Skip to main content

Latest

Chronicle

Law Enforcement: Snitch in Deadly Atlanta Raid Case Sues

Alex White made a career out of being an informant for Atlanta police, but when they asked him to lie for them in the Kathryn Johnston case, he instead went to the feds. Now he's suing the Atlanta police, claiming his career as a snitch has been ruined.
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Blog

Drug Czar Makes Absurd Claim That the Drug War Reduces Teen Tobacco Use

If you haven't figured out yet that the Drug Czar will say anything, you should start reading some of the stuff he says. This week he attempted to take credit for reductions in alcohol and tobacco use among teens, claiming that the war on illegal drugs somehow causes kids not to smoke cigarettes. Before you know it, he'll be declaring that the drug war extinguishes forest fires, increases child literacy, and inspires people to spay or neuter their household pets.

An ONDCP announcement this week heralding reductions in youth drug use contained this whopping claim:
When we push back against illegal drug use, youth abuse of other substances decrease as well:
*Use of alcohol, including binge drinking, and cigarette smoking
have decreased by 15 and 33 percent, respectively
This is just warped on so many levels, I must resort once again to a bullet point list to explain how ridiculous it is:
1. These are legal, widely available drugs. The Drug Czar's claim that supply-reduction efforts have been effective against illicit substances cannot be applied to alcohol and tobacco. There may be age restrictions, but there ain't no crop substitution or aerial fumigation going on in North Carolina.
2. The Drug Czar's office doesn't work on tobacco and alcohol prevention. They've made no ads about these drugs or implemented any laws or policies in regards to them.

3. There's no war on tobacco or alcohol. If reductions in the use of these drugs are achievable without harsh laws, that merely illustrates the futility of punitive drug war policies.

4. Coinciding reductions in both licit and illicit drug use demonstrate a broader social trend, suggesting that specific drug war programs are not a catalyst in determining youth behavior.
Really, nothing could better illustrate the absurdity of the Drug Czar's self-aggrandizing pronouncements than these simultaneous reductions in tobacco and alcohol use. Without any arrests, mandatory minimums, no-knock raids, and stark racial disparities, we've made more progress against alcohol and tobacco than against these pernicious illegal substances that supposedly can only be combated through a blind and violent civil war.

As is often the case, the Drug Czar has handed us the truth in a nifty little box. He just mislabeled its contents.
In The Trenches

Press Release: North Dakota’s Licensed Hemp Farmers Appeal Federal Court Decision

[Courtesy of Vote Hemp] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 12, 2007 CONTACT: Adam Eidinger: 202-744-2671, [email protected] or Tom Murphy 207-542-4998, [email protected] North Dakota’s Licensed Hemp Farmers Appeal Federal Court Decision BISMARCK, ND – Two North Dakota farmers, who filed a federal lawsuit in June to end the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) ban on commercial hemp farming in the United States and had their case dismissed on November 28, have filed a notice of appeal today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Lawyers working on behalf of the farmers, Representative David Monson and Wayne Hauge, are appealing a number of issues. In particular, the lower court inexplicably ruled that hemp and marijuana are the “same,” as the DEA has contended, and thus failed to properly consider the Commerce Clause argument that the plaintiffs raised — that Congress cannot interfere with North Dakota’s state-regulated hemp program. Scientific evidence clearly shows that industrial hemp, which includes the oilseed and fiber varieties of Cannabis that would have been grown pursuant to North Dakota law, is genetically distinct from the drug varieties of Cannabis and has absolutely no recreational drug effect. Even though the farmers' legal battle continues, the lawsuit prompted the DEA to respond to the North Dakota State University (NDSU) application for federal permission to grow industrial hemp for research purposes, which has languished for nearly a decade. University officials, however, say it could cost them more than $50,000 to install 10-foot-high fences and meet other strict DEA requirements such as high-powered lighting. NDSU officials are reviewing the DEA’s proposal, and Vote Hemp is hopeful that an agreement can be reached before planting season gets under way. If an agreement between the DEA and NDSU is reached and ultimately signed, it would pave the way for agricultural hemp research and development in North Dakota. Such research is key to developing varieties of industrial hemp best suited for North Dakota’s climate. “We are happy this lawsuit is moving forward with an appeal,” says Eric Steenstra, President of Vote Hemp, a non-profit organization working to bring industrial hemp farming back to the U.S. “We feel that the lower court’s decision not only overlooks Congress’s original legislative intent, but also fails to stand up for fundamental states’ rights against overreaching federal regulation. Canada grows over 30,000 acres of industrial hemp annually without any law enforcement problems. In our federalist society, it is not the burden of North Dakota’s citizens to ask Congress in Washington, D.C. to clear up its contradictory and confusing regulations concerning Cannabis; it is their right to grow industrial hemp pursuant to their own state law and the United States Constitution,” adds Steenstra. Vote Hemp, the nation's leading industrial hemp advocacy group, and its supporters are providing financial support for the lawsuit. If it is ultimately successful, states across the nation will be free to implement their own hemp farming laws without fear of federal interference. More on the case can be found at: http://www.VoteHemp.com/legal_cases_ND.html.
In The Trenches

A Holiday Surprise & Victory for Medical Marijuana!

[Courtesy of Americans for Safe Access] 

Last week, House Judiciary Committee Chair, Rep. Conyers (D-MI) pledged to investigate the DEA’s recent and ongoing tactics threatening the safety and security of state-sanctioned patients, providers, and innocent third-party landlords. Chairman Conyers’ commitment to question DEA attacks on medical marijuana states has brought holiday cheer to medical marijuana patients and supporters. Please thank Chairman Conyers, and his staff, today!

Click here to thank Chairman Conyers right now! Chairman Conyers needs to know you support and appreciate his decision to hold oversight hearings. Be sure to thank him and tell him that as a patient and/or medical marijuana supporter, you look forward to working with him and his dedicated staff as they prepare for the oversight hearing.
Visit www.AmericansforSafeAccess.org/ThankYouRepConyers to send a short message.

Since the DEA began raiding medical cannabis dispensing collectives in 2002, Congress has never held a hearing to investigate the goal of these raids, how much these raids are costing taxpayers in both dollars and precious resources, or what impact these raids are having on patients and the state and local governments attempting to regulate the distribution of medical marijuana in accordance with state law. A House oversight investigation is an important and significant opportunity for the medical marijuana community. Please thank Chairman Conyers today. Click here to send a message.

Thank you for your commitment to safe access.

Sincerely,

Sonnet Seeborg Gabbard
Field Coordinator
Americans for Safe Access
In The Trenches

U.S. Sentencing Commission Approves Crack Reform for Federal Prisoners

[Courtesy of The Sentencing Project] The day after the Supreme Court affirmed a judge's decision to sentence below the guideline range based on the unfairness of the crack cocaine sentencing disparity, the United States Sentencing Commission today voted unanimously to make retroactive its recent guideline amendment on crack cocaine offenses. The USSC's decision now makes an estimated 19,500 persons in prison eligible for a sentence reduction averaging more than two years. Releases are subject to judicial review and will be staggered over 30 years. The Sentencing Project applauds the USSC for responding at this heightened time of public awareness about excessive penalties and disparate treatment within the justice system. "The Commission's decision marks an important moment not only for the 19,500 people retroactivity will impact, but for the justice system as a whole," stated Marc Mauer, Executive Director of The Sentencing Project. "Today's action, combined with the Court's decision yesterday, restores a measure of rationality to federal sentencing while also addressing the unconscionable racial disparities that the war on drugs has produced." The Sentencing Project estimates that once the sentencing change is fully implemented, there will be a reduction of up to $1 billion in prison costs. Because African Americans comprise more than 80% of those incarcerated for crack cocaine offenses, the sentencing reform will also help reduce racial disparity in federal prisons. The Commission sets the advisory guideline range that federal judges use when sentencing defendants. In May the Commission recommended statutory reforms and proposed to Congress an amendment to decrease the guideline offense level for crack cocaine offenses. The amendment went unchallenged by Congress and went into effect on November 1st. The Commission's action today makes that guideline change retroactive to persons sentenced prior to November 1st. The guideline changes do not affect the mandatory minimum penalties that apply to crack cocaine, which can only be addressed through Congressional action. "Justice demands that Congress take the next step and eliminate the harsh mandatory minimums for low-level crack cocaine offenses," said Mauer. The Commission's vote comes a day after the United States Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in Kimbrough v. United States that a federal district judge's below-guideline sentencing decision based on the unfairness of the 100 to 1 quantity disparity between powder and crack cocaine was permissible. In June, Sen. Joseph Biden introduced the Drug Sentencing Reform and Kingpin Trafficking Act of 2007, legislation which would equalize the penalties for crack and powder cocaine offenses. Biden's bill, S. 1711, aims to shift federal law enforcement's focus from street-level dealers towards high-level traffickers.