Federal government won't block Colorado marijuana legalization

  Quote

 

The federal government, at least initially, will not stand in the way of marijuana legalization in Colorado or Washington.

In a memo sent out Thursday to federal prosecutors, the Department of Justice said it will not make it a priority to block marijuana-legalization laws in Colorado or Washington or close down recreational marijuana stores, so long as the stores abide by state regulations.

The guidance — which was sent to prosecutors in all 50 states and applies to medical marijuana businesses in addition to Colorado and Washington's forthcoming recreational marijuana businesses — is a significant rewrite of the federal approach to marijuana in states that have loosened laws around cannabis. The guidance says prosecutors should not make it a priority to target marijuana users or marijuana business — either medical or recreational — so long as they are in compliance with state laws and not violating eight key federal priorities. Those priorities include such things as keeping marijuana away from kids and keeping criminal gangs from involvement in the marijuana industry.

"The Department's guidance in this memorandum rests on its expectation that states and local governments that have enacted laws authorizing marijuana-related conduct will implement strong and effective regulatory enforcement systems that will address the threat those state laws could pose to public safety, public health, and other law enforcement interests," the guidance said.

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, who was told about the guidance by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder on Thursday morning, said the federal priorities reflect the concerns Colorado officials had when setting up the regulatory system for recreational marijuana stores.

"Today's announcement shows the federal government is respecting the will of Colorado voters," Hickenlooper said in a statement. "We share with the federal government its priorities going forward."

Colorado marijuana advocate Mason Tvert welcomed the new guidelines.

"It's a major and historic step toward ending marijuana prohibition," Tvert said. "It sends a clear signal that states are free to determine their own policies when it comes to marijuana."

But Kevin Sabet, a former official with the Office of National Drug Control Policy, said the guidance is not a federal endorsement of marijuana legalization. Instead, he said, the guidance still expresses significant concerns about the impact legalization will have on communities and, especially, kids.

"This is not the end of the story," he said. "This is the beginning."

Thursday's revealing of the guidance brings to an end a nine-month waiting game in Colorado. Voters in the state legalized marijuana use and limited marijuana retail sales in 2012 by passing Amendment 64.

During that time, federal officials mulled whether to file lawsuits against Colorado and Washington, arguing that federal law trumped state law on marijuana. Meanwhile, lawmakers and regulators in Colorado began writing the rules for recreational marijuana stores, even though federal law enforcement agents could have decided to raid the stores once they open in January.

The guidance says states with liberalized marijuana laws are expected to establish strict regulations to keep pot out of the hands of kids and to keep criminal groups from moving into the legal marijuana industry. States will be expected to have active and effective enforcement efforts for the regulations. If they fall short, the guidance says, the Department of Justice may move to block the state laws.

"A system ... must not only contain robust controls and procedures on paper; it must also be effective in practice," the guidance warns.

The guidance does not change federal law regarding marijuana. Cannabis will remain a Schedule I controlled substance — the most tightly regulated type of drug under federal law — and people who use, grow or sell marijuana remain at risk for federal prosecution.

The guidance instead speaks to prioritization of federal resources and lists eight federal priorities that prosecutors should consider when deciding whether to undertake a prosecution. They are:

• Preventing marijuana distribution to minors

• Preventing money from sales from going to criminal groups

• Preventing the diversion of marijuana from states where it is legal to states where it is illegal

• Preventing criminal groups from using state laws as cover for trafficking of other illegal drugs

• Preventing violence and the use of illegal firearms

• Preventing drugged driving

• Preventing the growing of marijuana on public lands

• Preventing marijuana possession or use on federal property

Contrary to previous DOJ guidance, the size or profitability of legal marijuana businesses can no longer be the only factor in assessing whether they should be a target for prosecution.

Colorado U.S. Attorney John Walsh said his office would focus most closely on cases involving marijuana trafficking to children, cases involving violence related to marijuana and cases of marijuana sales conducted by cartels or street gangs.

"The key federal interests set forth in that guidance are also key interests of the people of Colorado," Walsh said in a statement.

Sabet said the guidance puts a heavy burden on states to show they can loosen marijuana laws responsibly.

"This is not a free pass for states," he said. "I think they're going to have to be very careful in setting up their regimes."

Many of the priority areas — including concerns over drugged driving and distribution to minors — were things heavily on the minds of state lawmakers and regulatory officials as they created a new set of rules this year for recreational marijuana in Colorado.

Mike Elliott, the executive director of the Medical Marijuana Industry Association, said officials had no explicit guidance from the federal government while setting up the rules but did have hints about the Justice Department's chief concerns. That is one reason why Colorado's new rules — which include a law better defining stoned driving, background checks for people wanting to open marijuana businesses and inventory-tracking requirements for stores — so closely match the federal priorities.

" We've all been working to comply with what we heard they care about," Elliott said. "But a lot of it is common sense, too."

Sean McAllister, an attorney who specializes in marijuana law and also works with the Colorado chapter of NORML, said the guidance appear to give its blessing to Colorado-style marijuana regulation. But, he said, it is also a warning for Colorado regulators — following a scathing audit on the efficacy of the state's medical-marijuana regulations — to make sure the program works.

Still, McAllister said he worries the guidance will lead to over-regulation.

"Too much regulation and too much taxation will undermine the intent of Amendment 64 and keep the black market alive," he said.

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_23973568/federal-government-wont-block-colorado-marijauna-legalization

edit:sorry for bad formatting

Wow, i read a couple of great news headlines today, first MPs vote against Syria military action and then this.

well that's promising news! i'm excited to see how these stores turn out in WA. and i'm very excited to be able to actually shop for the thing i buy most often, lol.

on a probably related note, someone suggested this documentary to me - it's about the 'business of getting high' (illegally) - i have to admit i haven't seen it all yet but thought i'd pass it along:

Obama also said he'd ask the DEA to stop raiding medicinal marijuana dispensaries when he got elected. Yeah, we see how well that worked.

  On 8/30/2013 at 3:11 AM, Hoodie said:

Obama also said he'd ask the DEA to stop raiding medicinal marijuana dispensaries when he got elected. Yeah, we see how well that worked.

if they wanna change their minds then maybe they shouldn't have just told all the lawmakers in all the states that its ok to legalize pot if they want to

next year will probably see a few more states on board

  On 8/30/2013 at 3:11 AM, Hoodie said:

Obama also said he'd ask the DEA to stop raiding medicinal marijuana dispensaries when he got elected. Yeah, we see how well that worked.

Yeah I really don't see Holder or Obama actively advocating for decriminalization. I really think at this point's it's simply "meh, fuck it, we're out of money."

The American public, in all demographics, is becoming increasingly apathetic or flat-out supportive of decriminalizing marijuana - Obama and the Justice Department aren't going to decriminalize it because it will bring the who war on drugs into question too quickly.

Don't get me wrong, this is a step forward, in fact I think we've crossed a threshold and there's no going back, but it's going to be decades, not years, before pot is essentially legal federally. Marijuana is still smuggled in huge numbers along with cocaine, heroin, and meth from overseas.

A lot of it simply has to do with money, and because of that even conservative sheriffs are growing weary of prosecuting weed cases. There's a infamous checkpoint in Texas where the county is literally going broke, because a Federal Border Guard presence forces them to inspect EVERY vehicle travelling through on I-10 (a major highway from El Paso to San Antonio). The local police are used to busting small amounts they simply issue a misdemeanor fine and release everyone the same day. The Border Patrols equipment and search dogs are so good they're actually unable to catch as many large pot hauls and instead 90%+ are for an ounce or less. A liberal journalist who was busted there reported said the local cops were so friendly they actually folded his clothes in his car after inspecting it. If that doesn't highlight the absurdity of it all, I don't know what does.

  On 8/30/2013 at 3:58 AM, joshuatx said:

A liberal journalist who was busted there reported said the local cops were so friendly they actually folded his clothes in his car after inspecting it. If that doesn't highlight the absurdity of it all, I don't know what does.

 

i don't know. if i crumpled up some guys shirt and threw it in the back seat i think my mind would be doing backflips as I lap in bed at night thinking about all the uneven creases i left in my wake that day

Looks like DC will follow Colorado and Wash. and legalize pot for personal possession. The republicans must love that, fuck those rednecks!

http://news.yahoo.com/dc-fast-track-decriminalizing-pot-possession-151045831.html

feds raid colorado pot industry after promising not to intervene

http://benswann.com/feds-raid-colorado-pot-industry-after-promising-not-to-intervene/



its stuff like that convinces me that certain aspects of the US government are just unstoppable juggernauts at this point, too much at stake. the DEA would not survive as an entity if marijuana was not still a top priority. It's almost just like job security.

Governments shit their pants because they see weed as a threat they can't regulate like alcohol. They want to regulate how much dope people put in their joints just like how much alcohol is in a bottle of beer. The loading of the joint is too much in control of the user and it blows the governments mind. They need to be there, hanging over their shoulders, to see the bongs and joints getting loaded, incase the user puts too much in and OD's

Jammy cunts.

lolspected. This admin is all about say one thing and do another. They may not do it today, they may not tomorrow, but eventually on whatever their promise was they're going to fail at people.

more in-depth article on that story:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24570937/feds-involved-raid-at-denver-area-marijuana

and part two:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24580571/fed-raids-colorado-marijuana-businesses-seek-ties-colombian

i'd like to, err uh, wait till all the facts are in, but the feds are well known for being giant dickbags when it comes to states rights and marijuana so i'm not really holding my breath. gonna have to keep up on this story for a few days to find out i guess.

Yeah. Well they did say that proceeds of the sales shouldn't be going to criminals. So this raid might be part of that.

/Sits back on fence, has cushion confiscated off him for jumping the gun.

  On 11/22/2013 at 10:24 PM, John Ehrlichman said:

feds raid colorado pot industry after promising not to intervene

 

http://benswann.com/feds-raid-colorado-pot-industry-after-promising-not-to-intervene/

 

 

 

its stuff like that convinces me that certain aspects of the US government are just unstoppable juggernauts at this point, too much at stake. the DEA would not survive as an entity if marijuana was not still a top priority. It's almost just like job security.

At this point, what bothers me most about this story is that they haven't said which part of the mandate this guy broke. The message that sends is that this will never be a safe profession, no matter how well you adhere to local law. That's power for power's sake.

If they come out and prove the guy was trafficking across state lines, fine. But to renege on a promise like that and offer no justification is the action of a cruel or desperate office. I'm just hoping it's desperate.

i totally saw this coming, even if it happened a lot sooner than i expected. back when the first states started doing this and some word was coming out that the fed/this administration wouldn't intervene, i was saying 'look at the cali dispensaries (which afaik even bush didn't raid), and just be aware that this is on their whim. which can change at any moment.' the key phrase of that article was 'at least initially' right at the front of it. which was like admitting that the whole tone of everything that would follow that phrase, was built on something that was precariously balanced on some statements from a guy who seems to go back on his words just as quickly as any other president has.

but fwiw i don't think it has anything to do with them being afraid of weed because 'they can't regulate it'. if it were legalized, and if companies like marlboro etc were allowed to sell packs of joints, who would bother growing their own? who grows their own tobacco now? why would you do it? they could make it as freely available as cigs or alchyhol, and tax the shit out of it, and make mad loot. you know, that old routine where they say 'we believe this product is bad for you, so we are going to increase taxes on it, instead of outright banning it. and we'll only raise them enough such that you can still afford to keep buying it, and we keep getting money from those sales, but only now it's more money than we were before. because we care about you and your health SO much'.

some people may continue growing their own just as like a hobby or something, but you couldn't compete with a company putting out a packaged product they harvested from vast fields of dope. for all intents and purposes they'd have pretty much complete control over the sale of the vast majority of the plant that was sold, any time any exchanged hands. and they'd get a cut. that's not the reason.

FUCK DARK PEOPLE I WANT MY LEGAL PLANT PAINKILLER

BOMB THE SHIT OUT OF THE BROWNIES AS LONG AS I GET TO EAT WEED BROWNIES

THIS IS MOST IMPORTANT DAMMIT>

  On 11/23/2013 at 8:33 AM, SR4 said:

FUCK DARK PEOPLE I WANT MY LEGAL PLANT PAINKILLER

 

 

BOMB THE SHIT OUT OF THE BROWNIES AS LONG AS I GET TO EAT WEED BROWNIES

 

 

THIS IS MOST IMPORTANT DAMMIT>

More and more I picture your words coming out of the mouth of your avatar.

This is good news. Bravo!

  On 11/23/2013 at 8:33 AM, SR4 said:

FUCK DARK PEOPLE I WANT MY LEGAL PLANT PAINKILLER

 

 

BOMB THE SHIT OUT OF THE BROWNIES AS LONG AS I GET TO EAT WEED BROWNIES

 

 

THIS IS MOST IMPORTANT DAMMIT>

legalizing marijuana would take power out of the hands of the south american cartels, which are currently causing destruction in the region. it would also benefit minorities in our own country who are disproportionately being imprisoned for non-violent crimes.

i don't want anybody to bomb other countries, but that's not really my choice and i don't have any sway over it since our executive office has become disgustingly bloated with power. at least with pot, i can vote on a state level and encourage my friends to sign petitions. i can't, like, sign a petition for obama to pull out of afghanistan since he doesn't really give a FUCK.

|420|KILL|420|MIDDLE|420|EASTERN

|420|CIVILIANS|420|EVERY|420|DAY

*$WAG~$WAG*DRONE MURDERS*$WAG~$WAG*

[xx420BOMB IT FAGGOTxx]

HAHA!

'checkin

  On 11/23/2013 at 4:20 AM, delet... said:

Yeah. Well they did say that proceeds of the sales shouldn't be going to criminals. So this raid might be part of that.

 

/Sits back on fence, has cushion confiscated off him for jumping the gun.

They're only criminals because of stupid laws.

/tautology