WASHINGTON --- The Associated Press broke a
story late Sunday that the U.S. Department of Justice will be issuing new guidelines Monday to U.S. Attorneys regarding an official policy toward
medical marijuana. While the guidelines are yet to be
released, advocates are hailing this formal policy as a major victory in the effort to allow states to implement medical marijuana laws without interference from the federal
government.
Furthermore, it indicates a willingness by the Obama Administration to establish sound medical marijuana policies, such as changing federal
law, which currently criminalizes all
marijuana use, including medical use, and expanding research into this promising therapeutic substance.
"This is a huge victory for medical marijuana patients," said Steph Sherer, Executive Director of
Americans for Safe Access, the nationwide medical marijuana advocacy organization. "We will continue to work with the Obama Administration and the U.S. Congress to establish a comprehensive national policy, but it's good to know that in the meantime states can implement medical marijuana laws without interference from the federal government."
As promising as the new guidelines seem, certain questions remain, like whether U.S. Attorneys will be instructed to allow federal defendants the use of medical evidence and state law compliance in their federal criminal cases. In addition, the Associated Press reports that the new guidelines "urges prosecutors to pursue
marijuana cases which involve...selling pot to minors" and other federal crimes, which are not considered
illegal under certain state medical marijuana laws.
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content, so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
NEWS:Medical Marijuana Advocates Hail New Fed Guidelines as Big Win
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I don't understand how this is a victory.
The details were not released ... How can there be a victory when we don't even know the new federal position?
- SolarSanitizer
October 19, 2009 12:57AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
They Jumped The Gun
but it looks like they were correct in being happy, assuming the AP is correct:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_MEDICAL_MARIJUANA?SITE=TXKER&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
I'm uncomfortable on this just from a principle stance. We are a federalist government . Federal law hold supremacy over state law. To not enforce federal law because of conflicting state law just sits badly with me from a precedent stand point. I feel like if the administration doesn't want these prosecuted, rather than doing it the cheap way they should push to make a law that gives state authority over these matters - or at the very least try that first before going this route.
Granted, I feel that the many overburdened DA's office have better cases to deal with; I would never send out a memo saying "don't prosecute this crime ." And I doubt this is really about alleviating the overburdening of our DA's anyway since they are plenty of other crimes that could be cited. Basically, this is the administrations way of taking the cheap way out on this issue while still appeasing some of their base on the issue of medical marijuana (strong advocates,tend to be more on the liberal side in my experience, but I don't have stats to support that).
- caelum
October 19, 2009 1:19AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I feel strange about it also.
Seems like Obama's administration is saying in effect: Go ahead and allow it, just not officially." Seems that the rules could change with the political winds.
It is like a cop offering to drag race with you. Sure you are ' safe ' during the race, unofficially; but will he arrest you and impound your car if you beat him?
Smells like shady Chicago politics to me.
- SolarSanitizer
October 19, 2009 2:10AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The U.S. is not exactly a Federalist Gov't
States have rights as well. Each state is free to pass their own laws. Even those laws that conflict with the Federal Governments policies. In fact, states do this all the time. States are free to change or amend laws at the local level. If the two groups disagree, then it is up to the courts to decide which side must comply or not. Big Brother often throws its weight around but eventually it is the will of the people that must prevail. As it often does.
With these Checks and Balances in place our country often moves forward with bigger and better ideals. Change is the hallmark of our institution, it is the biggest reason why we no longer have slavery. As we learn and grow we become enlightened.
Good Day!
- tatoo1fresh
October 19, 2009 4:52AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Put the drug dealing criminals out of business
Freedom-loving Americans would be wise to support an approach allowing individuals to grow a little marijuana for personal use. It will put the illegal drug dealers out of business in a year. Limit the size of the growing area or the number of plants, and put a small user-fee on it to cover administrative costs, something like a fishing license.
One possibility:$100 per year for a permit to cultivate a dozen plants.
It's a win-win.
- Concerned Parent
October 19, 2009 8:14AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
prohibition or crime?
Our elected legislators have allowed a federal bureaucracy to become so powerful that they could be causing the unnecessary deaths of American citizens.
It is mandated by congress that the ONDCP refuse and refute any clinical or scientific proof of marijuana as a medicine or recommends that marijuana be moved from schedule I. They are required to fight legalization by any means necessary.
The DEA is the main law enforcement in the federal government for interdiction and enforcement of federal drug laws . They are also the agency charged with the final approval of any studies or clinical testing of marijuana.
As of this date,they have routinely refused all applications trying to prove any medical uses of marijuana,in any form,except to the pharmaceutical companies,(Marinol).
The pharmaceutical companies also have several more medicines in various stages of testing,that are either derived from or are synthetically produced because the chemical compounds that are naturally in marijuana have shown to have medicinal properties.
Yet the ONDCP still claims that marijuana has no medicinal uses.
Every medical evaluation that congress has ordered,since 1972,has stated that marijuana is a possible therapeutic medicine and has recommended that it be removed from schedule I ,and they have refused to listen to the doctors and scientists.
Now there are four studies,one paid for by the ONDCP budget ,that has stated that marijuana in it's natural form shows
cancer blocking properties and may prove to be a cure for some cancers.
They are still refusing to reschedule marijuana so scientific testing can be done to find out if we are possibly prohibiting a natural cancer blocker.
Any study that the DEA approves now,with their history of and continued anti-marijuana campaign,and a federal budget in the billions riding on the findings of such a study.would be tainted.
They are required by law, to lie if necessary,to keep protecting America,even if it kills us..
The pharmaceutical companies are trying to synthesize and extract the medical compounds from marijuana,so they can put it in a pill,to sell you,but the plant already has the compounds in it,safely. Big pharmacy's one attempt at synthetic thc,marinol,
has been listed as the cause of death four times,and only been used by a very few patients. Marijuana has been used by millions,with real thc in it,and never been listed as a cause of death. And the same results may occur with the new medicines,derived from or copying compounds from pot.
Every day that goes by that they delay the testing to see if marijuana blocks cancer,may be allowing people too contract cancer that could have been blocked or treated with marijuana
and it is a dangerous game they are playing with peoples lives
just too protect who?
Whether marijuana blocks cancer 62% as claimed in one study,or even 1/2 that amount,wouldn't it be better to block cancer than treat it. And big pharmacy has no cancer blocking medicines,and there are none going through any clinical testing
but they are working on some more cancer treatments, using cannibinoids that are in marijuana.
Pharmaceutical companies are suits and ties,not caregivers or even doctors,they are after the buck,for the buck and of the buck. They don't want cancer blocked,or cured,they make billions treating it.
Someone STOP this INSANITY
The above policy is now on paper instead of just hinted at on tv. That took 8 months too get. Now how long will it take congress to remove marijuana from shedule 1? How do you have a medical policy for a schedule 1 drug that has no medical applications?
They have only taken 3 or 4 months too write a national health plan,that is still being argued over,but it took 8 months for the Justice Department,whom I assume has attorney's working there,to write a medical marijuana policy,,,simply amazing!
A further note about cancer blocking,American's have a 1 in 3 chance of contracting some form of cancer,while in India,where cannibus has been used since before written history,marijuana has been used for food ,medicine and rcreational,citizens have a 1 in 10 chance of contracting cancer.. You would think that one of the cancer researching groups would at least be saying something about that.
- Clay
October 19, 2009 10:36AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.