The National and California laws prohibit the use, cultivation or transportation of medical marijuana. However, the County statutes of California allow the usage of marijuana in legal medical cases. These statutes give cities and counties the authority of passing regulations that are in conflict with the National laws. The powers that are enshrined in these statutes include the authority to determine the use of land within the county and across the borders, public health matters, and welfare.
In the exercise of the power over land use, the City of Riverside declared that it was illegal to use land within the city for establishing a health facility for marijuana. The federal laws point out that it was illegal for the city to use land for such activities. Consequently, the city initiated an action against the defendants. The court held that the facility should not be used for the distribution of marijuana. To challenge the injunction, the defendants considered the ruling as invalid and held that distributing marijuana was in full compliance with the state laws. However, the federal laws stipulate that the grant of powers of right of using medical marijuana is limited and can only be exercised under very strict conditions. Thus, the court ruling was binding to the extent of the adherence of the defendants to the provisions of health and safety code. The statute laws of California give the affirmation that except with the authority of the federal laws, it is illegal to have in possession, cultivate or distribute marijuana. Therefore, this case justifies the enforcement of the strict restrictions on the possession and distribution of marijuana.
In the Riverside Ordinances, the defendant established a marijuana health facility in Riverside. The defendant was the owner and also leaser of the land that was used for the construction of the facility. An action against the defendant gave the affirmation that it was illegal for anyone to grow and distribute marijuana. The court ruled that Riverside zoning prohibitions of medical marijuana facilities were in contravention of the state laws and the defendants were liable of an offence against state laws.
In conclusion, in both rulings, the defendants were liable of illegal distribution of marijuana. Despite having the powers for distribution of medical marijuana, California statute has placed limitations on the extent of the application of these powers.