Aligned with Thomas, Rehnquist

It's rare to find myself in solidarity with Justices Thomas, Rehnquist, and O'Connor, but medical marijuana seems to create strange bedfellows indeed. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the Court's ruling yesterday does not strike down California's Compassionate Use statute, but rather is fairly narrow in only saying that the feds can ignore state law and go after those it deems as violating federal law regardless of state interests. In other words, federal law trumps state law.

There are two courses of immediate action. The first is to urge passage of a House budget amendment that's to go to be voted on next week that would "bar use of Justice Department funds to enforce federal drug laws against medical marijuana users in states where it is allowed," according to Legal Times.

Another avenue left open -- or even encouraged -- by the ruling Monday is to persuade the Food and Drug Administration to change the classification of marijuana as a completely banned Schedule I substance, which it has refused to do for decades. In a footnote, Justice John Paul Stevens said that if the scientific evidence offered by medical marijuana supporters is true, it would "cast serious doubt" on the Schedule I classification.

That, of course, will not happen because it is in Big Pharma's interest to keep cultivated marijuana a banned substance while they work to develop a pill form that would have the same effects (they've been trying for decades, but have not been able to match the efficacy of the real deal). Heaven forbid the FDA to open the door to marijuana, pretty effectively closing the door on Big Pharma's plans.