“I don’t think Carl’s current lawsuit against the Board of Pharmacy has any legs. Carl’s suit comes close to being a mere request for an advisory ruling, something the courts don’t generally do. As you note, Carl may have no injury, possible relief or standing, and he, himself seems to admit that he is filing a suit without hope of success, just to foreclose an argument that he somehow failed to exhaust his remedies administratively before going off to court once again. In my view, we won any relief that the Board of Pharmacy could give on Carl’s issue in the original lawsuit, McMahon v. Board of Pharmacy. I don’t think that the Supreme Court will overturn the Bonjour decision until the legislature acts to recognize that marijuana has medical use. Any other result would require them to overrule their holding in Bonjour that this is a legislative decision.
The focus needs to shift from the courts to public opinion and ultimately the legislature. Make your case there and the right result will follow.”
Interesting turn of events in the lawsuit I had the honor of serving against the State of Iowa last month.
I don’t remember serving the Board of Pharmacy, but I could be confused I guess. I was hoping for a more thorough legal analysis, but I appreciate the interest nonetheless.