## Facts

- Ralph Seeley, a terminally ill cancer patient, experienced severe chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting.
- He used prescribed antiemetic medications, including FDA-approved synthetic THC (dronabinol/Marinol), but claimed smoked marijuana relieved his symptoms more effectively.
- Washington law classified marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance under RCW 69.50.204(c)(14), requiring (among other criteria) no currently accepted medical use and lack of accepted safety under medical supervision.
- Seeley filed a pro se declaratory judgment action challenging marijuana’s Schedule I classification as unconstitutional under the Washington Constitution.
- The trial court declared the classification unconstitutional, and the State appealed directly to the Washington Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether classifying marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance violates Washington’s privileges and immunities clause (art. I, § 12) when synthetic THC is legally available.
2. Whether the Washington Constitution protects a fundamental right to use marijuana for medical purposes (or to choose a particular medical treatment), triggering heightened scrutiny.
3. Whether, absent a fundamental right or suspect classification, the Schedule I classification is rationally related to legitimate state interests.

## Decision

- The Washington Supreme Court reversed the trial court and upheld RCW 69.50.204(c)(14) as constitutional.
- The court held that the Schedule I classification did not violate the privileges and immunities clause.
- The court held that no fundamental constitutional right to use marijuana for medical purposes (or to obtain a particular drug) was implicated.
- Applying rational basis review, the court concluded the Legislature could reasonably classify marijuana as Schedule I based on concerns about abuse potential, lack of accepted medical use, safety, and difficulties of standardization and dosing for plant marijuana.

## Legal Principles

- A claimed right to use a specific prohibited drug for treatment is not a fundamental right under Washington substantive due process; it is reviewed under rational basis unless tied to an established fundamental right.
- For art. I, § 12 challenges in this setting, absent a suspect class or fundamental right, a statutory classification is valid if it is rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose.
- Courts defer substantially to legislative judgments about controlled-substance scheduling, especially where medical and scientific evidence is disputed.
- Differential treatment of plant marijuana and FDA-approved synthetic THC can be rationally justified by interests in drug-abuse control, medical safety, and the ability to ensure consistent potency and dosing.

## Conclusion

The court held that Washington’s Schedule I classification of marijuana was constitutionally permissible and that terminally ill patients do not have a state constitutional right to use marijuana as medical treatment; the statute survived rational basis review and the declaratory judgment was reversed.


Seeley v. State, 132 Wash. 2d 776, 940 P.2d 604 (Wash. 1997)