December 2, 2012

"Marijuana... is still illegal under federal law. State officials say the Justice Department is creating confusion..."

"... by remaining silent about what steps it may take in Washington and Colorado, which passed initiatives in November legalizing the manufacturing, distribution and possession of up to an ounce of marijuana."
After his state approved the initiative, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) called Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and wrote him a letter asking for guidance about how the federal government will react to the state’s new law.

“We need to know whether the federal government will take legal action to block the implementation of Amendment 64, or whether it will seek to prosecute grow and retail operations,” Hickenlooper wrote. He also asked Holder if Justice will prosecute Colorado state employees who regulate and oversee the growing and distribution of marijuana.
What a mess!

27 comments:

Sofa King said...

Since my current M.O. is to assume the worst and then be pleasantly surprised if it doesn't happen, I will predict that Obama will use his E.O. powers to order federal law enforcement to selectively not enforce certain laws pertaining to this subject. This allows Obama to bask in the glory while deflecting the criticism, and accumulates more power to him while simultaneously giving the finger to Congress.

Ironclad said...

I am certain that Obama will ask Congress to legalize pot in his State of the Union to eliminate this "confusion." I mean the Federal government always accedes to the rights of the States in these matters - right?

Laws like this that are passed in "progressive" states are always correct. It's just the ones in the disloyal (read R states) that must be quashed by Holder and his merry crew.

leslyn said...

I don't see how this is significantly different from the actions (or non-actions) re medical marijuana laws. The feds warned when they were passed that cultivation and possession of medical marijuana was illegal under federal law--then elected to do nothing. That predated this administration, which has changed nothing.

The only mess is local, due to the changing attitudes of municipalities which have gone back and forth on regulation.

LYNNDH said...

BO and Holder will do nothing. They thought start taking vacations here to Colorado to get that Rocky Mtn High.

Jay Vogt said...

Surely now that President Obama has won his reelection and realizes that he has no reason to hedge his policy formation for further electoral purposes he will give timely, clear and actionable direction as to his administration's stance on the proper application of federal law and his administration's ensuing plans to deploy the assets of the federal government to affect that application. He'll do that because that's what leaders do.

The fact that he's so smart and was a constitutional law instructor at one of our country's most prestigious law colleges and is thereby so well versed in just this kind of thorny state's rights conflict will only make it easier for him to exercise his natural leadership qualities on this issue.

Leland said...

I thought the Arizona decision made it clear that the states are not to encroach on enforcement of federal laws and thus burdening the federal justice system. I'd say the only solution is for more DEA agents in those states enforcing federal law.

Chip Ahoy said...

It's how they want it, a mess.

Better control when you can be had for anything.

Then you defend legally with your own money and they prosecute you with your money.

ambienisevil said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sofa King said...

"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken. You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against—then you’ll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We’re after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you’d better get wise to it. There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there it that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted—and you create a nation of lawbreakers—and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system, Mr. Rearden, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with."

Trashhauler said...

How does the Colorado law treat people who supply marijuana to minors?

edutcher said...

Choom wants it all for himself.

Some Seppo said...

The Feds will do what they did to Cali "Medical" weed dispensaries. Federal jury nullification will be the only way to assert 10th Amendment rights.

Which makes me wonder if Holder will ask for change of venue for all of his weed show trials to states where it's illegal. Nah, he's too (caution, racism ahead) incompetent.

Lyssa said...

I really, really do not like the idea of the feds selectively enforcing the law (or not, depending on the day). Either pass a law that says that certain states are exempt, or don't.

Matthew Sablan said...

Is it sad that I expect selective enforcement?

Matthew Sablan said...

"The feds warned when they were passed that cultivation and possession of medical marijuana was illegal under federal law--then elected to do nothing."

-- Incorrect. An inconsistent standard has been applied (especially in California) with no firm, easy way to understand when the federal authorities will jail people, with the best answer I've seen is: "Whenever they need an easy bust."

EMD said...

Scott Adams would like to know, too.

Bryan C said...

What? The Obama administration causing confusion with selective and inconsistent application of federal law?

The deuce you say!

Bryan C said...

"The feds warned when they were passed that cultivation and possession of medical marijuana was illegal under federal law--then elected to do nothing. That predated this administration, which has changed nothing."

To the contrary, the Obama administration has been much more aggressive than Bush was.

drozz said...

i'm pretty sure no federal government likes it when a state decides to usurp some power.

Matthew Sablan said...

"To the contrary, the Obama administration has been much more aggressive than Bush was."

-- This is why any Republican who ever gets elected president should change their party to Democrat, and simply pursue the exact same policy they would have before. Simply having a -D instead of a -R protects you from so much.

TMink said...

A 10th Ammendment case if ever I heard one.

Trey

ndspinelli said...

leslyn, Eric Holder has taken draconian steps in California against legit growers and sellers of cannabis. Even some local cops have been outraged.

Robert Cook said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...

Obama has been more repressive than Bush in more ways than just his persecution of dispensers of medical marijuana.

Look at how he treats whistle blowers: more use of the 1917 Espionage Act than all previous presidents combined.

I'm surprised you guys aren't cheering Obama every day you wake up...he's more Republican than the Republicans!

Annie Johnson said...

Although I believe that legalizing Marijuana for medicinal purposes is a necessity, I think that this opens the door for increasing problems with controlling the drug problem in our nation. How do you fight a drug war when some of it is legal, depending on it's use?

city said...

thanks for sharing..

kanchan tyagi said...

Really thankful to you for posting this blog,I really like this type of blog in which we can easily get much more info related to indoor weeds so really thankful to you for posting this blog. cannabis growing is illegal in some countries but I think is not too much bad plant.We have some positive effects from this.