGAINST it! THAT is why they have been SO defensive and "against" MMJ (other then their own mmj businesses of course)! They took the "Kids and users just want to get stoned" side immediately after passing the bill!! Acting as though it protected the kids! BECAUSE they KNEW in court it would likely NOT stand up against the State Constitution. By taking that stand, fighting the regulation was looked at (and deemed on the news) AS trying to get drugs to users and kids!:mad:

So, you CAN change it Highpop, all you have to do is CHANGE THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT!! Unfortunately our Local, State and Federal "officials" love to regulate outside their legal power. Because WE never (or at least rarely ever) fight it. Most often WE don't even realize what they are doing!!

I use the term "WE" meaning the bulk of the U.S. people. As for myself (and a growing population) Politics IS my Football!!:thumbsup: I could not care less if ANY sports team wins OR looses. However I'll cheer on ANY politician who fights for my rights. I'll also FIGHT against any politician who LIES, or IGNORES the "law of the land". I REALLY hate the 90% which say one thing, and vote the other way!!

That's called Treason!!:cursing:

According to the U.S. Constitution, States are Countries joined under an END-ABLE agreement(hence the term "UNITED STATES"). Meaning if the Country as a whole goes against the State or it's ideals. The state can choose to leave the union all together. Giving States authority OVER the "Federal" government.

THIS Country was supposed to be ruled from the BOTTOM UP!! Not from an unruly Central Government!:beatdeadhorse:

So, WAY to go on the court filings!!:thumbsup: I'm ALWAYS for forcing the government to live by the same rules WE are supposed to live under! I was wondering how long it would take to get something going on this!!

---

Thank you for explaining that regulations cannot interfere with constitutional RIGHTS! If the Supreme Court hears this petition and agrees (not on mmj) but on constitutional rights--ALL people statewide can go back to what they were doing pre 1284 and 109. And yes, highpop, that means I will return to business, as it was not anyone else telling me I couldn't continue, I refused to apply to be an mmc, as I firmly believe I was a legal caregiver, protected by the constitution. The town of Nederland loved my sales taxes and openly have admitted they have lost the money my state licensed business was generating.

And if they rule against or throw the case out, people who had retail sales tax or wholesale business licenses granted from the state of CO pre 1284 will need to realize we all need to file takings lawsuits. The government cannot issue one a business license and then pass laws to ban your business--ie 'taking' your livelihood from you, without compensating you for up to 20 years of income from that business. We will bankrupt the state.

This petition is forcing the government to play by the same rules we do. MMJ does not make anyone a second class citizen. Anyone who believes we should bend over just because mmj is 'controversial', is believing 2010 reefer madness.

highpop is usually wrong, and I won't give you a further response. If you have read the full petition, posted on cannabislawsuits.com, you clearly don't understand it. Maybe read the westword latest word interview with my attorney.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colodonmed

"I know there's a lot of (medical marijuana centers) who are not happy with me for filing this, but they have to realize... they are in legal limbo," Chippi said.

Too bad if they are not happy with your decision to file this, I would risk saying that the majority of patients and caregivers are ecstatic!!, Way to go Kathleen!

---

I agree. At this point if your MMC does not have literature or signs or if they haven't even mentioned to their patients what is going on, patients should ask them why not and then run! (and take your paperwork with you!)

I want to let everyone know that I was contacted by 2 MMC applicants who said thank you after my filing. Colorado Care on Iris in Boulder and North Fork Natural Healing in Peonia. They are concerned for themselves and their patients and are educating their patients on this issue. And NFNH is being closed by a local ban in March.

In the long run, when they start closing most MMC's down, like NFNH, they will see that this petition is their only ray of light. It's good for everyone. And if they still say it isn't good for them, then you know they loved the fact that their competition was kicked out by 1284, because that is all 1284 did--cut out the constitutionally protected patients and caregivers from providing their overflow to other patients and caregivers in need.

And I agree, patients and caregivers are ecstatic! The positive response from them has flowed. I really don't care if 1000 people in the state who applied for this draconian statute MMC status hate me. Almost 3 million people are residents and will be affected by this either directly, as they are a patient or a caregiver, or they have a family member who will be a patient or a caregiver. 1 in 3 people in CO gets some form of cancer. That's 33% of the population qualifying for mmj on cancer alone.

So not having support from those who want me to be disqualified from my constitutional RIGHTS is not a loss for me. It's a good riddance. http://boards.cannabis.com/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif

Patients NEED to educated themselves on who is on their team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighPopalorum

Well, you're absolutely right about one thing: the court will decide. We won't have long to wait.

This is tangential, but what do you think would happen if 1284 was sent back to the legislature? I haven't digested the new committees, but one new chair stands out: Bob Gardner, who makes no secret of his desire to close all MMCs: "I don't think the dispensary model is appropriate." He was overruled the first time around, but now he will be the one holding the gavel in those committee hearings. He has a plan to sell MMJ through prescriptions and pharmacies, a de facto death penalty for MMJ in Colorado. I think you would be mistaken to celebrate the end of 1284, because the legislature is much more hostile to marijuana than it was a year ago. There are some unknowns (DelGrasso) and of course Summers, but my read is that a new Republican bill would be more restrictive than the current one.

---

Nice how you try to sway it that my petition is going to bring a worse response from the legislature. You just don't get it--NO statute can override our constitutional RIGHTS. As far as patients and caregivers see it this hb1284 IS as bad as it gets.

As far as it getting worse for MMC's--the legislature's have already got their prohibition language to "correct the flaws in HB1284" for months now. There are already "10 times the mmj lobbyist from 2009 at the capitol". They are NOT lobbying patient rights, but MMC rights--which are not protected by the constitution. The legislature listened to the 10 to one public comment against 1284 and passed it anyway. They are not on team patient/caregiver. Never have been. It was we the people of Colorado who voted for mmj. Politicians don't get to ignore that. The only means left for patients are the courts, and the courts will decide in the end anyway.

If the Supreme Court throws this out, the patients will know the top judges in CO want them to suffer for 2-3 more years as we will just file in a lower court and appeal our way back up to the Supreme Court and they will be forced to make the ruling then.

I am hopeful, and so are my attorneys, that they see the urgency for patients and see the future takings lawsuits that will inevitably bankrupt the state(unfortunately it is the money that talks) and just rule now.

Believe it or not Kathleen, I look forward to the day when owning and operating a commercial marijuana growing business is no more difficult than running a restaurant or a convenience store. I hope you do return to business and that the regulations your industry faces are not too onerous.

apply to be MMC's may now have their hands tied. They chose their team. They can't advise a client (MMC applicant) to fill out the forms (required by hb1284) and then support the calling of the same legislation (hb1284) as unconstitutional. They very well could be charged with mis advising their clients (MMC's).

Keep this in mind as we wonder why they did nothing on behalf of the patients--the patients didn't give them hundreds of thousands of dollars, the MMC's did.

So money won over doing whats RIGHT and just.

When I called Andrew Reid, he told me straight up--he was NOT an MMJ attorney. He had numerous calls from people asking to represent them and their dispensaries pre 1284. He declined ALL. He said I was the ONLY ONE who called asking about a constitutional action on everyone's behalf. And I asked Andrew to do whatever it took to get as many rights restored to as many people in Colorado as possible, as fast as we could, hence the Original Action to the CO Supreme Court. He took this case because it was the right thing to do for everyone.

The CO Supreme Court only hears 20% of the cases put before it. But Andrews law firm believes we have a solid case that could very well be heard due to urgency and the number of negatively impacted people statewide and it is a health concern. Send positive vibes to the court to do the right thing. I am remaining cautiously hopeful that justice will prevail and the court will hear the case.

(After all, Chris Romer promised to close down 80% of the businesses with hb1284 and most MMC applicants believe they will be the 20% who survive.) I'm gonna think like they do( Hahaha) and hope that my (our) petition will survive the Supreme Courts 80% rejection rate, because this is constitutional and negatively impacts people who are sick statewide who could further suffer loss of job, health insurance, kids, gov aid and even freedom or life.

Well... good on you for putting the state to the test. I hope they hear your case! All our laws should be regularly challenged. I appreciate the financial outlay you provide, even if we disagree about the ideal level of regulation.

Well The Supreme Court already denied hearing the petition......


{Denver} -- The patient petition filed with the Colorado Supreme Court
last week was denied on Monday (1/10), only 5 days after it was filed. The
Supreme Court opted not to decide the case, forcing the patient and
caregiver plaintiffs to start in lower courts and work their way through
the appellate courts, a process that will take much longer.

The petition had been filed on Jan. 5, 2011 by Andrew B. Reid, senior
counsel for Springer and Steinberg, P.C., a Denver law firm, on behalf of
Kathleen Chippi, a Nederland caregiver and dispensary owner, and the
Patient and Caregivers Rights Litigation project, an association of
patients, caregivers and physicians that have been harmed by the passage
of these laws.

The petition was an original jurisdiction petition, asking the Supreme
Court to decide urgent constitutional issues. The Court has discretion on
whether to decide original actions and hears only a small percentage of
such petitions filed each year. So its denial of this case was not a total
surprise, but patients had hoped for more compassion from the court.

"Apparently, the Supreme Court does not think that it is a matter of great
urgency that sick and dying people in Colorado are being denied their
constitutional rights of safe and confidential access to medicine," says
plaintiff Kathleen Chippi. "This delay in deciding these constitutional
issues only harms patients by forcing them to wait months or years for the
Court's decision and spend thousands of dollars to decide issues that the
Court knows it will be ruling on eventually. In the meantime, the
Department of Revenue and the state legislature will continue with
impunity to enact unconstitutional laws that harm patients." She says,
"We are being treated like second-class citizens yet again."

The petition had asked the court to overturn large parts of laws passed by
the Colorado legislature last year (HB 10-1284 and SB 10-109) because they
restrict patient access to medicine and violate patient privacy rights
guaranteed by the Colorado Constitution.

The Department of Revenue is in the process of replacing the Colorado
Department of Health and Environment's confidential patient registry with
their own massive government database of patient medicine information. The
new Patient and Medicine Tracking Database and Surveillance System will
cost the state at least $4 million to set up and will be shared by 5
government agencies and state and federal law enforcement. It will include
up to 16,000 different security cameras in Medical Marijuana Centers,
visible to law enforcement via Internet web cameras 24/7. The MMCs will be
required to videotape patients as they purchase their medicine and log
each patient purchase into the database. All of this will be open to law
enforcement, including CBI and DEA, and other agencies on demand.

Just as the state has taken away the Constitutional protection of
caregivers, they are now taking away the Constitutional protection for
patients. MMC applicants were forced to revoke their constitutional right
to be a caregiver in exchange for the statutory privilege of applying to
operate an MMC. Similarly, patients are being told they must revoke their
constitutional right to patient confidentiality in order for the
"privilege" of purchasing their medicine at an MMC. Not only is this is
completely backwards of how the constitution was supposed to work, but it
opens patients up to immeasurable harm if (when) their information is
leaked from the government database. Patients stand to lose their homes,
their jobs, their health insurance, their children and more if it becomes
known that they are medical marijuana patients. That is why
confidentiality is at the foundation of Colorado's Medical Marijuana
Constitutional Amendment.

Chippi and other patients are worried these electronic patient records can
never be secured on the Internet, as evidenced by WikiLeaks and other
recent "accidental" disclosures of records. Once the records have been
leaked, the harm has been done and is irreparable to patients.

Chippi will now file her action in District Court. The Patient and
Caregiver Rights Litigation Project event on Wed. evening to discuss these
issues will continue as scheduled. Please spread the word and invite your
friends:

PUBLIC MEETING
Wed., Jan. 12, 2011
Casselman's Bar and Venue
2620 Walnut Street, Denver, CO 80205

The Patient & Caregiver Rights Litigation Project
the Cannabis Trade Council and the Cannabis Therapy Institute will be
hosting a Public Meeting and Medical Marijuana Legal Panel

FREE and open to the public.

Schedule:

6:00pm - 6:30pm: Mingling and cash bar

6:30pm - 7:30pm
PATIENT & CAREGIVER RIGHTS LITIGATION PROJECT
Discussion of current lawsuits to regain patient and caregiver rights and
the positive benefits for cannabis business. * Andrew B. Reid, Senior
Counsel, Springer and Steinberg, P.C., author of Original Action Petition
to Colo. Supreme Court filed 1/5/11. * Kathleen Chippi, Patient and
Caregiver Rights Litigation Project * Kristy A. Martinez, Attorney at Law,
offered Amicus Support for Original Action Petition * Peter Loyd Weber,
Attorney at Law, offered Amicus Support for Original Action Petition *
Richard M. Gee, Attorney at Law, offered Amicus Support for Original
Action Petition * Eric Moutz, Attorney at Law, offered Amicus Support for
Original Action Petition

CANNABIS TRADE COUNCIL
Discussion of security issues regarding new DoR rules and organization of
CTC Committees. * Anthony P. Ibarra, security expert (DigaNET, Inc.,
Denver) Head of Cannabis Trade Council Electronic Security Committee *
Veronica Carpio, medical cannabis business owner (420 Highways) Head of
Cannabis Trade Council Committee Organizing

7:45pm - 9:15pm
MEDICAL MARIJUANA LEGAL PANEL
Moderated by the Cannabis Therapy Institute
Topics for discussion will current and future lawsuits, compliance with
the new DoR rules, the bleak legislative picture, and the prospects of a
ballot initiative in 2012. Opportunity for Q & A from the audience.

Panelists

Dennis Blewitt (Boulder)
Civil Rights Attorney and Author of Dr. Gonzo's Blog
gonzo2's posterous - Home

Richard Gee (Blackhawk)
Phone: (303) 569-6430
MC Squared Law

Danyel Joffe (Denver)
Attorney at Law
Phone: 303-757-6572
The Joffe Law Firm

Bill Lahey (Littleton)
Lahey Law Firm, P.C.
Phone: 303-399-3308
Home | Lahey Law Firm, P.C.

Kristy A. Martinez (Longmont)
Phone: 303-772-3230

Eric Moutz (Boulder)
Phone: 303-440-3923
The Law Offices of Eric J. Moutz, LLC - Colorado Trial Attorney Providing Legal Service to Denver, Boulder, and the Front Range.

Ann Toney, Lawyer (Denver)
Phone: 303-399-5556
Ann Toney, P.C. - Index

Peter Loyd Weber
Attorney at Law (Broomfield)
303-818-8625
http://www.peterloydweberlaw.com

For more information, see:

Patient and Caregivers Rights Litigation Project
http://www.CananbisLawsuits.com/

Cannabis Trade Council
Cannabis Trade Council: A Cannabis (Medical Marijuana) Professional Trade Organization and Industry Group

Cannabis Therapy Institute
Cannabis Therapy Institutue - - Medical Cannabis (Marijuana) Research, Education and Advocacy in Colorado