Justice Dept. Won't Challenge State Marijuana Laws

Truth Seeker

New Member
The Justice Department will not attempt to challenge state laws that allow for the medical and recreational use of marijuana as long as the drug sales do not conflict with eight new federal enforcement priorities.

Those include the distribution of marijuana to minors and sales that assist or act as cover for trafficking operations, according to a directive being issued Thursday to federal prosecutors across the country.

Although the directive issued by Attorney General Eric Holder will apply nationwide, it will largely affect the 20 states and the District of Columbia that allow for medical marijuana use, and Colorado and Washington where state laws allow medical and recreational use by adults.

Holder briefed the governors of Colorado and Washington earlier Thursday on the new directive in a conference call. Federal prosecutors were expected to begin briefing authorities in other states later Thursday.

The new guidelines do not change marijuana's classification as an illegal drug. But it effectively discourages the pursuit of individual non-violent marijuana users who have no links to criminal gangs or cartel operations.

The document contains a list of eight new federal enforcement priorities, which is expected to guide federal authorities when weighing decisions on marijuana prosecutions. It also notified state authorities that the federal government reserved the right to intervene if the states did not enact appropriate regulations to protect federal interests, including guarding against the distribution of marijuana to minors.

The sweeping directive was described as a major breakthrough by advocates for decriminalizing marijuana use.

"Today's announcement demonstrates the sort of political vision and foresight from the White House we've been seeking for a long time,'' said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, which supports the legalization of marijuana and favors referring offenders to treatment rather than prison.

"They (federal officials) are basically saying to Washington and Colorado: proceed with caution. They are giving (states) a chance to roll this out. This is politically and historically significant.''

Dan Riffle, the Marijuana Policy Project's director of federal policy, said it was now time "for Congress to act.''

"Today's announcement is a major and historic step toward ending marijuana prohibition,'' Riffle said. "The Department of Justice's decision to allow the implementation of the laws in Colorado and Washington is clear signal that states are free to determine their own policies with respect to marijuana.''

As recently as last week, the Obama administration signaled its approval for more lenient marijuana enforcement.

"While the prosecution of drug traffickers remains an important priority, the president and the administration believe that targeting individual marijuana users, especially those with serious illnesses and their caregivers, is not the best allocation of federal government resources,'' White House spokesman Josh Earnest said last Wednesday.

In Colorado, marijuana advocates said the announcement sent a reassuringly "strong signal" to state voters who in 2000 permitted medical marijuana for medicinal use, and then last fall approved recreational use.

Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., said he had long pressed the federal government to "respect the will of Colorado's voters.''

"This is a critical first step in providing much-needed certainty for Colorado's residents and businesses who have been left in limbo since the voters decriminalized marijuana in 2012," Udall said.

Attorney General John W. Suthers says the federal decision means Colorado can continue developing a marketplace for people to buy and sell legal pot. "As belated as it is, it's a welcome document. We now know what the ground rules are," Suthers says.

The Justice Department announcement, however was not being hailed in all corners.

"We are very disappointed that Eric Holder's not doing his job,'' said Calvina Fay, executive director of the Drug Free America Foundation. "It is his job to enforce our nation's laws.

"He has created what will become a tsunami that will most likely result in far too many young people becoming victims of chemical slavery,'' she said. "And it's really unforgivable. ... He should be fired."

Peter Bensinger, former administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, said Holder's action amounted to a violation of the law.

"He's not just abandoning the law,'' Bensinger said, "he's breaking the law...He's putting the people of Washington and Colorado at risk. He's violating the treaty obligations of this country. He's telling the world we don't really follow the law here."

According to the new directive, federal authorities still will prosecute individuals or entities involved in:

  • The distribution of marijuana to minors.
  • Directing revenue from marijuana sales to gangs and cartels.
  • Diverting marijuana from states where it is legal to other states where there are no laws allowing for marijuana use.
  • Using legal sales as cover for trafficking operations.
  • Using violence and or firearms in marijuana cultivation and distribution.
  • Driving under the influence of marijuana.
  • Growing marijuana on public lands.
  • Possessing marijuana or using on federal property.
  • Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said he "welcomed'' the guidance that has been "long-awaited and in short supply.''

"The Justice Department should focus on countering and prosecuting violent crime, while respecting the will of the states whose people have voted to legalize small amounts of marijuana for personal and medical use,'' Leahy said.

110615032119_pot-dispenary-640.jpg


News Hawk- Truth Seeker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Source: usatoday.com
Author: Kevin Johnson and Raju Chebium
Contact: USA TODAY
Website: Justice Dept. won't challenge state marijuana laws
 
"Driving under the influence of marijuana." How do they enforce that? If you are pulled over and appear intoxicated and there are trees in the car? I don't get it you can't blow into a meter and have it read off a thc level.. can you? o.0
 
Today the POTUS sent me a "How are we doing" message, asking for feedback about the announcement this week that the "Justice Department Announces Update to Marijuana Enforcement Policy".

Note: You're receiving this update because you've previously signed a We the People petition on the issue of marijuana.

Last week, the Department of Justice released their guidance in light of ballot initiatives in Colorado and Washington -- we thought you'd want to see the news:

Justice Department Announces Update to Marijuana Enforcement Policy

Today, the U.S. Department of Justice announced an update to its federal marijuana enforcement policy in light of recent state ballot initiatives that legalize, under state law, the possession of small amounts of marijuana and provide for the regulation of marijuana production, processing, and sale.

In a new memorandum outlining the policy, the Department makes clear that marijuana remains an illegal drug under the Controlled Substances Act and that federal prosecutors will continue to aggressively enforce this statute. To this end, the Department identifies eight (8) enforcement areas that federal prosecutors should prioritize. These are the same enforcement priorities that have traditionally driven the Department¹s efforts in this area.

Outside of these enforcement priorities, however, the federal government has traditionally relied on state and local authorizes to address marijuana activity through enforcement of their own narcotics laws. This guidance continues that policy.

For states such as Colorado and Washington that have enacted laws to authorize the production, distribution and possession of marijuana, the Department expects these states to establish strict regulatory schemes that protect the eight federal interests identified in the Department¹s guidance. These schemes must be tough in practice, not just on paper, and include strong, state-based enforcement efforts, backed by adequate funding. Based on assurances that those states will impose an appropriately strict regulatory system, the Department has informed the governors of both states that it is deferring its right to challenge their legalization laws at this time. But if any of the stated harms do materialize -- either despite a strict regulatory scheme or because of the lack of one -- federal prosecutors will act aggressively to bring individual prosecutions focused on federal enforcement priorities and the Department may challenge the regulatory scheme themselves in these states.

An here is my own response below; please go to the POTUS website and tell them how you feel about the president's response to the MMJ issue.

Dear Mr. President:

Disappointment only skims the surface of how I feel about the administration's response. Why is it that we can never achieve closure for pressing issues like Cannabis, where there is an obvious solution that no one opposes? No one with any standing, that is. Cannabis is cheap and effective with no unwanted side effects – without harsh chemical processing, industrial waste or obscene profits by uncaring corporations with too much influence over the legislative process.

If you cannot resolve the simplest of issues like this, then what good are you?

Oh yes, I remember - persecuting innocent whistleblowers, torturing ignorant Islamists and getting nowhere with the abusive Republican regime in the House.

Brother, if I could say it to your face, you would see the pain and disappointment of a nation - you could have been a memorable POTUS, but even if you kissed a newborn baby in the morning on the Today Show, killed an old bad law by noon and squashed a host of bad Republican legislation before suppertime - every day - I doubt that you will able to redeem yourself by the time your term has run it’s course.

Ask yourself one question:

What would Dr. King think of your priorities and performance?

I will not presume to know what Dr. King would think or feel, but I am disappointed enough to be sure that you are incapable of redemption by any act. You owe us an explanation how you could promise so much and achieve so little, while signing away our individual freedoms so freely.
 
Back
Top Bottom