A positive for state's rights!

[charby]

Doesn't really matter your opinion on medical usage of marijuana but latest Obama statement puts one in favor of state's rights.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091019/D9BE5D2G0.html

Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy

Oct 19, 8:07 AM (ET)

By DEVLIN BARRETT
WASHINGTON (AP) - Federal drug agents won't pursue pot-smoking patients or their sanctioned suppliers in states that allow medical marijuana, under new legal guidelines to be issued Monday by the Obama administration.

Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state law.

The guidelines to be issued by the department do, however, make it clear that agents will go after people whose marijuana distribution goes beyond what is permitted under state law or use medical marijuana as a cover for other crimes, the officials said.

The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.

Fourteen states allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

California is unique among those for the widespread presence of dispensaries - businesses that sell marijuana and even advertise their services. Colorado also has several dispensaries, and Rhode Island and New Mexico are in the process of licensing providers, according to the Marijuana Policy Project, a group that promotes the decriminalization of marijuana use.

Attorney General Eric Holder said in March that he wanted federal law enforcement officials to pursue those who violate both federal and state law, but it has not been clear how that goal would be put into practice.

A three-page memo spelling out the policy is expected to be sent Monday to federal prosecutors in the 14 states, and also to top officials at the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration.

The memo, the officials said, emphasizes that prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which cases to pursue, and says it is not a good use of federal manpower to prosecute those who are without a doubt in compliance with state law.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the legal guidance before it is issued.

"This is a major step forward," said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project. "This change in policy moves the federal government dramatically toward respecting scientific and practical reality."

At the same time, the officials said, the government will still prosecute those who use medical marijuana as a cover for other illegal activity. The memo particularly warns that some suspects may hide old-fashioned drug dealing or other crimes behind a medical marijuana business.

In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or involvement in other crimes.

And while the policy memo describes a change in priorities away from prosecuting medical marijuana cases, it does not rule out the possibility that the federal government could still prosecute someone whose activities are allowed under state law.

The memo, officials said, is designed to give a sense of prosecutorial priorities to U.S. attorneys in the states that allow medical marijuana. It notes that pot sales in the United States are the largest source of money for violent Mexican drug cartels, but adds that federal law enforcement agencies have limited resources.

Medical marijuana advocates have been anxious to see exactly how the administration would implement candidate Barack Obama's repeated promises to change the policy in situations in which state laws allow the use of medical marijuana.

Soon after Obama took office, DEA agents raided four dispensaries in Los Angeles, prompting confusion about the government's plans.

[41magsnub]

As a person who supports state rights and whose father is undergoing chemo and lost his appetite I think this is a great thing.

[AZRedhawk44]

I see nothing in the story that implies the BHO administration is supportive of states' rights.

I do, however, see an intent to placate a support base for the BHO campaign:  pot users or supporters.

Pot users or supporters = hippies + libertarians + anarchists (who are closer to closet communists) + states rights supporters.  A very eclectic support base for legalized marijuana that tends to lean mostly democratic, tempered by the libertarian (whose votes are arguably wasted on 5% or lesser candidates) and states rights supporters.

The Obama administration has no demonstrated respect for states' rights at this point.

The memo, the officials said, emphasizes that prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which cases to pursue, and says it is not a good use of federal manpower to prosecute those who are without a doubt in compliance with state law.

Use of manpower is the argument.  Not legitimacy of law or 10th amendment principles or other legal opinion.  Just a function of available resources.

[charby]

I see nothing in the story that implies the BHO administration is supportive of states' rights.

The guidelines to be issued by the department do, however, make it clear that agents will go after people whose marijuana distribution goes beyond what is permitted under state law or use medical marijuana as a cover for other crimes, the officials said.

Here it is just not spelled out as State Rights as some would like to see it word for word.

[El Tejon]

A victory for federal pandering.

[Fjolnirsson]

While I do think pot should be legal, I see this move as merely a way to free up resources which can now be used to harass prosecute gun owners evil, racist, bitter clingers.

[AZRedhawk44]

The guidelines to be issued by the department do, however, make it clear that agents will go after people whose marijuana distribution goes beyond what is permitted under state law or use medical marijuana as a cover for other crimes, the officials said.

Here it is just not spelled out as State Rights as some would like to see it word for word.

Mmmm... nested quotes.  I love it.

That would then be a violation of state law.  Enforceable by state authorities.

But... we have federal authorities nosing in.  They're just cherry-picking enforcement of particular situations to appease the supporters of those in power.

Still see no States' Rights angle to this.  Fed enforcement <> States' Rights.

[grampster]

Pot smokers are mostly democrats?  '"A very eclectic support base for legalized marijuana that tends to lean mostly democratic,..."

Everybody I know/knew that smoked a bit of weed, except one, were Republicans.
In fact those that I knew that grew it, were Repubs as well.  Businessmen, you know...capitalists.

[AZRedhawk44]

Pot smokers are mostly democrats?  '"A very eclectic support base for legalized marijuana that tends to lean mostly democratic,..."

Everybody I know/knew that smoked a bit of weed, except one, were Republicans.
In fact those that I knew that grew it, were Repubs as well.  Businessmen, you know...capitalists.

I'm 31, and I've only known cannibis consumers for the last 15 years or so.  That being said, they've all leaned left.  Felt entitled to something.  Blamed republicans for any oppression they felt they were subjected to.  Believed in enforced "fairness."

While that mindset tends to get focused on college-aged folks and that could be the cause of my prejudices on the matter... I have yet to see major republican-aligned pushes for legalization of anything currently prohibited.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Not sure how this is a pro-states-rights development.  Obama decided he's going to ignore certain laws he doesn't like.  El T nailed it, it's just pandering.

I don't see this as substantively different from any of the other laws Presidents routinely find it politically expedient to ignore.  Illegal immigration rushes to mind.

[seeker_two]

I do, however, see an intent to placate a support base for the BHO campaign:  pot users or supporters.

Agreed....this is to buy back some cheap popularity points from the ultra-liberal base....see if he feels the same way about Montana's recent gun laws....

[El Tejon]

Everybody I know/knew that smoked a bit of weed, except one, were Republicans.

Marijuana encourages filth and sloth thus it has to be a Democrat drug. 

To paraphrase Nick Griffin, I am against any drug that encourages people to take their shoes off.

[grampster]

Tecumpseh had a problem with pot smokers back in the day.  Claimed all they wanted to do was lay around and eat, not push the white man back into the sea.

That was a bit before there were very many states worried about rights.

[jackdanson]

Marijuana encourages filth and sloth thus it has to be a Democrat drug.

uh-huh.

I've met people of both stripes who were users.  There is also a difference between being against something and wanting it to be illegal.  I am against infidelity, but that doesn't mean I want a law against it.

[El Tejon]

Tecumpseh had a problem with pot smokers back in the day.  Claimed all they wanted to do was lay around and eat, not push the white man back into the sea.

Yes, I walked by his mural in the courthouse today.  It depicts a bunch of stoners getting their asses kicked by the Indiana Militia.

Sorry, Chief, learn to fight.

[MicroBalrog]

This is a good thing. Take it from someone who suffers from chronic pain.

Now, my pain is not - at least not often - OH GOD THE HORROR horrible. But I know full well it will get worse, and worse, over the years. One day I may need this.

But not arresting a small subset of people who use (or pretend to use) weed for horrible pain is not OMG LEGALIZING WEED.

[sanglant]

This is a good thing. Take it from someone who suffers from chronic pain.

Now, my pain is not - at least not often - OH GOD THE HORROR horrible. But I know full well it will get worse, and worse, over the years. One day I may need this.

But not arresting a small subset of people who use (or pretend to use) weed for horrible pain is not OMG LEGALIZING WEED.

have you tried stadol yet? it's a real barack now oxycotin works pretty good for awhile

[Balog]

Marijuana encourages filth and sloth thus it has to be a Democrat drug. 

To paraphrase Nick Griffin, I am against any drug that encourages people to take their shoes off.

You're a teetotaler then?

[Gewehr98]

Word to the wise - be very careful answering Balog's question.

IOW, it's a trap, and he's used it here before. 

[sanglant]

You're a teetotaler then?

yes, i'm a tea drinker. you got a problem with that bub?



 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Word to the wise - be very careful answering Balog's question.

IOW, it's a trap, and he's used it here before. 

Not very effectively...

[lupinus]

so did they change the law or choose to ignore it?

If they changed the law, great.  If they simply choose to ignore it then it's BS.

[Perd Hapley]

You're a teetotaler then?

I am, but mainly to keep the wife happy.   

[Strings]

And here I thought you had stopped drinking to avoid any more pictures in lingerie...

[Marnoot]

And here I thought you had stopped drinking to avoid any more pictures in lingerie...

Ewwww. Pictures of fistful in lingerie? Whatever floats your boat, man...