BLYTHE, Calif – Early this year, the Blythe City Council passed an ordinance
banning Medical Marijuana facilities in the City of Blythe. Based on this
article, it looks like the federal courts agree. Below is an excerpt from
California Peace Officers Association article written by Marty Mayer.
In three separate matters, judges in both state and federal courts have recently
upheld the rights of cities to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries, on
several legal theories. The most novel approach taken so far was the claim that
a person with a disability had the "right" to use marijuana for medical
purposes, if it was done under state law and with a doctor’s recommendation.
The United States Supreme Court has clearly stated that the use of marijuana is
illegal; thereby affirming that there is no exception for medicinal use under
California law." Furthermore, "our Supreme Court has recognized this principle
in Ross v. Ragingwire Telecommunications, Inc. (2008) 42 Cal.4th 920 when it
stated that despite the passage of California’s Compassionate Use Act (CUA),
marijuana was not a legal prescription drug …."
These three cases support the efforts to resist the proliferation of medical
marijuana dispensaries by banning them based on current law. Individual cities
have the right to establish zoning ordinances which exclude certain types of
businesses, such as medical marijuana dispensaries. Additionally, as the court
noted in the Lake Forest and Westminster cases, California’s Government Code
section 37100 only allows municipalities to promulgate ordinances which are not
in conflict with state OR federal laws. If a city generates a zoning ordinance
which "permits" the sale or distribution of marijuana, for any purpose, that
ordinance is in conflict with federal law and, therefore, in violation of
Government Code sec. 37100.
Additionally, it is important to note that novel and/or unique arguments can be
presented in an effort to overcome resistance to the permitting of dispensaries
in a community. The suit against Costa Mesa, claiming its prohibition was a
violation of the ADA, is just such an example. It is up to each jurisdiction to
decide whether or not to allow or resist the opening of such establishments but
these cases certainly reinforce prior appellate court decisions which give
cities the tools to resist, if they so wish.
The
reality is that a serious conflict exists between state and federal law on this
subject. It is up to each community to decide how to proceed. This is an area
of the law fraught with difficulties and conflict.