Deparment of Justice breaking the law in continuing persecution of medical marijuana patients

A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) told the Los Angeles Times that a bi-partisan amendment passed by Congress last year prohibiting DOJ from spending any money to undermine state medical marijuana laws doesn’t prevent it from prosecuting people for medical marijuana or seizing their property. The statement comes as the agency continues to target people who are complying with their state medical marijuana law. This insubordination is occurring despite the fact that members of Congress in both parties were clear that their intent with the amendment was to protect medical marijuana patients and providers from federal prosecution and forfeiture.

Like a defiant toddler, the remaining dinosaurs fighting the drug war at the Department of Justice and the DEA believe that if they close their eyes, plug their ears and scream NAH NAH NAH I CANT HEAR YOU at the tops of their lungs that the will of the President, the will of the Congress and the will of the American people do not apply to them, or maybe it is a redundant organization going through the final spasms before their budget is yanked out from under them.

“The Justice Department is ignoring the will of the voters, defying Congress, and breaking the law,” said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance. “President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder need to rein in this out-of-control agency.”

Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia have laws that legalize and regulate marijuana for medicinal purposes. Twelve states have laws on the books regulating cannabidiol (CBD) oils, a non-psychotropic component of medical marijuana which some parents are utilizing to treat their children’s seizures. Four states and the District of Columbia have legalized marijuana for non-medical use.

Last May Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher and Democratic Congressman Sam Farr offered an amendment to a spending bill prohibiting the Justice Department from spending any money in 2015 to prevent states “from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.” Members of both parties took to the House floor in opposition to the prosecution of medical marijuana patients and providers and in defense of states setting their own marijuana laws without federal interference.

The Republican-controlled House passed the amendment with most Democrats and 49 Republicans approving it. The amendment was backed in the Senate by Republican Senator Rand Paul and Democratic Senator Cory Booker and made it into the final “cromnibus” bill that was signed by President Obama in December. The spending restriction applies to fiscal year 2015 spending.

The House also passed three other amendments last year letting states set their own marijuana policies, but those amendments never made it into law. Polls show roughly three-quarters of Americans support legalizing marijuana for medical use. A little more than half of voters support legalizing marijuana for non-medical use, in the same way alcohol is legal, taxed, and regulated.

Advocates say that even though the spending restriction is a good restriction, the Department of Justice’s actions show the need for changing federal law. Last month Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Dean Heller (R-NV) introduced bipartisan legislation to legalize marijuana for medical use. The Compassionate Access, Research Expansion and Respect States – CARERS – Act is the first-ever bill in the U.S. Senate to legalize marijuana for medical use and the most comprehensive medical marijuana bill ever introduced in Congress. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) and Rep. Don Young (R-AK) introduced a House version of the bill last week.

“Congress should respond to the Justice Department’s insubordination by changing federal law,” said Piper. “Patients and the people who provide them with their medicine will never be safe until states are free to set their own marijuana policy without federal interference.”

D.C. hosts nation’s biggest legal marijuana giveaway

WaPo – The District witnessed a massive, public drug deal Thursday — and for those involved, it was quite a bargain.

With D.C. police officers looking on, hundreds of city residents lined up and then walked away from an Adams Morgan restaurant carrying baggies containing marijuana seeds.

Taking advantage of a ballot measure approved last fall by voters that legalized possession of the plant, the unprecedented giveaway scattered what organizers said were thousands of pot seeds to cultivate in homes and apartments across the nation’s capital.

Depending on how many D.C. residents have green thumbs, a homegrown crop of pot could be ready for legal consumption by late summer.

The District is unique among the handful of jurisdictions that have legalized pot for recreational use; under a prohibition by Congress, buying and selling marijuana remains against the law. That made Thursday’s giveaway — and not the opening of stores for legal sales, as has happened in Colorado and Washington state — the highest-profile event to date marking the reality of legalization.

The line for the marijuana “seed share” at the Libertine bar and restaurant snaked around 18th Street NW almost all the way to Champlain Street. It included people of many ages and ethnic backgrounds and from all corners of the city. Close to 8 p.m., it also featured a pouring rain.

Wendell Myers didn’t want to to stand at the back of a line hundreds of people long, but he had no choice. He wanted marijuana seeds, and this was the only place he could legally snag some.

“If I could buy it, I wouldn’t need the seeds,” said Myers, 53, who lives in Petworth. “I can’t grow anything. But it’s a weed. I know I’ve already been able to grow those in my back yard.”

Thanks to Congress, the District has no ability to track the seeds dispersed Thursday. That could feed a “gray market” for bartering and other attempts to profit off legalization.

In Colorado, every seedling raised for the commercial sale of pot is tracked with a 24-digit radio-frequency identification tag. Sales are heavily taxed by the state, with the money going mostly to education. In the District, thousands of plants could soon begin growing with no such oversight or benefit to the city.

But proponents of the ballot measure say that a crop from amateur growers could increase supply and reduce the market for illegal street sales.

The giveaway attracted no protest and little attention from official Washington. D.C. police spokeswoman Gwendolyn Crump offered a short comment went asked about the event: “Seed sharing is not prohibited.”

St. Patrick’s Day in D.C. Green beer or green bud?

By Aaron C. Davis Washington Post

First a disclaimer: There is no marijuana in the beer. That’s what I was told. Cannabis and hops are just a lot alike. It only smells like pot beer. And it might, well, kind of taste like it, too.

But if that’s what you like — a dank, resinous pint — or if you’re willing to at least try it, this could be your kind of St. Patrick’s Day in D.C.

The District’s DC Brau will tap a few green-decorated kegs of its new seasonal india pale ale dubbed “Smells Like Freedom” on Tuesday night, for what is bound to be a first in the District’s protracted fight for full voting rights.

DC Brau co-founder Brandon Skall, seated, with brewer Christopher Graham on March 14 during a tour of DC Brau Brewing Co. and a sneak peek of its new protest beer “Smells Like Freedom.” (Aaron C. Davis/The Washington Post)

The aromatic brew is the latest in a series of imaginative protests since House Republicans attempted to block a voter-approved ballot measure to legalize marijuana for recreational use in the nation’s capital.

D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) pressed forward with implementing the ballot measure last month over threats of jail time by congressional Republicans. Possession, sharing and home cultivation of marijuana is now legal in the District. But Congress has blocked legal sales or purchases of pot.

The conflict has spurred sit-ins, marches, and as late as Tuesday, a band of pro-marijuana advocates dressed up in colonial garb who barged into the Capitol Hill office of House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), a leading opponent of legalization in D.C. The protestors offered a glass peace pipe of sorts. Chaffetz’s staffers declined.

Brewing a marijuana protest beer, however, was far less spontaneous. It’s been fermenting, in fact, since last fall, said Brandon Skall, chief executive and co-founder of DC Brau Brewing Co.

DC Brau and Longmont, Colo.-based Oskar Blues Brewing, both of which bottle their beers in cans, had for more than a year been looking for a reason to team up on a brewing project.

In e-mails last fall, Skall said he laid out the case for doing a beer together around D.C.’s legalization effort and the rarely-noticed plight of the 650,000 D.C. residents who have no voting rights in Congress.

Oskar executives were sold, and brewers there took to their lab, Skall said. They found three experimental hops that, when combined, produced a distinctly marijuana-like aroma. read more…@Washington Post

U.S. Surgeon General warms to medical marijuana

In an interview, the country’s top doctor said preliminary research shows “marijuana can be helpful.”

U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy expressed optimism about the medical benefits of marijuana use in a Wednesday television interview.

Speaking on CBS This Morning, Murthy said there is some promising research about medical uses of the drug, which is legal in some states but still banned on the federal level. “We have some preliminary data showing that for certain medical conditions and symptoms, that marijuana can be helpful,” Murthy told CBS. “I think that we have to use that data to drive policymaking.”

Murthy added that more research is needed “to see what the science tells us about the efficacy of marijuana,” but he said more data should be on the way thanks to the growing list of states passing laws to legalize medical marijuana.

The Surgeon General’s statements follow what seems to be growing acceptance in the federal government of medical marijuana. In December, Congress passed a spending measure that included a provision to effectively end the federal ban on medical marijuana in states where it is legal.

At the moment, 23 states allow the use of medical marijuana, despite the fact that federal laws still classify marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug — the most dangerous level, which also includes heroin and ecstasy. Four states have passed laws legalizing recreational pot along with Washington, D.C.

At a Senate confirmation hearing last year, some politicians asked Murthy to clarify his stance on marijuana legalization. The physician said at the time that, much like other drugs, he would not recommend that anyone use marijuana. “I don’t think it’s a good habit to use marijuana,” he said.

Still, there is some precedent of U.S. Surgeon Generals showing open minds when it comes to medical marijuana’s potential benefits. Regina Benjamin, who served in the post from 2009 to 2013, acknowledged that the drug could have medicinal uses. But she felt more research was necessary. Former U.S. Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders, who occupied the job in the early 1990’s, said in 2010 that she supported legalization and added that marijuana is not addictive.

read more Fortune

Obama Budget Would Allow D.C. Marijuana Legalization

President Barack Obama’s nearly $4 trillion federal budget plan unveiled Monday includes fine print that may have major consequences for marijuana legalization in Washington, D.C.

Obama’s addition of a single word — “federal” — to his budget proposal may thwart congressional Republicans trying to block marijuana legalization in the district, and would allow the city government to move ahead with local laws regulating and taxing recreational pot.

“It is very much consistent with the administration’s stance that marijuana policy is a state’s rights issue and his statements in support of D.C. being able determine its local laws,” Dr. Malik Burnett, policy manager at the Drug Policy Alliance and vice chairman of the D.C. Cannabis Campaign, told The Huffington Post.

The District’s non-voting representative in the House, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), said Obama’s budget proposal “demonstrated his support for D.C. to spend its local funds as it chooses and without politically motivated congressional interference.”D.C. voters in November approved an initiative that legalized up to two ounces of recreational marijuana for personal use and up to six marijuana plants for home cultivation.

However, tucked into the federal spending bill passed by Congress in December was a provision introduced by Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) that challenged D.C.’s ability to enact marijuana laws and aimed to block the city from spending funds to legalize or regulate the sale of marijuana.

That’s where Obama’s word-change comes in. By adding “federal” to his budget, the president forbids “federal funds” from being used to enact any “law, rule, or regulation to legalize” marijuana. That would leave the city free to use local funds to implement pot laws. The language change was first reported by Tom Angell, chairman of Marijuana Majority.

A White House official explained that the president supports the principle of home rule for Washington and believes Congress should not interfere with local decisions. While marijuana remains illegal under federal law, the Obama administration is committed to treating drug use as a public health issue, not just a criminal justice problem, the White House official said.

Multiple congressional Democrats, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), favor allowing D.C.’s new marijuana law to move forward. D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D) submitted the new marijuana legalization initiative to Congress in January, ignoring the GOP effort to block the measure.

Washington’s government is mostly autonomous, but the U.S. Constitution gives Congress final say over the District’s laws.

If Congress doesn’t overturn D.C.’s current pot measure and Obama’s wording remains in the final version of his budget, Washington marijuana legalization could go into effect as early as March. Further city plans to regulate pot sales could begin with legal retail marijuana stores, similar to those already open in Colorado and Washington, opening by the end of the year.

Still, legalization in D.C. faces long odds. Congress has 30 days to review the D.C. Council legalization. Without congressional action, the measure automatically becomes law. That leaves Obama’s proposed budget. His plan needs approval by the Republican-controlled House and Senate.

Marijuana: The new gay marriage for the GOP?

Republicans struggle to find their footing on an issue that resonates with younger voters

Marijuana is shaping up to be the new gay marriage of GOP politics — most Republicans would rather not talk about it, except to campaign to the states rights issue.

But when it comes to the 2016 presidential race, a series of legalization ballot initiatives — and a certain outspoken Kentucky senator —Rand Paul  could make it harder for the Republican field to avoid the conversation.

When asked to articulate their positions on recreational marijuana, several potential GOP 2016 candidates have tried to strike a tricky balance: stress the downsides of pot use and the upsides of states’ rights. Some have indicated their Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who took steps toward decriminalizing pot in his state, declared last year: “I am a staunch promoter of the 10th Amendment. States should be able to set their own policies on abortion, same-sex marriage and marijuana legalization.”

Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, meanwhile, “believes legalization of marijuana for recreational use is a bad idea, and that the states that are doing it may well come to regret it,” said Alex Conant, his spokesman. “Of course, states can make decisions about what laws they wish to apply within their own borders.”

Marijuana may not stimulate the same kind of passion as the debate over same-sex marriage. Still, a majority of Americans support legalizing pot, and young people — who tend to turn out more for presidential elections than midterms — are especially keen on it.

The “leave it to the states” stance allows potential GOP candidates to stake out a relatively safe middle ground between an older conservative base that disapproves of marijuana use and a general-election electorate and libertarian wing that prefers legalization. The states’ rights approach also allows GOP candidates to express some openness to medical marijuana and criminal justice reform and argue against devoting costly resources for federal enforcement.

It’s also a position many in the prospective GOP field have taken on same-sex marriage.

Perry and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush both argued for the rights of states to set their own marriage policies after courts overturned bans in Texas and Florida. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and Rubio, among others, have also said marriage should be left up to the states. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has called for a constitutional amendment to disallow the federal government or courts to nullify state marriage laws, saying: “our Constitution leaves it to the states to define marriage.”

At least five states are preparing to vote on legalization of recreational marijuana in 2016 — Arizona, California, Maine, Massachusetts and Nevada. There are efforts to put the issue on ballots in Florida, Missouri and Montana. Colorado, Washington state, Oregon and Alaska already have voted to legalize recreational marijuana, as has Washington, D.C.

President Barack Obama’s administration has basically tried to avoid what’s becoming a murky legal issue. The Justice Department announced in 2013 that it wouldn’t block recreational and medical marijuana in states that adopted legalization measures; while a federal cannabis ban remains, the administration has largely opted not to enforce it in states that have voted to legalize.

Many states have laws either legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes or decriminalizing it — eliminating criminal charges while still having penalties, such as a fine. States have flirted with those two avenues to test the waters on marijuana without immediately embracing full-scale legalization.

Among those states is Florida, which narrowly defeated a constitutional amendment to allow medical marijuana in 2014. Bush publicly opposed it but added that states “ought to have a right to decide.”

Cruz has called the Obama administration’s failure to enforce the federal marijuana ban “fundamentally dangerous to the liberty of the people,” but hasn’t said what he’d do if elected president. So far, none of the likely 2016 candidates has said the federal government should stop states from legalizing marijuana.

The pro-legalization lobby, buoyed by recent successes, is taking an aggressive state-based approach in the next two years and believes 2016 will be favorable for the ballot initiatives. Advocates don’t see anyone in the GOP field pushing back too hard.

“No one’s been a problem for us,” said Michael Collins, policy manager at the Drug Policy Alliance.

“Largely, major presidential candidates will do their best to avoid the issue,” added his colleague Malik Burnett.

Some advocates have downplayed the parallels between same-sex marriage and marijuana legalization. While recreational cannabis has found its success on the ballot, gay marriage has been decided mostly in state legislatures and courts.

Still, both movements have successfully used state-based models, increasing pressure for federal action. The Supreme Court will decide later this year whether same-sex marriage is a constitutional right.

One Republican outspoken on marijuana is Paul, who has made major overtures to young people and minorities. The Kentucky senator, a favorite in the GOP’s libertarian wing, is the highest-profile Republican to support federal decriminalization and the party’s only potential presidential candidate to do so.

Paul has sponsored legislation aimed at preventing the federal government from cracking down on the medical marijuana industry in states where it’s legal. He’s teamed up with Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) to introduce sentencing reform legislation. He recently co-sponsored a Senate bill to legalize industrial hemp — a less-potent sibling of marijuana.

“I don’t want to put our kids in prison for it,” Paul said of marijuana in December. “So if your kid was caught selling marijuana or growing enough that it’s a felony conviction, they could be in jail for an extended period of time. They also lose their ability to be employable. So I want to change all of that.”

The senator’s stance could prove a vexing problem not just for fellow Republicans but also Hillary Clinton. The likely Democratic 2016 frontrunner has been relatively quiet on the issue, asking for a “wait and see” approach to the experiments in Colorado and Washington state and offering some support for medical marijuana.

“He is going to force other candidates, whether it’s in the Republican primary or the general, to take positions on these issues,” Collins said.

Paul has been so outspoken that at least one GOP strategist believed he supports legalization. But he doesn’t, and he often speaks negatively about cannabis use, which irks some legalization advocates who otherwise have a favorable impression of the senator (the Marijuana Policy Project donated $2,500 to Paul’s PAC in the 2014 cycle).

When asked about Paul’s efforts on marijuana, spokesman Brian Darling immediately noted: “He’s been pretty clear that marijuana is bad for people, but they should not have their lives ruined for smoking it.”

Strategists argue that Paul’s reluctance to embrace full legalization and insistence on warning about the dangers of marijuana use indicate he doesn’t want to anger a key segment of the GOP base.

“Part of the reason why Paul finds himself in this conundrum is the amount of older voters we have in the Republican primary,” said GOP strategist Ford O’Connell, noting that Paul’s libertarian-leaning foreign policy stances already have Republican voters over 50 eying him warily.

Although most Americans support marijuana legalization, just 39 percent of Republicans and 31 percent of conservatives do, according to a recent Gallup poll. Another survey shows that 16 percent of Republicans in Iowa, the first presidential nominating state, favor legalization.

The GOP’s internal struggle over the issue is playing out in Congress, where a group of Republicans — led by House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers of Kentucky and Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland — pushed for a provision included in the December $1.01 trillion spending bill that aims to stop the marijuana legalization measure passed in Washington, D.C.

Several Republicans have expressed discomfort with the move, saying it makes the party look bad with younger voters and that the GOP shouldn’t meddle in local affairs.

When the debate is framed around state versus federal rights, Republican voters appear more receptive. Fifty-four percent of Republicans support the federal government not interfering in states that have legalized marijuana, according to a Third Way poll from December.

For legalization advocates, that’s the main issue.

“The question is whether they will continue to allow states to set their own policies on marijuana,” Collins said of GOP presidential candidates. “And the answer will be yes.”

read more: @Politico

Marijuana and the Law – U.S. District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller opens the debate Drug Enforcement Administration’s Schedule 1 classification is constitutional or not

A federal judge has done what Congress and the Obama administration have failed to do — open a discussion on whether marijuana should continue to be listed as a Schedule 1 drug, a classification that is supposed to be used only for the most dangerous, addictive drugs, such as heroin and LSD.

As part of a criminal trial involving alleged marijuana growers in Northern California, U.S. District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller held a five-day hearing late last year to evaluate the current scientific research on marijuana use and to determine whether the Schedule 1 designation is unconstitutional, as the defendants contend. Final arguments are scheduled for next month.

This discussion is a welcome one. Whether the Drug Enforcement Administration’s classification is constitutional or not, it shouldn’t take a judge to point out that lumping marijuana in with heroin and deeming it to have no medicinal value at all is unreasonable and unnecessary.

Frankly, government policy on marijuana is a mess. Federal law says marijuana has no accepted medicinal value, yet 23 states have legalized it for medical use. It has been put on the list of drugs that carry the most severe penalties for drug crimes, but Congress and the Obama administration have also passed legislation that blocks funding for the enforcement of federal marijuana laws in states that allow medical marijuana. That law, passed in December, in effect ended the prohibition of medical marijuana in nearly half the states. Meanwhile, Colorado and Washington have been unofficially allowed by the federal government to legalize recreational pot.

Even as lawmakers relax enforcement, federal authorities, including the prosecutors in Mueller’s courtroom, defend the Schedule 1 designation, saying there are not enough long-term studies of the medicinal value and health risks of marijuana use to justify reclassifying it. But the DEA has for decades made it nearly impossible for researchers to obtain the drug for study. … The agency began increasing government production of marijuana for research only last year.

Legalization advocates hope Mueller will rule that federal marijuana policy is unconstitutional. Although her decision would apply only to the defendants in this case and could be appealed, a ruling against the existing policy could prompt other defendants to file similar motions. But the country’s drug laws should not be decided in the courts. It’s long past time for Washington to revisit the war on drugs, and officials can begin by reclassifying medical marijuana so it can be regulated more as a prescription drug.

Los Angeles Times, Jan. 21