Attorney General Holder Says Feds Will Respect State Medical Marijuana Laws
At a press conference yesterday:
This should remove doubt once and for all about the direction the new administration is heading with regards to medical marijuana. There's been some confusion about this, but Holder himself has been consistent in maintaining that medical marijuana providers operating legally under state law will be left alone.
The biggest remaining question is what will become of unresolved criminal cases initiated during the Bush administration. Charlie Lynch, whose recent federal conviction has become a national controversy, will be sentenced next week. Lynch and others like him are lingering casualties in a war that's been called off at the highest levels of government. The president and attorney general are on the right track, but the job isn’t done until the innocent victims of the war on medical marijuana are set free.
U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. said Wednesday that the Justice Department has no plans to prosecute pot dispensaries that are operating legally under state laws in California and a dozen other states -- a development that medical marijuana advocates and civil libertarians hailed as a sweeping change in federal drug policy. [Los Angeles Times]
This should remove doubt once and for all about the direction the new administration is heading with regards to medical marijuana. There's been some confusion about this, but Holder himself has been consistent in maintaining that medical marijuana providers operating legally under state law will be left alone.
The biggest remaining question is what will become of unresolved criminal cases initiated during the Bush administration. Charlie Lynch, whose recent federal conviction has become a national controversy, will be sentenced next week. Lynch and others like him are lingering casualties in a war that's been called off at the highest levels of government. The president and attorney general are on the right track, but the job isn’t done until the innocent victims of the war on medical marijuana are set free.
Looking for the easiest way to join the anti-drug war movement? You've found it!
This is very good news
I am moderately optimistic about this one. The states which have enacted protections for their medical marijuana users can now feel a bit more relaxed in their decisions to be humane, and such humanity may well catch on.
SmileySam
It's clear that the Los Angeles US Atty is going to use the lie that Charles was selling to minors to not have to deal with his case in any real way. Charles following Ca. Law sold to those 18 and above, or with parental permission and a Dr.s rec., but the US Atty played games using the Federal law of a minor being anyone under 21. Of course that is ridiculous since we send men and women under 21 to fight our wars and die for us daily. Still this is the type of game that we will continue to see used as a excuse not to free Charles.
Lest anyone forgets, the Judge in Charles case banned any talk of Medical Marijuana or Ca. Law, making it impossible for fair trial to have taken place. The same Judge banned about half of Charlies witnesses for the same reason. Why the Court of Appeals refused a new trial is about politics, not the law. Until Charles gets a new and fair trial, or the case is thrown out altogether, no one is as safe as they might think they are. Don't fall into that trap.
Common Fed Excuse
Seems that the DEA usually labels its targets as"illegal" and "drug dealers" to justify its terrorism. Holder is only promising to do more of the same. Only fools will believe this propaganda disinformation and expose themselves. DEA will always play the willing partner to county law enforcement cowboys with personal issues.
demonstrations?
California needs to have mass demonstration as on this "Lynching"! His hometown, and wherever the federal court is held, would be the most important places to expose ourselves. Why couldn't it happen? I bet the media would be a little more receptive, now. So far as the alleged act of selling to 18-21 year olds, it is not illegal understate laws, so the feds have no case for that, either! He needs exonerated. I don't want to use "pardon", because he did nothing wrong! The federal court building would make a great camping spot, would it not?
I would hope that all concerned would realize that violence would help nothing. But, for the most part, we do. I would only worry that, we would get some police subterfuge to incite a riot!
What about the suppliers?
Did not Holder say that the Feds would still target suppliers?
So all they have to do is surveill the dispensaries to target the suppliers, who get busted (kidnapped-robbed-extorted) and the dispensaries go out of business from lack of product.
How 'lovely'!
legally???
as much as i hate to say it he doesnt have a decent defense, he violated federal law, and is prosecuted under federal law, laws in the state of california have nothing to do with federal law, it doesnt matter if something if illegal or legal under state law for there to be a prosecution in federal court
"Did not Holder say that the Feds would still target suppliers?"
so you've never heard of smuggling it?
i think we can manage to squeeze a little through the cracks, if the dispensary is legally protected, then how would an unmanned shipment to them be prosecuted? legal loopholes and mumbo jumbo can be taken advantage of by both sides
what i dont like to see is this guy whining about the feds busting his ass after he surely knew the feds were gonna bust his ass sooner or later, he was aware that he was prosecutable, he should had waited, but nevertheless he shouldnt whine about getting what he got, i was busted in '95, manufacture and delivery, and i knew what i was doing was illegal even though i knew the law was fundamentally wrong i never whined about getting locked up because of it, I knew the risks, so did he, and i really dont think he's going to get a bailout from the current administration since he committed the crime under the previous administration
Don't be a blockhead!
Unlike you, Mr Lynch was following state law. He is being held responsible for selling to underage patients (18-21). This age level should not be illegal, at the federal level, either! So many people are willing to give up their rights, when the feds insist they rule over the states. This, as far as I am concerned, is a violation of states' rights. And, anything less than exoneration, of Mr Lynch, is just a legal game, played by the federal prosecutors. It may be the letter of the law, but it should not the intention of the law!
Things, seem to, have, really, changed. That should enter into the decisions on his sentencing.
I say let him whine, about if, he wants. There are a lot of us that are sympathetic to his misery!
Chuck Grassley
and other drug warriors on the senate Judiciary Committee will make a big thing of the change in medical pot policy at the confirmation hearings for Kerlikowske. I am sure of this. So don't get too attached to the policy yet because the administration could be pushed to back-peddle big time.
I have tried to get reform leaders to prepare for this eventuality with a preemptive campaign to push congress into legalization as an on-the-spot counter position so that Obama could throw it into the lap of congress. Drug reform leaders just said no.
So be ready for the drug warriors to attack the policy and Kerlikowske without the reform movement leadership having any organized response. We could have been ready with a good hard push at the congress but reform leaders just said no.
Why?
I'm really curious as to why they would refuse to act on your suggestion, it was a good suggestion. What were their reasons for choosing to not act pre-eminently? It is not logical.
I'm pro-choice on EVERYTHING!
Post new comment