|
Sponsored by |
|---|
|
|
-
Need help navigating the forum? Find out how to use our features here.
-
Did you know we have lots of smilies for you to use?
Law The Cannabis Chronicles - Misc Cannabis News
- Thread starter CarolKing
- Start date
ataxian
In a BLACK HOLE!
BITCHEN once?
DAYZ long gone bye!
Baron23
Well-Known Member
American Legion calls on Trump to take cannabis off Schedule I to help vets
The nation's largest veterans service organization wants barriers to scientific researched removed
America’s largest veterans service organization has a message for President Donald Trump: Reschedule marijuana to permit research into its medical efficacy for treating vets suffering from traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder.
The appeal by the American Legion was included in a letter sent to the White House last month. The letter requests a meeting with Trump to discuss critical veterans’ issues including opiate addiction and suicide, and calls on the Trump administration to “clear the way for clinical research in the cutting edge areas of cannabinoid receptor research,” according to portions of the draft letter shared with The Cannabist.
“It’s time the federal government took action to remove barriers to scientific research on this very important subject,” said Joe Plenzler, American Legion Director of Media Relations, in an email to The Cannabist.
Under the Controlled Substances Act, cannabis is listed alongside heroin, LSD and ecstasy as a Schedule I substance — the strictest of classifications, defined as having a high potential for abuse and no “currently accepted medical use.”
The American Legion’s request is an attempt to extricate the federal government from a “policy Catch 22,” said Louis Celli, the organization’s national director of veterans affairs and rehabilitation.
“On one hand the government claims that there is no federally approved scientific evidence to support cannabis being used in a medical environment, so they refuse to consider reclassifying it,” he said via email. “And on the other hand they refuse to permit scientific research because it’s a Schedule 1 substance.”
American Legion officials stress that they are not advocating for marijuana legalization.
“Rather we are advocating for re-scheduling so that more research can be done,” said Plenzler. “That (research) will enable our elected leaders and the American people to have a national discussion on the matter based on scientific evidence.”
The American Legion has received feedback from many veterans who report access to medical cannabis has been “effective” in helping them cope with issues such as traumatic brain injury (TBI) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), Plenzler said. He called those afflictions “the signature wounds of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
“Some veterans have told me that access to cannabis is the very reason they are alive today,” he said. “Others have told me that they have been able to come off of every other pharmaceutical that they have been prescribed. Certainly, this is anecdotal evidence, but it is compelling.”
The American Legion’s request that marijuana be reclassified doesn’t come as a complete surprise. At its national convention last August, the group passed a resolution urging the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to license privately-funded U.S. medical marijuana production operations to enable “safe and efficient cannabis drug development research.” The resolution also calls on Congress “to remove marijuana from Schedule I and reclassify in a category that, at a minimum, will recognize cannabis as a drug with potential medical value.”
Last December, Legion officials met with then President-elect Trump’s transition team to lay out top priorities, including the reclassification of marijuana so that quantifiable medical research can be conducted.
In addition to the American Legion’s advocacy, there are efforts underway in Congress to allow veterans safe access to medical marijuana in states where it is legal. The Veterans Equal Access Act, introduced in the House of Representatives earlier this year by Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Oregon, would authorize Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care providers to give recommendations and opinions to veterans regarding participation in state marijuana programs.
The VA states on its website that while some states have approved the use of marijuana for medical and/or recreational use, the department is “required to follow all federal laws” regarding cannabis.
Veterans taking part in state medical marijuana programs should therefore be aware, the website states, that while they won’t be denied access to VA healthcare, the VA doctors and clinical staff will “record marijuana use in the Veterans VA medical record along with its impact on the Veterans treatment plan.”
Among the groups supporting the American Legion’s call to advance research on medical marijuana is the newly-formed Veterans Cannabis Project, a nonprofit organization educating veterans on the benefits of medical marijuana while also promoting cannabis industry career opportunities available to them.
“Medical marijuana is a political issue. It is a legal issue. But most important, it is a health issue that is playing an increasingly significant role in the quality of life for America’s veterans,” said Nick Etten, the group’s executive director and a former Navy Seal, in an email. “In their request to seek support from the president to clear the way for expanded clinical research of cannabis, the American Legion is once again demonstrating, as their membership consistently has for almost 100 years, the leadership required to ensure that neither partisan politics nor failed policy will impede safe and effective treatment options for those who have served us.”
This is the American Legion, folks. Never in this life thought of as a progressive or liberal organization. INow even they are calling for rescheduling. You listening, Jeff? eh?
The nation's largest veterans service organization wants barriers to scientific researched removed
America’s largest veterans service organization has a message for President Donald Trump: Reschedule marijuana to permit research into its medical efficacy for treating vets suffering from traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder.
The appeal by the American Legion was included in a letter sent to the White House last month. The letter requests a meeting with Trump to discuss critical veterans’ issues including opiate addiction and suicide, and calls on the Trump administration to “clear the way for clinical research in the cutting edge areas of cannabinoid receptor research,” according to portions of the draft letter shared with The Cannabist.
“It’s time the federal government took action to remove barriers to scientific research on this very important subject,” said Joe Plenzler, American Legion Director of Media Relations, in an email to The Cannabist.
Under the Controlled Substances Act, cannabis is listed alongside heroin, LSD and ecstasy as a Schedule I substance — the strictest of classifications, defined as having a high potential for abuse and no “currently accepted medical use.”
The American Legion’s request is an attempt to extricate the federal government from a “policy Catch 22,” said Louis Celli, the organization’s national director of veterans affairs and rehabilitation.
“On one hand the government claims that there is no federally approved scientific evidence to support cannabis being used in a medical environment, so they refuse to consider reclassifying it,” he said via email. “And on the other hand they refuse to permit scientific research because it’s a Schedule 1 substance.”
American Legion officials stress that they are not advocating for marijuana legalization.
“Rather we are advocating for re-scheduling so that more research can be done,” said Plenzler. “That (research) will enable our elected leaders and the American people to have a national discussion on the matter based on scientific evidence.”
The American Legion has received feedback from many veterans who report access to medical cannabis has been “effective” in helping them cope with issues such as traumatic brain injury (TBI) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), Plenzler said. He called those afflictions “the signature wounds of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
“Some veterans have told me that access to cannabis is the very reason they are alive today,” he said. “Others have told me that they have been able to come off of every other pharmaceutical that they have been prescribed. Certainly, this is anecdotal evidence, but it is compelling.”
The American Legion’s request that marijuana be reclassified doesn’t come as a complete surprise. At its national convention last August, the group passed a resolution urging the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to license privately-funded U.S. medical marijuana production operations to enable “safe and efficient cannabis drug development research.” The resolution also calls on Congress “to remove marijuana from Schedule I and reclassify in a category that, at a minimum, will recognize cannabis as a drug with potential medical value.”
Last December, Legion officials met with then President-elect Trump’s transition team to lay out top priorities, including the reclassification of marijuana so that quantifiable medical research can be conducted.
In addition to the American Legion’s advocacy, there are efforts underway in Congress to allow veterans safe access to medical marijuana in states where it is legal. The Veterans Equal Access Act, introduced in the House of Representatives earlier this year by Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Oregon, would authorize Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care providers to give recommendations and opinions to veterans regarding participation in state marijuana programs.
The VA states on its website that while some states have approved the use of marijuana for medical and/or recreational use, the department is “required to follow all federal laws” regarding cannabis.
Veterans taking part in state medical marijuana programs should therefore be aware, the website states, that while they won’t be denied access to VA healthcare, the VA doctors and clinical staff will “record marijuana use in the Veterans VA medical record along with its impact on the Veterans treatment plan.”
Among the groups supporting the American Legion’s call to advance research on medical marijuana is the newly-formed Veterans Cannabis Project, a nonprofit organization educating veterans on the benefits of medical marijuana while also promoting cannabis industry career opportunities available to them.
“Medical marijuana is a political issue. It is a legal issue. But most important, it is a health issue that is playing an increasingly significant role in the quality of life for America’s veterans,” said Nick Etten, the group’s executive director and a former Navy Seal, in an email. “In their request to seek support from the president to clear the way for expanded clinical research of cannabis, the American Legion is once again demonstrating, as their membership consistently has for almost 100 years, the leadership required to ensure that neither partisan politics nor failed policy will impede safe and effective treatment options for those who have served us.”
This is the American Legion, folks. Never in this life thought of as a progressive or liberal organization. INow even they are calling for rescheduling. You listening, Jeff? eh?
There's such an abundance of information on the benefits of cannabis for PTSD and other ailments. And I don't know if anyone else has noticed this; but all of a sudden there's a ton more than there was being published. I'm even seeing snippets on my Yahoo feed.
I really feel it's just a matter of time. .... even D.A.R.E. took it off it's list of gateway drugs ffs!
ataxian
In a BLACK HOLE!
CANNABIS = READING STUDYING THINKING LISTENING are IMPROVED?
Why is it schedule #1?
CANNABIS increases your learning capacity?
You know the old adage about common sense not being so common?
ataxian
In a BLACK HOLE!
Will full ignorance?You know the old adage about common sense not being so common?
Believing something without evidence?
DECEPTION?
elykpeace
exVASted
It kills me when it obviously has medical purposes.
Definition of Controlled Substance Schedules
Drugs and other substances that are considered controlled substances under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) are divided into five schedules. An updated and complete list of the schedules is published annually in Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) §§ 1308.11 through 1308.15. Substances are placed in their respective schedules based on whether they have a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, their relative abuse potential, and likelihood of causing dependence when abused. Some examples of the drugs in each schedule are listed below.
Schedule I Controlled Substances
Substances in this schedule have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse.
Some examples of substances listed in Schedule I are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), peyote, methaqualone, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine ("Ecstasy").
I'd like to know who updates these annually and make sure they have a heartbeat. Do the people who assess whether or not something is medicinal live under rocks?
Greed. @ataxian that's why.
Edit
Definition of Controlled Substance Schedules
Drugs and other substances that are considered controlled substances under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) are divided into five schedules. An updated and complete list of the schedules is published annually in Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) §§ 1308.11 through 1308.15. Substances are placed in their respective schedules based on whether they have a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, their relative abuse potential, and likelihood of causing dependence when abused. Some examples of the drugs in each schedule are listed below.
Schedule I Controlled Substances
Substances in this schedule have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse.
Some examples of substances listed in Schedule I are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), peyote, methaqualone, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine ("Ecstasy").
I'd like to know who updates these annually and make sure they have a heartbeat. Do the people who assess whether or not something is medicinal live under rocks?
Greed. @ataxian that's why.
Edit
ataxian
In a BLACK HOLE!
GREED = DISASTER of CIVILIZATION!
MEDICAL = CANNABIS is the best medicine
RECREATIONAL = {safer than Beer; Milk; Soda}
Last edited:
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Americans Spent $1B More On Cannabis Than Viagra and Cialis in 2016
The billion-dollar cannabis industry is a rising tide with no horizon in sight. And according to MJ Biz Daily’s recent Factbook report, that tide is only growing stronger.
In 2016, combined adult-use and medical marijuana sales garnered $4-4.5 billion in sales — or over one billion more than Americans spent on Viagra and Cialis or Paid Music Streaming Services.
Factoring in the regulated and black markets, the cannabis industry’s estimated demand in the United States checks in at a cool $45-50 billion. Along with this economic impact, more jobs are being created: “The cannabis sector now employs between 165,000-230,000 full and part-time workers.”
To put that in perspective, that’s more cannabis employees than bakers and masseuses.
Perhaps the nation’s quarter-century low unemployment rate should thank the cannabis industry?
Likewise, with recreational sales in Colorado and Washington up 66% in 2016 and more growth en route, those job numbers should continue to surge.
Moreover, the economic impact on communities with legal cannabis companies appears clearcut. For every dollar spent at an adult-use or medical dispensary, “another $3 in economic benefits are created in cities, states, and nationwide.” That economic impact was $20-24 billion in 2016 and could increase to $70 billion by 2021.
With new businesses launching every day, construction on facilities sprouting up, and more money being invested in this industry, towns and cities with operating cannabis businesses should continue to provide more jobs. Just look to Adelanto, California for an example — a struggling desert town that went from $2.6 million in debt in 2014 to between $500,000 and $750,000 in debt today.
By allowing large cultivation facilities to be constructed, the town of Adelanto — once possibly disbanding due to financial strain — was literally rescued by the cannabis industry. The tide should only continue to rise.
As more states legalize, more towns like Adelanto should benefit from America’s green savior.
Wow, its really saying something when MJ is more popular than getting wood!!
The billion-dollar cannabis industry is a rising tide with no horizon in sight. And according to MJ Biz Daily’s recent Factbook report, that tide is only growing stronger.
In 2016, combined adult-use and medical marijuana sales garnered $4-4.5 billion in sales — or over one billion more than Americans spent on Viagra and Cialis or Paid Music Streaming Services.
Factoring in the regulated and black markets, the cannabis industry’s estimated demand in the United States checks in at a cool $45-50 billion. Along with this economic impact, more jobs are being created: “The cannabis sector now employs between 165,000-230,000 full and part-time workers.”
To put that in perspective, that’s more cannabis employees than bakers and masseuses.
Perhaps the nation’s quarter-century low unemployment rate should thank the cannabis industry?
Likewise, with recreational sales in Colorado and Washington up 66% in 2016 and more growth en route, those job numbers should continue to surge.
Moreover, the economic impact on communities with legal cannabis companies appears clearcut. For every dollar spent at an adult-use or medical dispensary, “another $3 in economic benefits are created in cities, states, and nationwide.” That economic impact was $20-24 billion in 2016 and could increase to $70 billion by 2021.
With new businesses launching every day, construction on facilities sprouting up, and more money being invested in this industry, towns and cities with operating cannabis businesses should continue to provide more jobs. Just look to Adelanto, California for an example — a struggling desert town that went from $2.6 million in debt in 2014 to between $500,000 and $750,000 in debt today.
By allowing large cultivation facilities to be constructed, the town of Adelanto — once possibly disbanding due to financial strain — was literally rescued by the cannabis industry. The tide should only continue to rise.
As more states legalize, more towns like Adelanto should benefit from America’s green savior.
Wow, its really saying something when MJ is more popular than getting wood!!
ataxian
In a BLACK HOLE!
When we young guns we listen to music like this:Americans Spent $1B More On Cannabis Than Viagra and Cialis in 2016
The billion-dollar cannabis industry is a rising tide with no horizon in sight. And according to MJ Biz Daily’s recent Factbook report, that tide is only growing stronger.
In 2016, combined adult-use and medical marijuana sales garnered $4-4.5 billion in sales — or over one billion more than Americans spent on Viagra and Cialis or Paid Music Streaming Services.
Factoring in the regulated and black markets, the cannabis industry’s estimated demand in the United States checks in at a cool $45-50 billion. Along with this economic impact, more jobs are being created: “The cannabis sector now employs between 165,000-230,000 full and part-time workers.”
To put that in perspective, that’s more cannabis employees than bakers and masseuses.
Perhaps the nation’s quarter-century low unemployment rate should thank the cannabis industry?
Likewise, with recreational sales in Colorado and Washington up 66% in 2016 and more growth en route, those job numbers should continue to surge.
Moreover, the economic impact on communities with legal cannabis companies appears clearcut. For every dollar spent at an adult-use or medical dispensary, “another $3 in economic benefits are created in cities, states, and nationwide.” That economic impact was $20-24 billion in 2016 and could increase to $70 billion by 2021.
With new businesses launching every day, construction on facilities sprouting up, and more money being invested in this industry, towns and cities with operating cannabis businesses should continue to provide more jobs. Just look to Adelanto, California for an example — a struggling desert town that went from $2.6 million in debt in 2014 to between $500,000 and $750,000 in debt today.
By allowing large cultivation facilities to be constructed, the town of Adelanto — once possibly disbanding due to financial strain — was literally rescued by the cannabis industry. The tide should only continue to rise.
As more states legalize, more towns like Adelanto should benefit from America’s green savior.
Wow, its really saying something when MJ is more popular than getting wood!!
We need legal cannabis NOW!
Baron23
Well-Known Member
I'm a HUGE Clapton fan....particularly his blues work. Saw him touring the Back to the Cradle album and it was the most awesome display of blues guitar playing I have ever heard.
Recently saw a Clapton concert on PBS (recorded it actually) for his 70th b-day. Albert Hall (what a venue). I'm not as big a fan of his ballads (just don't think his voice is that compelling) but I love his blues and guitar work.
Clapton and Santana....the guitar gods in my heaven.
deep_meditation
Well-Known Member
I did not know they did that.
The opiate crisis is just over the top. Same probably goes for dependency on anti-anxiety drugs. Who the hell is doling these pills out so much? My oncologists were so cautious when prescribing anything opiate based that I had to work though some "relatively manageable" pain.
Opiates and meth should be the focus but I'm preaching to the choir.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Hardliner who crafted Sessions’ harsher sentences memo turns to marijuana policy
Hardliner who crafted Sessions’ harsher sentences memo turns to marijuana policy
Steve Cook is detailed to the deputy attorney general's office in Washington, studying policies to see how they reconcile with Jeff Sessions' top priorities
Published: May 30, 2017, 7:37 am • Updated: about 4 hours ago Comments (6)
By Sadie Gurman, The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — A zealous prosecutor who was crucial in writing the Justice Department’s new policy encouraging harsher punishments for criminals is now turning his attention to hate crimes, marijuana and the ways law enforcement seizes suspects’ cash and property.
Steve Cook’s hardline views on criminal justice were fortified as a cop on the streets of Knoxville, Tennessee, in the late 1970s and early ’80s. The unabashed drug warrior is now armed with a broad mandate to review departmental policies, and observers already worried about Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ agenda are wringing their hands at Cook’s ascension.
After some 30 years of prosecuting mostly violent crimes, Cook sums up his philosophy in simple terms that crystallized one night on patrol when he came upon a family whose station wagon had been hit head-on by a “pilled-up drug user.” Two daughters were dead in the backseat. In Cook’s eyes, everyone had to be punished, including the courier who shuttled the drugs into town and the dealer who sold them to the man behind the wheel.
“This theory that we have embraced since the beginning of civilization is, when you put criminals in prison, crime goes down,” he told The Associated Press during a recent interview. “It really is that simple.”
It is actually a widely challenged view, seen by many as far from simple. But it is one that governs Cook as he helps oversee a new Justice Department task force developing policies to fight violent crime in cities. Already he is pushing ideas that even some Republicans have dismissed as outdated and fiscally irresponsible. (cont with some fairly frightening info on this guy, Cook)
Where does Sessions find these guys.....progeny of ex-nazis hiding out in Argentina, perhaps?
Hardliner who crafted Sessions’ harsher sentences memo turns to marijuana policy
Steve Cook is detailed to the deputy attorney general's office in Washington, studying policies to see how they reconcile with Jeff Sessions' top priorities
Published: May 30, 2017, 7:37 am • Updated: about 4 hours ago Comments (6)
By Sadie Gurman, The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — A zealous prosecutor who was crucial in writing the Justice Department’s new policy encouraging harsher punishments for criminals is now turning his attention to hate crimes, marijuana and the ways law enforcement seizes suspects’ cash and property.
Steve Cook’s hardline views on criminal justice were fortified as a cop on the streets of Knoxville, Tennessee, in the late 1970s and early ’80s. The unabashed drug warrior is now armed with a broad mandate to review departmental policies, and observers already worried about Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ agenda are wringing their hands at Cook’s ascension.
After some 30 years of prosecuting mostly violent crimes, Cook sums up his philosophy in simple terms that crystallized one night on patrol when he came upon a family whose station wagon had been hit head-on by a “pilled-up drug user.” Two daughters were dead in the backseat. In Cook’s eyes, everyone had to be punished, including the courier who shuttled the drugs into town and the dealer who sold them to the man behind the wheel.
“This theory that we have embraced since the beginning of civilization is, when you put criminals in prison, crime goes down,” he told The Associated Press during a recent interview. “It really is that simple.”
It is actually a widely challenged view, seen by many as far from simple. But it is one that governs Cook as he helps oversee a new Justice Department task force developing policies to fight violent crime in cities. Already he is pushing ideas that even some Republicans have dismissed as outdated and fiscally irresponsible. (cont with some fairly frightening info on this guy, Cook)
Where does Sessions find these guys.....progeny of ex-nazis hiding out in Argentina, perhaps?
After reading who was appointed to the board here in Michigan and then this? I'm just glad there are term limits...
CarolKing
Always in search of the perfect vaporizer
14 More States That Might Legalize Cannabis This Year
Adult-use cannabis legalization is sweeping across the nation, and globe.
Saturday 02/18/2017
by Zoe Wilder
So much marijuana reform, so much time left on the calendar in 2017. Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Wyoming, and Washington, D.C. all have strong policymakers working to actively legalize and regulate cannabis. When passed, these 14 states will follow in the footsteps of Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. It’s a common adage in the cannabis industry that once Texas legalizes weed, the country’s truly gone to pot. Or something.
Nonetheless, a potential 22 states with full-on legalization would be impressive—and that’s not counting states that have decriminalized or legalized medical marijuana programs. The bottom line: An overwhelming majority of U.S. states, almost all 50 (plus Puerto Rico and Guam), are reforming cannabis laws.
What could happen?
Some of these initiatives, bills, and state constitutional amendments will get shot down, either by voters or various branches of state government. Wyoming and Mississippi specifically have experienced hurdles in the process requiring policymakers to go back to the drawing board and develop new ways to introduce legalization. Regardless, voters in both states support reform, especially decriminalization. In many states that have already legalized cannabis, lawyers and courts have been offering expungements of past cannabis convictions—something we all want to see.
A look at the national perspective.
Polls show nearly 90 percent of Americans support medical marijuana while around 60 percent support legalization. Why the discrepancy? Well, a number of people across the country associate legalization with taxation, believing people should have an inalienable right to cultivate and trade cannabis at will. Yet, many legal states have proven that legalization yields this ability, enabling both personal home cultivation and free trade of cannabis so long as no money is exchanged. However, not everyone wants to grow cannabisand many people favor the safety and convenience of buying cannabis from a local dispensary, even if it means extra tax.
In states that have opted to add tax at the register, this currently equates to prices hovering around $30–$50 per eighth, tax included. That’s the same price most of us were paying on the black market 20 and 30 years ago for premium flower, and it’s not too shabby. While consumer taxes from regulated cannabis are proposed to support community improvements in education and infrastructure, the overall price of cannabis is expected to decline, one day putting cannabis pricing on par with your local produce at the grocery store. Brussel sprouts for $2.99 per pound? Cannabis may get there as well, and the tax onus may be placed on cannabis businesses moving the most bulk.
The future of legalization.
Much remains to be seen. With recent administrations showing outward tolerance and support of budding regulated cannabis markets, it appears a logical next step would be to reschedule cannabis on a national scale, permitting states to continue creating their own cannabis policy and regulated cannabis programs. The legal transfer of cannabis across state lines and medical marijuana program reciprocity are two other outcomes that can greatly benefit the adult-use and medical cannabis communities as a whole. With Israel moving to legalize the exportation of cannabis, Canada set to implement legalization in 2018, and additional regions jumping on board, a global cannabis marketplace is beginning to unfold.
Advocacy is essential.
Twist up and take the ride. Not enjoying the process? Get involved. Joining networking groups, attending town halls and committee meetings, discussing sound policy with your local and state representative, and volunteering for lobby groups all extend an opportunity for anyone interested to help shape local, state, national and global cannabis reform.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Marijuana crackdown might backfire on Feds, officials say at Aspen gathering
ASPEN — Changing perceptions of marijuana and possible job and tax money losses could thwart Attorney General Jeff Sessions' plans to crack down on the drug, two former U.S. attorneys said Thursday at a pro-marijuana gathering in Aspen.
"Nothing gets you unelected quicker than people losing jobs," said Bill Nettles, former U.S. attorney for South Carolina. "Putting people out of work is bad politics."
Nettles, who left his post a year ago, and Barry Grissom, who left his job as U.S. attorney in Kansas in April 2016, spoke Thursday at a legal seminar put on by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws at The Gant.
Republicans like to talk about job creation, but if a threatened crackdown on states that have legalized recreational marijuana starts to eliminate jobs, then Sessions and President Donald Trump could have a problem, Nettles said. Same thing goes for a reduction in tax money for a state such as Colorado, he said.
"(Losing jobs and tax money) is an argument that's persuasive to them," Nettles said. "You lose 120,000 jobs in one jobs report, that's big."
Grissom called Sessions' plans to crack down on recreational marijuana and his recent direction to prosecute offenders to the maximum legal level a "dumb on crime" policy.
"I'll be kind," Grissom said. "He's a blowhard. He's the things we hated about U.S. attorneys.
"He loved the power when he was (U.S. attorney) in Alabama."
Grissom said he believes there's been a "sea of change" in the way at least some law enforcement views marijuana. As evidence of that, Grissom pointed to the November legalization of medical marijuana in North Dakota, Florida and Arkansas, three states handily carried by Trump.
South Carolina recently legalized industrial hemp, and Nettles said he's hoping to prompt the legalization of medical marijuana in the state in the next two years. Such a move would help children with seizure disorders, people with on-the-job injuries that might otherwise become addicted to opioids and the large number of veterans in the state dealing with traumatic war-related issues, he said.
If that happens, then Nettles said he hopes it might prompt other states to follow suit.
"(Imagine) if we get it down in South Carolina and y'all don't have it in y'all's state?" he said
Even prosecutors think Sessions is a misguided facist! LOL
ASPEN — Changing perceptions of marijuana and possible job and tax money losses could thwart Attorney General Jeff Sessions' plans to crack down on the drug, two former U.S. attorneys said Thursday at a pro-marijuana gathering in Aspen.
"Nothing gets you unelected quicker than people losing jobs," said Bill Nettles, former U.S. attorney for South Carolina. "Putting people out of work is bad politics."
Nettles, who left his post a year ago, and Barry Grissom, who left his job as U.S. attorney in Kansas in April 2016, spoke Thursday at a legal seminar put on by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws at The Gant.
Republicans like to talk about job creation, but if a threatened crackdown on states that have legalized recreational marijuana starts to eliminate jobs, then Sessions and President Donald Trump could have a problem, Nettles said. Same thing goes for a reduction in tax money for a state such as Colorado, he said.
"(Losing jobs and tax money) is an argument that's persuasive to them," Nettles said. "You lose 120,000 jobs in one jobs report, that's big."
Grissom called Sessions' plans to crack down on recreational marijuana and his recent direction to prosecute offenders to the maximum legal level a "dumb on crime" policy.
"I'll be kind," Grissom said. "He's a blowhard. He's the things we hated about U.S. attorneys.
"He loved the power when he was (U.S. attorney) in Alabama."
Grissom said he believes there's been a "sea of change" in the way at least some law enforcement views marijuana. As evidence of that, Grissom pointed to the November legalization of medical marijuana in North Dakota, Florida and Arkansas, three states handily carried by Trump.
South Carolina recently legalized industrial hemp, and Nettles said he's hoping to prompt the legalization of medical marijuana in the state in the next two years. Such a move would help children with seizure disorders, people with on-the-job injuries that might otherwise become addicted to opioids and the large number of veterans in the state dealing with traumatic war-related issues, he said.
If that happens, then Nettles said he hopes it might prompt other states to follow suit.
"(Imagine) if we get it down in South Carolina and y'all don't have it in y'all's state?" he said
Even prosecutors think Sessions is a misguided facist! LOL
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Christians Demand: Stop the War on Drugs
The most determined opponents of a cannabis reform often come from conservative religious circles, such as those who regard homosexuality as a curable disease, deny Darwin’s findings, or regard the equal treatment of all sexes as ungodly. Just recently, Jeff Hunt, a Colorado Christian University educator, wanted to ban the 420 Rally in Denver in its current form. Not due to any illegal activities occurring during the event, but because cannabis itself was a social threat.
“We want to reform culture, to make culture good,” Hunt said. “And we see recreational marijuana as a threat to making a good and healthy society.”
Hunt’s negative experience with cannabis dates back to when he tried to complete his homework after smoking herb in the eighth grade, at the young age of approximately 14 years old. “I would smoke marijuana pretty regularly and try to do homework, and I’d forget a paragraph as soon as I’d read it,” he said. Hunt’s experience is a prime example of what happens when cannabis is purchased as an illegal, unregulated substance by an eighth-grade student lacking any cannabis-related education.
But even among committed Christians in the U.S., the voices calling for an end to the War on Drugs have grown over the last several years. Three weeks ago, the conservative televangelist Pat Robertson criticized the decision of U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions directing federal prosecutors to impose the harshest penalties the Controlled Substance Act provides. Robertson called the decision absurd. “These people are ‘tough on crime.’ That’s nonsense. Our country is groaning under the weight of incarceration,” he said on Christian Broadcasting Network.
In Europe, church criticism of state drug policy is rare and only gradually being perceived by the public. For example, German evangelical pastor Michael Kleim has denounced the human rights violations in the name of the War on Drugs, as well as the drug policy of the Federal Republic, for many years. Kleim was also decisively involved in setting up the network that published the Berlin Declaration on May 26th, 2017 on the occasion of the Deutsche Evangelische Kirchentag (German Evangelical Churches’ Days) in Berlin.
The “Berlin Declaration” calls for the end of a War on Drugs, one that’s widely recognized as a failure. The declaration emerged as an idea during a Berlin Meeting, where attendees shared their concern about the massive and excessive human rights abuses caused by current drug policies in many countries, specifically in Latin America and Southeast Asia.
The declaration is promoted by the Iglesia Evangélica Protestante de El Salvador (IEPES) within the framework of the 500 years of the Protestant Reformation and in view of the United Nations Political Declaration on International Drug Control in 2019. The appeal was introduced in the Berlin Hemp Museum during an event on Drug Policy and Human Rights titled “Christians demand: Stop the War on Drugs. An unconventional contribution to Kirchentag (Churches’ Day).”
Organizations, institutions, religious leaders, academics, scientists, specialists, social influencers and activists signed the document to express their commitment to the “reform of the current international model of drug control.” The Berlin Declaration focuses on the negative consequences of national and international drug policies while calling for harm reduction and more scientific research to combat illegal and large-scale drug trafficking.
The Berlin Declaration seeks to connect the adherents of social, academic, scientific, religious, activist, business, law enforcement and political leaders. Any organization, institution, or company with a social purpose can adhere to the declaration as a tool for advocacy at the highest level in favor of civil society.
On the first day of its presentation, the Berlin Declaration garnered support from more than 80 organizations from all five continents: signers include the IDPC (International Drug Policy Consortium), DPA (Drug Policy Alliance), stopthedrugwar.org, Law Enforcement Partnership, German Hemp Association (DHV), Akzept (Germany), several faith communities such as the Anglican Episcopal Church of El Salvador, the Metropolitan Community Church, and dozens of personalities, including Noam Chomsky, the former British Drug Czar David Nutt and Mexican Catholic Priest Alejandro Solalinde.
And the lions shall lay down with the lambs. Wow.
The most determined opponents of a cannabis reform often come from conservative religious circles, such as those who regard homosexuality as a curable disease, deny Darwin’s findings, or regard the equal treatment of all sexes as ungodly. Just recently, Jeff Hunt, a Colorado Christian University educator, wanted to ban the 420 Rally in Denver in its current form. Not due to any illegal activities occurring during the event, but because cannabis itself was a social threat.
“We want to reform culture, to make culture good,” Hunt said. “And we see recreational marijuana as a threat to making a good and healthy society.”
Hunt’s negative experience with cannabis dates back to when he tried to complete his homework after smoking herb in the eighth grade, at the young age of approximately 14 years old. “I would smoke marijuana pretty regularly and try to do homework, and I’d forget a paragraph as soon as I’d read it,” he said. Hunt’s experience is a prime example of what happens when cannabis is purchased as an illegal, unregulated substance by an eighth-grade student lacking any cannabis-related education.
But even among committed Christians in the U.S., the voices calling for an end to the War on Drugs have grown over the last several years. Three weeks ago, the conservative televangelist Pat Robertson criticized the decision of U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions directing federal prosecutors to impose the harshest penalties the Controlled Substance Act provides. Robertson called the decision absurd. “These people are ‘tough on crime.’ That’s nonsense. Our country is groaning under the weight of incarceration,” he said on Christian Broadcasting Network.
In Europe, church criticism of state drug policy is rare and only gradually being perceived by the public. For example, German evangelical pastor Michael Kleim has denounced the human rights violations in the name of the War on Drugs, as well as the drug policy of the Federal Republic, for many years. Kleim was also decisively involved in setting up the network that published the Berlin Declaration on May 26th, 2017 on the occasion of the Deutsche Evangelische Kirchentag (German Evangelical Churches’ Days) in Berlin.
The “Berlin Declaration” calls for the end of a War on Drugs, one that’s widely recognized as a failure. The declaration emerged as an idea during a Berlin Meeting, where attendees shared their concern about the massive and excessive human rights abuses caused by current drug policies in many countries, specifically in Latin America and Southeast Asia.
The declaration is promoted by the Iglesia Evangélica Protestante de El Salvador (IEPES) within the framework of the 500 years of the Protestant Reformation and in view of the United Nations Political Declaration on International Drug Control in 2019. The appeal was introduced in the Berlin Hemp Museum during an event on Drug Policy and Human Rights titled “Christians demand: Stop the War on Drugs. An unconventional contribution to Kirchentag (Churches’ Day).”
Organizations, institutions, religious leaders, academics, scientists, specialists, social influencers and activists signed the document to express their commitment to the “reform of the current international model of drug control.” The Berlin Declaration focuses on the negative consequences of national and international drug policies while calling for harm reduction and more scientific research to combat illegal and large-scale drug trafficking.
The Berlin Declaration seeks to connect the adherents of social, academic, scientific, religious, activist, business, law enforcement and political leaders. Any organization, institution, or company with a social purpose can adhere to the declaration as a tool for advocacy at the highest level in favor of civil society.
On the first day of its presentation, the Berlin Declaration garnered support from more than 80 organizations from all five continents: signers include the IDPC (International Drug Policy Consortium), DPA (Drug Policy Alliance), stopthedrugwar.org, Law Enforcement Partnership, German Hemp Association (DHV), Akzept (Germany), several faith communities such as the Anglican Episcopal Church of El Salvador, the Metropolitan Community Church, and dozens of personalities, including Noam Chomsky, the former British Drug Czar David Nutt and Mexican Catholic Priest Alejandro Solalinde.
And the lions shall lay down with the lambs. Wow.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
DOJ’s Mysterious Marijuana Subcommittee
Led by an outspoken legalization opponent, Jeff Sessions' Justice Department is reviewing federal marijuana policy, with significant changes possible soon. Almost nothing about the review process is publicly known and key players in the policy debate have not been contacted.
The outcome of the review could devastate a multibillion-dollar industry and countermand the will of voters in eight states if the Obama administration's permissive stance on non-medical sales is reversed.
What is known: The review is being conducted by a subcommittee of a larger crime-reduction task force that will issue recommendations by July 27. The subcommittee was announced in April alongside other subcommittees reviewing charging and sentencing.
The task force is co-chaired by Steve Cook, an assistant U.S. attorney in Tennessee who like Sessions advocates harsh criminal penalties and a traditional view of drug prohibition. The other co-chair is Robyn Thiemann, a longtime department official who works as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Policy.
The marijuana subcommittee is led by Michael Murray, counsel to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, U.S. News has learned.
After graduating from Yale Law School in 2009, Murray ricocheted between law firms and public-sector jobs. He served less than a year as an assistant U.S. attorney in Virginia in 2013 before clerking for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, according to his LinkedIn page. He worked at the Jones Day law firm before joining the Trump Justice Department.
Murray could not be reached for comment and Justice Department spokesman Ian Prior declined to comment on the “deliberative processes within the department“ when asked to discuss Murray’s role.
The department declined to identify other members of the subcommittee, the scope of its policy review or name outside groups that are being consulted.
The lack of information provided and the seemingly secretive nature of the review has proponents of a more lenient marijuana policy concerned.
“It’s difficult to ascertain any clear information about the subcommittee and how they’re working,” says Taylor West, deputy director of the National Cannabis Industry Association, a trade group representing marijuana businesses.
West says the group is focused on building relationships with members of Congress and points to overwhelming public support for respecting state marijuana laws -- 73 percent, according to an April survey by Quinnipiac University.
The Marijuana Policy Project, a large advocacy group that has led many of the successful state legalization campaigns, also says it is not in touch with the subcommittee.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., a leading marijuana reform advocate, requested to meet with Sessions about the issue but was refused, says Rohrabacher spokesman Ken Grubbs.
“Without knowing much about the approach the subcommittee is taking, it’s hard to say whether we’d expect them to reach out,” West says. “So far, [Sessions'] comments have not indicated a lot of willingness to work together toward common ground.”
It's unclear if agencies under the Justice Department's umbrella, such as the Drug Enforcement Administration, are contributing to the subcommittee.
DEA acting administrator Chuck Rosenberg told U.S. News on Tuesday that he is not personally involved in the review, and that he didn't know if any of his subordinates are. A DEA spokesman was not immediately able to provide additional information.
Marijuana possession for any reason outside limited research remains a federal crime. Most state medical programs are protected from federal enforcement by a congressional spending restriction. Recreational programs are protected only by the 2013 Cole Memo that allowed states to regulate sales so long as certain enforcement triggers aren't tripped, such as diversion to other states, distribution to minors, public health consequences and involvement of criminal groups.
State-legal cannabis businesses hit $6.7 billion in estimated sales last year. Cannabis companies are believed to employ more than 100,000 workers and they collect hundreds of millions of dollars in state and federal taxes.
Listening to diverse points of view on marijuana policy is significant because the effects of regulated sales are debated, and data can be spliced to support a point of view.
For example, multiple federal and state surveys indicate that teen use of marijuana has not increased since 2012, when the states legalized marijuana for adults 21 and older. But use rates have fluctuated for years, so comparing current use to a particularly low-use year further in the past can offer a different impression about trends.
Diversion to other states is also debated. A law enforcement task force called Rocky Mountain HIDTA claimed that intercepts of marijuana mail out of Colorado increased following legalization, sourcing the information to the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. But a USPIS spokesperson told U.S. News state-specific records did not exist. Though state-specific records are not available, national parcel intercepts did increase in 2016 after two years of declines. Two states sued Colorado unsuccessfully claiming spillover.
Mexican drug cartels, meanwhile, have been caught smuggling significantly less marijuana across the southern border. And it's unclear if local increases in drugged driving arrests and marijuana hospital admissions are primarily the result of legalization policies or improved awareness and reporting.
In April, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper said Sessions told him the Cole Memo was "not too far from good policy." But the attorney general has repeatedly made clear his personal objection to marijuana use and legalization.
In March Sessions scoffed at marijuana's medical potential and evidence showing legal access associated with less opioid abuse. The prepared copy of a March speech called marijuana use a "life-wrecking dependency" that's "only slightly less awful" than heroin addiction. In May Sessions said there was "too much legalization talk and not enough prevention talk." Last year, he famously declared that “good people don’t smoke marijuana.”
President Donald Trump said during the presidential campaign that he does not personally support marijuana legalization, but favors state autonomy. Recent national polls show roughly 60 percent of Americans believe marijuana use should be legal.
If they try to roll back all of the state MJ laws this will be in court for years....hopefully with injunctions against the Feds until sorted by the courts. I should think that prinicipal among the arguments against Fed restriction of state programs is the Federal Government's massive over reach under the Commerce clause.
Led by an outspoken legalization opponent, Jeff Sessions' Justice Department is reviewing federal marijuana policy, with significant changes possible soon. Almost nothing about the review process is publicly known and key players in the policy debate have not been contacted.
The outcome of the review could devastate a multibillion-dollar industry and countermand the will of voters in eight states if the Obama administration's permissive stance on non-medical sales is reversed.
What is known: The review is being conducted by a subcommittee of a larger crime-reduction task force that will issue recommendations by July 27. The subcommittee was announced in April alongside other subcommittees reviewing charging and sentencing.
The task force is co-chaired by Steve Cook, an assistant U.S. attorney in Tennessee who like Sessions advocates harsh criminal penalties and a traditional view of drug prohibition. The other co-chair is Robyn Thiemann, a longtime department official who works as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Policy.
The marijuana subcommittee is led by Michael Murray, counsel to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, U.S. News has learned.
After graduating from Yale Law School in 2009, Murray ricocheted between law firms and public-sector jobs. He served less than a year as an assistant U.S. attorney in Virginia in 2013 before clerking for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, according to his LinkedIn page. He worked at the Jones Day law firm before joining the Trump Justice Department.
Murray could not be reached for comment and Justice Department spokesman Ian Prior declined to comment on the “deliberative processes within the department“ when asked to discuss Murray’s role.
The department declined to identify other members of the subcommittee, the scope of its policy review or name outside groups that are being consulted.
The lack of information provided and the seemingly secretive nature of the review has proponents of a more lenient marijuana policy concerned.
“It’s difficult to ascertain any clear information about the subcommittee and how they’re working,” says Taylor West, deputy director of the National Cannabis Industry Association, a trade group representing marijuana businesses.
West says the group is focused on building relationships with members of Congress and points to overwhelming public support for respecting state marijuana laws -- 73 percent, according to an April survey by Quinnipiac University.
The Marijuana Policy Project, a large advocacy group that has led many of the successful state legalization campaigns, also says it is not in touch with the subcommittee.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., a leading marijuana reform advocate, requested to meet with Sessions about the issue but was refused, says Rohrabacher spokesman Ken Grubbs.
“Without knowing much about the approach the subcommittee is taking, it’s hard to say whether we’d expect them to reach out,” West says. “So far, [Sessions'] comments have not indicated a lot of willingness to work together toward common ground.”
It's unclear if agencies under the Justice Department's umbrella, such as the Drug Enforcement Administration, are contributing to the subcommittee.
DEA acting administrator Chuck Rosenberg told U.S. News on Tuesday that he is not personally involved in the review, and that he didn't know if any of his subordinates are. A DEA spokesman was not immediately able to provide additional information.
Marijuana possession for any reason outside limited research remains a federal crime. Most state medical programs are protected from federal enforcement by a congressional spending restriction. Recreational programs are protected only by the 2013 Cole Memo that allowed states to regulate sales so long as certain enforcement triggers aren't tripped, such as diversion to other states, distribution to minors, public health consequences and involvement of criminal groups.
State-legal cannabis businesses hit $6.7 billion in estimated sales last year. Cannabis companies are believed to employ more than 100,000 workers and they collect hundreds of millions of dollars in state and federal taxes.
Listening to diverse points of view on marijuana policy is significant because the effects of regulated sales are debated, and data can be spliced to support a point of view.
For example, multiple federal and state surveys indicate that teen use of marijuana has not increased since 2012, when the states legalized marijuana for adults 21 and older. But use rates have fluctuated for years, so comparing current use to a particularly low-use year further in the past can offer a different impression about trends.
Diversion to other states is also debated. A law enforcement task force called Rocky Mountain HIDTA claimed that intercepts of marijuana mail out of Colorado increased following legalization, sourcing the information to the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. But a USPIS spokesperson told U.S. News state-specific records did not exist. Though state-specific records are not available, national parcel intercepts did increase in 2016 after two years of declines. Two states sued Colorado unsuccessfully claiming spillover.
Mexican drug cartels, meanwhile, have been caught smuggling significantly less marijuana across the southern border. And it's unclear if local increases in drugged driving arrests and marijuana hospital admissions are primarily the result of legalization policies or improved awareness and reporting.
In April, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper said Sessions told him the Cole Memo was "not too far from good policy." But the attorney general has repeatedly made clear his personal objection to marijuana use and legalization.
In March Sessions scoffed at marijuana's medical potential and evidence showing legal access associated with less opioid abuse. The prepared copy of a March speech called marijuana use a "life-wrecking dependency" that's "only slightly less awful" than heroin addiction. In May Sessions said there was "too much legalization talk and not enough prevention talk." Last year, he famously declared that “good people don’t smoke marijuana.”
President Donald Trump said during the presidential campaign that he does not personally support marijuana legalization, but favors state autonomy. Recent national polls show roughly 60 percent of Americans believe marijuana use should be legal.
If they try to roll back all of the state MJ laws this will be in court for years....hopefully with injunctions against the Feds until sorted by the courts. I should think that prinicipal among the arguments against Fed restriction of state programs is the Federal Government's massive over reach under the Commerce clause.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
10th Circuit: Neighbors may file federal RICO lawsuit against state-licensed marijuana growing operation
Marijuana has been decriminalized and regulated by various states, but it remains forbidden by federal law. This means that state-legal marijuana growers might still face federal charges, though federal prosecutors could choose not to enforce the federal ban in such situations.
But it also means that private citizens (here, a couple named the Reillys) could sue neighboring marijuana growers under the federal RICO statute, on the theory that the growers are interfering with the neighbors’ use of their land — as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit just held Wednesday in Safe Streets Alliance v. Alternative Holistic Healing, LLC. And this would not be affected by a Justice Department policy of not enforcing the criminal ban on marijuana production and distribution in those states that allow marijuana. The decision thus further highlights the precarious status of marijuana in Colorado, Washington, California and other such states, so long as Congress declines to officially allow such state legalization.
The federal Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) lets people sue “racketeering” enterprises that injure the plaintiff’s “business or property.” Drug growing or distribution that is a felony under federal law qualifies as racketeering activity.
And, the 10th Circuit concluded, injuries to “property” include some examples of what property law calls “nuisance” — serious interference with the enjoyment of property, often accompanied by decline in property value. In particular, plaintiffs alleged that the marijuana enterprise produced “noxious odors” that wafted onto their property; such an “odorous nuisance” could qualify as an injury to property, assuming plaintiffs could show that the interference with their property was substantial enough.
Plaintiffs also alleged that “the open operation of the Marijuana Growers’ criminal enterprise has caused the value of their land to decline, independent of the harms attending the nuisance”; that too could be a sufficient “injury to property,” the court concluded, if the decline in value could be shown. Perhaps “the value of the Reillys’ land” has actually “increased because of the now-booming market in Colorado for land on which to cultivate marijuana,” but that is a factual question to be determined later — for now, the Reillys’ claim can go forward:
At this stage in the litigation, we conclude that it is reasonable to infer that a potential buyer would be less inclined to purchase land abutting an openly operating criminal enterprise than she would be if that adjacent land were empty or occupied by a lawfully-operating retailer. Based on the Reillys’ assertion that the Marijuana Growers’ operation is anything but clandestine, the Reillys’ land plausibly is worth less now than it was before those operations began. Therefore, we conclude that the Reillys pled a plausible diminution in the value of their property caused by the public operation of the Marijuana Growers’ enterprise.
In principle, this same claim could be made by neighbors of a wide range of marijuana growers and distributors, assuming they could show substantial interference with enjoyment of land or decline in property value. And while some such claims could have in any event been brought under state nuisance law in state court, RICO provides much better remedies — potentially, a recovery of three times the actual damages plus a reasonable attorney’s fee — and likely isn’t subject to any state law defenses (as there might be against some nuisance claims brought against licensed, regulated businesses). So the decision is bad news for marijuana businesses, and for the uneasy coexistence between state legalization regimes and the federal marijuana prohibition.
This is not good. And yet again the anti and NIMBY'ers look to a back door to impose their views. One of the major problems with America is the degree to which we are litigious....the most litigious country in the world. Now, not to name any particular political party, but you know who, that has resisted tort reform for decades because somehow trial lawyers are in their "core constituency"?? Hint: it ain't the party you would tend to think. Final thoght, RICO was intended to go after major criminal organizations. Its extreme punishments killed the Mafia....muerto went out the door when looking at life sentences with no chance of parole. To that extent, its very good. However, provisions allowing for civil suit is just BS, badly written legislation, with yet another unintended consequence.
Marijuana has been decriminalized and regulated by various states, but it remains forbidden by federal law. This means that state-legal marijuana growers might still face federal charges, though federal prosecutors could choose not to enforce the federal ban in such situations.
But it also means that private citizens (here, a couple named the Reillys) could sue neighboring marijuana growers under the federal RICO statute, on the theory that the growers are interfering with the neighbors’ use of their land — as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit just held Wednesday in Safe Streets Alliance v. Alternative Holistic Healing, LLC. And this would not be affected by a Justice Department policy of not enforcing the criminal ban on marijuana production and distribution in those states that allow marijuana. The decision thus further highlights the precarious status of marijuana in Colorado, Washington, California and other such states, so long as Congress declines to officially allow such state legalization.
The federal Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) lets people sue “racketeering” enterprises that injure the plaintiff’s “business or property.” Drug growing or distribution that is a felony under federal law qualifies as racketeering activity.
And, the 10th Circuit concluded, injuries to “property” include some examples of what property law calls “nuisance” — serious interference with the enjoyment of property, often accompanied by decline in property value. In particular, plaintiffs alleged that the marijuana enterprise produced “noxious odors” that wafted onto their property; such an “odorous nuisance” could qualify as an injury to property, assuming plaintiffs could show that the interference with their property was substantial enough.
Plaintiffs also alleged that “the open operation of the Marijuana Growers’ criminal enterprise has caused the value of their land to decline, independent of the harms attending the nuisance”; that too could be a sufficient “injury to property,” the court concluded, if the decline in value could be shown. Perhaps “the value of the Reillys’ land” has actually “increased because of the now-booming market in Colorado for land on which to cultivate marijuana,” but that is a factual question to be determined later — for now, the Reillys’ claim can go forward:
At this stage in the litigation, we conclude that it is reasonable to infer that a potential buyer would be less inclined to purchase land abutting an openly operating criminal enterprise than she would be if that adjacent land were empty or occupied by a lawfully-operating retailer. Based on the Reillys’ assertion that the Marijuana Growers’ operation is anything but clandestine, the Reillys’ land plausibly is worth less now than it was before those operations began. Therefore, we conclude that the Reillys pled a plausible diminution in the value of their property caused by the public operation of the Marijuana Growers’ enterprise.
In principle, this same claim could be made by neighbors of a wide range of marijuana growers and distributors, assuming they could show substantial interference with enjoyment of land or decline in property value. And while some such claims could have in any event been brought under state nuisance law in state court, RICO provides much better remedies — potentially, a recovery of three times the actual damages plus a reasonable attorney’s fee — and likely isn’t subject to any state law defenses (as there might be against some nuisance claims brought against licensed, regulated businesses). So the decision is bad news for marijuana businesses, and for the uneasy coexistence between state legalization regimes and the federal marijuana prohibition.
This is not good. And yet again the anti and NIMBY'ers look to a back door to impose their views. One of the major problems with America is the degree to which we are litigious....the most litigious country in the world. Now, not to name any particular political party, but you know who, that has resisted tort reform for decades because somehow trial lawyers are in their "core constituency"?? Hint: it ain't the party you would tend to think. Final thoght, RICO was intended to go after major criminal organizations. Its extreme punishments killed the Mafia....muerto went out the door when looking at life sentences with no chance of parole. To that extent, its very good. However, provisions allowing for civil suit is just BS, badly written legislation, with yet another unintended consequence.
|
Sponsored by |
|---|
|
|
|