The struggles District Court Judge James Reynolds was having with Montana’s new medical marijuana law have coalesced into a temporary injunction of major restrictions in the law.

Among the parts of the law that the injunction blocks is the provision against any profit being made from medical marijuana, the provision against growers even being reimbursed for their expenses, and the provision against caregivers growing for no more than 3 patients.

In his 15-page ruling Judge Reynolds wrote, “The court is unaware of and has not been shown where any person in any other licensed and lawful industry in Montana — be he a barber, an accountant, a lawyer or a doctor — who, providing a legal product or service, is denied the right to charge for that service or is limited in the number of people he or she can serve.”

He said that these restrictions “will certainly limit the number of willing providers and will thereby deny the access of Montanans otherwise eligible for medical marijuana to this legal product and thereby deny these persons this fundamental right of seeking their health in a lawful manner.”

As flawed as our system of law may be in this country, this seems like a good time to point out that as Americans we have several avenues of redress for our grievances; something those living in many other countries cannot say. When politicians let us down, we still have the courts, and vice versa.

There is also the route of the ballot box, where Montana cannabis advocates are working on returning the issue of medical marijuana to the voters.

Politicians in Montana have attempted to overturn the will of the voters and sneak through a repeal bill in the disguise of an “overhaul” to “close loopholes.” It seems the courts aren’t going to stand for it, and I have a feeling the voters won’t either.

- Joe Klare