Feds wrong on Rosenthal redux

OH, FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE, why don't the feds just give it a rest?

Not satisfied with seeing Ed Rosenthal convicted of a felony for growing medicine for the sick with the knowledge and approval of a local government, the boors at the U.S. Justice Department have decided they don't like the one-day sentence Rosenthal got. Last week they appealed U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer's decision. Prosecutors had wanted the 58-year-old sent away for six and a half years.

Rosenthal, for years a prominent authority and prolific writer on the cultivation of marijuana, was sentenced June 4 in a case that harshly highlighted the philosophical chasm between California voters and absolutist elements in the federal war on drugs.

Rosenthal was convicted of three counts of growing pot in an Oakland warehouse. The crop was destined for a San Francisco medical-marijuana dispensary.

In a trial bizarrely dissonant with reality, Rosenthal's lawyers were forbidden from telling jurors why he was growing marijuana, and any mention of medicinal use was stricken from the record. California's 1996 medical-marijuana law was kept out of the courtroom altogether because the federal government does not recognize the state law.

There are a number of reasons the Justice Department should back off.

First, and perhaps legally foremost, is that this is a matter of states' rights. Rosenthal was not engaged in interstate or international commerce, nor was he interfering in the relations among sovereign nations. Because Rosenthal's operation was conducted entirely within the state of California, the federal government by rights ought to let California decide what to do -- or not do -- about his pot crop.

Second, on that count state and local voters have been quite clear: They do not want people stuck in the penitentiary for growing medical marijuana.

Third is the practical matter of money. The federal campaign against Rosenthal and against the will of California voters is unlikely to be successful, and this mean-spirited attempt to revive a losing case is only throwing good money after bad.