Law Virginia

[Baron23]

Over ride him. Sort of gives truth to that Rich Men North of Richmond song, right?

Virginia GOP Governor Vetoes Marijuana Parental Rights Bill That Passed Legislature With Bipartisan Support​

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) vetoed a bill on Friday that would have prevented the state from using marijuana alone as evidence of child abuse or neglect, dealing a setback to advocates who’ve spent years working to enact the reform.


Youngkin had until midnight Friday to sign the bill, HB 833, veto it or let it take effect without his signature. He also could have sent the bill back to lawmakers with a request for amendments.


Around 8 p.m., his office announced that he’d vetoed the bill. It was among action he took on 84 bills—64 of which he signed, eight of which he vetoed and 12 of which he sent back with amendments.


“The proposed legislation, aiming to address a non-existent problem, has potential consequences that may expose children to harm,” Youngkin wrote in a veto message about the cannabis parental rights bill.


“Child protective service (CPS) referrals rarely, if ever, involve screening solely based on parents’ legal use of controlled substances or marijuana,” he added. “Instead, cases typically encompass additional risk factors like impaired supervision, access to drugs or drug paraphernalia, or a parent’s inability to meet the child’s basic needs. The inherent risk of unintended consequences, potentially endangering child safety by dissuading local departments of social services from implementing necessary protective measures, disrupts the balanced approach of current CPS policies, thus jeopardizing the well-being of vulnerable children.”


If enacted, the legislation

would have also provided that drug testing in child custody and visitation matters “shall exclude testing for any substance permitted for lawful use by an adult” under the state’s alcohol, cannabis and drug laws. A person’s “lawful possession or consumption” of those substances, the bill says, “shall not serve as a basis to restrict custody or visitation unless other facts establish that such possession or consumption is not in the best interest of the child.”


An enactment clause would have directed the state Board of Social Services to amend its regulations, guidance documents and other materials to comply with the provisions of the bill.


The governor argued in his veto message that the measure “undermines the tangible link between substance use and harm to children, evident in the increased calls to poison control and emergency room visits for children consuming cannabis-infused substances following the authorization of personal marijuana possession.”


“The blanket exemption further places children at risk by potentially endangering their welfare,” he wrote

. “This is a significant threat to child safety, potentially shielding parents engaging in substance possession or consumption from scrutiny. This failure to consider nuanced circumstances undermines the child’s best interests and contradicts our efforts to address substance misuse in families and communities.”


On its path to the governor’s desk, the legislation won unanimous or near-unanimous approval in votes on the Senate floor. The House was more divided, with Democrats generally in favor, though the proposal garnered some Republican votes, as well.


The bill now returns to the legislature, where two thirds of both houses will have to approve it in order to override Youngkin’s veto. A companion Senate version of the measure, SB 115

, also passed the legislature this session and has not yet been transmitted to the governor’s desk.


Advocates said Youngkin’s veto came as a blow after all the effort they put into crafting the bill and getting it through the legislature—including incorporating feedback from Senate lawmakers and the governor’s office itself.


“Disappointed doesn’t describe how it feels for the veto to come down after two years of pushing this proposal,” Chelsea Higgs Wise, executive director of the group Marijuana Justice, told Marijuana Moment. “We will not stop working to peel back the layers family policing through outdated marijuana laws. On behalf of the Commonwealth, [we] apologize to the families that will feel this impact while the administration waits another year to align family policy with current decriminalization.”


She added that organizers “will be back next year and every year until we get it right.”


JM Pedini, NORML’s development director and executive director for Virginia NORML, pushed back against Youngkin’s assertion that the bill seeks to solve a “non-existent problem.”


“Our office has received numerous calls and emails from parents who have lost custody and or visitation of their children due solely to their lawful use of medical cannabis, not from CPS intervention, but during custody battles,” Pedini told Marijuana Moment. “This bill would have made clear to the courts that lawful and responsible cannabis use is not sufficient reason to deny custody or visitation. This bill is necessary and was introduced to address actual harm being done to Virginia parents and children. To those families torn apart, we will continue fighting for you.”


The legislation is among a number of marijuana-related measures that will land on Youngkin’s desk this session. Others include a proposal to legalize and regulate retail cannabis sales to adults, resentence people serving time for past cannabis offenses and protect public-sector workers from employment discrimination based on lawful medical marijuana use.


As a result of legislative procedures, the governor has more time to act on the other proposals. But earlier this week, a sponsor of the retail sales legislation said that bill could go “up in smoke” after an unrelated deal with the governor soured.


The governor’s office had repeatedly said Youngkin wasn’t on board with the sales proposal, however. In a recent statement to Marijuana Moment, his press secretary pointed to Youngkin’s comments earlier this year in which “he said he doesn’t have a lot of interest in pressing forward with marijuana legalization.”


Given the governor’s broader silence on cannabis this session, it’s also not clear which way he leans on the other marijuana proposals.


Use, possession and limited cultivation of cannabis by adults is already legal in Virginia, the result of a Democrat-led proposal approved by lawmakers in 2021. But there’s nowhere for adults to legally buy the drug. Illicit stores have thus sprung up to meet consumer demand, with some estimates valuing the unregulated market at roughly $3 billion.

 

[Baron23]

The cannabis cold warriors seem to still be alive and well. And, IMO, the program described below seems to be fairly reasonable. Its just stupid to have legalized MJ but not allow a regulated commercial market for it. Just idiotic, IMO.

Virginia Governor Says Anyone Who Thinks He’ll Sign A Marijuana Sales Bill ‘Must Be Smoking Something’


With a bill sitting on his desk that would legalize the retail sale of marijuana in Virginia, Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) said recently that people “must be smoking something” if they think he’s going to sign it into law.

It’s the latest and clearest comment from the governor on where he stands on the legal sales proposal, which supportive lawmakers have spent months working to craft and pass through the legislature.

The legislation, SB 448

in the Senate and HB 698

in the House, was formally transmitted to Youngkin’s desk on March 11, and he has through April 8 to act it. His options are to sign it into law, veto it, allow it to become law without his signature or return it to lawmakers with suggested amendments.
Petition to decriminalize marijuana in Dallas

While Youngkin has not committed to vetoing the bill, he didn’t mince words about the chances of it winning his signature.


“I don’t plan on signing that bill,” he told local CBS affiliate WTKR

at an event in Cheseapeake last week. “I had somebody ask me the other day, ‘Are you going to sign the legislation?’ and I’ve been talking about this for 60 days and I said, ‘Anybody who thinks I’m going to sign that legislation must be smoking something.'”

House Speaker Don Scott (D), who supports the legislation, added that the governor “has not signed that bill, and I don’t anticipate he would.”


For months, Democrats working to pass legal sales legislation have said they’ve received little or no response from Youngkin’s office despite efforts to reach out and see what the governor might be open to.


Meanwhile, representatives for the governor have been referring to the same comments he made following his State of the Commonwealth speech in January, in which he said he didn’t “have any interest in” signing the Democratic-led bills.



As far back as October, Sen. Adam Ebbin (D), who was then working to draft a legal sales bill, told Marijuana Moment that Youngkin “has been a challenge to deal with because he hasn’t been forthcoming with his views on what he’s willing to support.”


“I’m not sure what the governor will sign, since he’s been kind of cagey and not really supportive in his public statements,” Ebbin said at the time.


Lawmakers in support of the sales bill now believe a veto is likely, though the governor has stopped short of pledging to block the bill outright. If he does, there currently aren’t enough votes in the legislature to overcome a veto.



Asked about the governor’s stance earlier this month, Del. Paul Krizek (D), the legislation’s sponsor in the House, told Marijuana Moment that “it seems pretty clear that he is not a fan of a legally regulated retail market.”


“He even said something to the effect that that he would not want a cannabis store on every street corner,” Krizek added—a hypothetical the lawmaker said was “not at all accurate and the opposite of what our bill would allow.”


And Sen. Creigh Deeds (D) has told local media: “We were advised that the governor wasn’t going to sign the [cannabis market] bill under any circumstance.”


Use, possession and limited cultivation of cannabis by adults is already legal in Virginia, the result of a Democrat-led proposal approved by lawmakers in 2021. But Republicans, after winning control of the House and governor’s office later that year, subsequently blocked the required reenactment of a regulatory framework for retail sales. Since then, illicit stores have sprung up to meet consumer demand.



Though Democrats retook control of both legislative chambers in last November’s elections, the governor is still an obstacle.


Cannabis is “an area that I really don’t have any interest in,” Youngkin said back in January. “What I want us to work on are areas that we can find a meeting of the mind and press forward for the betterment of Virginia.”


Already the governor has vetoed one of the several marijuana-related measures passed by lawmakers this session, standing in the way of a bipartisan measure that would have protected the parental rights of lawful marijuana users.



Though that proposal repeatedly passed the Senate on unanimous or near-unanimous votes, Youngkin’s veto message criticized it for “aiming to address a non-existent problem”—a claim advocates have said is untrue.


At one point earlier this session, it appeared the retail cannabis bill could become part of a grand deal between Youngkin and legislative Democrats. In December, Senate President Pro Tempore Louise Lucas (D) alluded to a compromise involving a sports stadium project the governor supported. But that deal never materialized and Democrats left the governor’s proposed area plan out of budget legislation.



Here’s what the retail sales legislation would do if it becomes law:

• Retail sales could begin as of May 1, 2025.
• Adults would be able to purchase up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana in a single transaction, or up to an equivalent amount of other cannabis products as determined by regulators.
• A state tax of 11.625 percent would apply to the retail sale of any cannabis product. Of that, 8 percent would go to the state, local governments would get 2.5 percent and 1.125 percent would fund schools.
• The Virginia Cannabis Control Authority would oversee licensing and regulation of the new industry. Its board of directors would have the authority to control possession, sale, transportation, distribution, delivery and testing of marijuana.
• Local governments could ban marijuana establishments, but only if voters first approve an opt-out referendum.
• Locations of retail outlets could not be within 1,000 feet of another marijuana retailer.
• Cultivators would be regulated by space devoted to marijuana cultivation, known as canopy size. Both indoor and outdoor marijuana cultivation would be allowed, though only growers in lower tiers—with lower limits on canopy size—could grow plants outside. Larger growers would need to cultivate plants indoors. Secure greenhouses would qualify as indoor cultivation.
• Only direct, face-to-face transactions would be permitted. The legislation would prohibit the use of other avenues, such as vending machines, drive-through windows, internet-based sales platforms and delivery services.
• Existing medical marijuana providers that enter the adult-use market could apply to open up to five additional retail establishments, which would need to be colocated at their existing licensed facilities.
• Serving sizes would be capped at 10 milligrams THC, with no more than 100 mg THC per package.
• No person could be granted or hold an interest in more than five total licenses, not including transporter licenses.
• People with convictions for felonies or crimes involving moral turpitude within the past seven years would be ineligible to apply for licensing, as would employees of police or sheriff’s departments if they’re responsible for enforcement of the penal, traffic or motor vehicle laws of the commonwealth.
• An equity-focused microbusiness program would grant licenses to entities at least two-thirds owned and directly controlled by eligible applicants, which include people with past cannabis misdemeanors, family members of people with past convictions, military veterans, individuals who’ve lived at least three of the past five years in a “historically economically disadvantaged community,” people who’ve attended schools in those areas and individuals who received a federal Pell grant or attended a college or university where at least 30 percent of students are eligible for Pell grants.
• “Historically economically disadvantaged community” is an area that has recorded marijuana possession offenses at or above 150 percent of the statewide average between 2009 and 2019.
• Tax revenue from the program would first cover the costs of administering and enforcing the state’s cannabis system. After that, 60 percent of remaining funds would go toward supporting the state’s Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund, 25 percent would fund substance use disorder treatment and prevention, 10 percent would go to pre-K programs for at-risk children and 5 percent would fund a public health and awareness campaign.
• Adults could also share up to 2.5 ounces with other adults without financial remuneration, though gray-market “gifting” of marijuana as part of another transaction would be punishable as a Class 2 misdemeanor and a Class 1 misdemeanor on second and subsequent offenses.
• A number of other new criminal penalties would be created. Knowingly selling or giving marijuana or marijuana paraphernalia to someone under 21, for example, would be a Class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and a maximum $2,500 fine, as would knowingly selling cannabis to someone reasonably believed to be intoxicated. It would also be a Class 1 misdemeanor to advertise the sale of marijuana paraphernalia to people under 21.
• Knowingly obtaining marijuana on behalf of someone under 21 would be a Class 1 misdemeanor.
• People under 21 who possess or use marijuana, or attempt to obtain it, would be subject to a civil penalty of no more than $25 and ordered to enter a substance use disorder treatment and/or education program.
• Illegal cultivation or manufacture of marijuana, not including legal homegrow, would be a Class 6 felony, punishable by up to five years imprisonment and a $2,500 fine.
• People could process homegrown marijuana into products such as edibles, but butane extraction or the use of other volatile solvents would be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.

Other cannabis-related bills before the governor include a proposal to resentence people serving time for past cannabis offenses and protect public-sector workers from employment discrimination based on lawful medical marijuana use.


A sales bill did advance through the Democratic-controlled Senate last session, but it stalled in committee in the House, which at the time had a GOP majority

 

[Baron23]

Most I can say positive is that he kept his word....but this is stupid, Younkin and its going to cost your party votes and majorities in this purple state. I really fucking hate politicians...in general.

"The world is weary of statesmen whom democracy has degraded into politicians."

Benjamin Disraeli

Virginia Governor Vetoes Bill To Legalize Cannabis Sales​

Virginia’s governor has vetoed legislation to authorize licensed pot sales and another bill allowing for resentencing of past pot convictions.​

Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin on Thursday vetoed a bill to legalize recreational marijuana sales, saying that regulated sales of cannabis would be a danger to health and safety. Virginia legalized the possession of small amounts of weed three years ago, but consumers remain without a legal way to purchase cannabis in the state.


The governor vetoed two identical bills passed by each chamber of the state legislature, SB 448 in the Senate and HB 698 in the House of Delegates. The legislation would have established a regulated cannabis market in Virginia, including provisions for the licensing of small and large retailers.


Virginia lawmakers legalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana for adults in 2021. But when the Republicans took control of the House of Delegates following an election later that year, a required second vote to legalize regulated cannabis sales was never held.


“The proposed legalization of retail marijuana in the Commonwealth endangers Virginians’ health and safety,” Youngkin said in his veto statement. “States following this path have seen adverse effects on children’s and adolescent’s health and safety, increased gang activity and violent crime, significant deterioration in mental health, decreased road safety, and significant costs associated with retail marijuana that far exceed tax revenue.”


“It also does not eliminate the illegal black-market sale of cannabis, nor guarantee product safety,” the governor continued. “Addressing the inconsistencies in enforcement and regulation in Virginia’s current laws does not justify expanding access to cannabis, following the failed paths of other states and endangering Virginians’ health and safety.”


While Youngkin had previously made it clear he was not interested in authorizing regulated weed sales in Virginia, Democrats had hoped the legislation which serve as a bargaining chip in negotiations for a plan supported by the governor to build a $2 billion sports complex in northern Virginia. But earlier this month, the legislature passed the state’s final budget without including funding for the proposal, setting the stage for Thursday’s veto of the cannabis sales bill.

Lawmakers Blast Veto​

Democratic Delegate Paul Krizek, the lead sponsor of the weed marketplace bill in the Virginia House of Delegates, said that the governor’s veto will further empower the state’s unregulated weed economy.


“Governor Youngkin’s failure to act allows an already thriving illegal cannabis market to persist, fueling criminal activity and endangering our communities,” he said in a statement cited by Politico. “This veto squandered a vital opportunity to safeguard Virginians and will only exacerbate the proliferation of illicit products, posing greater risks to our schools and public safety.”


Democratic state Senator Aaron R. Rouse, the sponsor of the Senate version of the bill, also decried Youngkin’s refusal to approve the legislation.


“This veto blocks a pivotal opportunity to advance public health, safety, and justice in our Commonwealth,” Rouse said in a written statement to the Associated Press.


Rouse further criticized Youngkin’s veto of the marijuana sales bills on social media, writing on X that the governor’s “dismissive stance towards addressing Virginia’s cannabis sales dilemma is unacceptable. Public servants are obligated to tackle pressing issues. This legislation would have combated the illegal market & ensured access to safe, tested and taxed cannabis products.”

Governor Also Nixes Cannabis Sentencing Bill​

Youngkin also vetoed a cannabis sentence modification bill (SB 696) spearheaded by the Last Prisoner Project, a nonprofit working to secure the release of all cannabis prisoners. Adrian Rocha, policy manager at the group, denounced the veto as a continuation of outdated policy.


“Under the bill, thousands of individuals charged for cannabis offenses under outdated laws would have had their sentences reevaluated in light of legalization,” he wrote in a statement emailed to High Times. “Instead, the Governor’s veto message not only ignored the intention of this bill but, more importantly, ignored the plight of thousands of families across the Commonwealth whose lives have been permanently altered by prohibitionist laws repealed three years ago!”


“Virginia may have ended cannabis prohibition in 2021, but there remains a significant injustice for those individuals who continue to be incarcerated for offenses that are no longer considered illegal,” Rocha added.


Although Youngkin nixed both bills, Democrats still have another chance to make them law by overriding his vetoes. The legislature returns to the capitol on April 17 to reconsider bills vetoed or amended by the governor.