Medical Marijuana Community Decries Federal Threats Against Public Officials
Justice Department policy "clarification" pushes legal patients into unregulated, illicit marketsWashington, DC -- Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole
issued a controversial memorandum Wednesday in an apparent attempt
to clarify federal policy with regard to medical marijuana. Calling
marijuana "a dangerous drug," Cole's memo threatened enforcement
actions against "Persons who are in the business of cultivating,
selling or distributing marijuana, and those who knowingly
facilitate such activities," including local and state officials.
The memo further underscored that "State laws or local ordinances
are not a defense to civil or criminal enforcement of federal law."
Medical marijuana advocates are decrying this new policy as a
retreat from President Obama's pledge that he was "not going to be
using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws,"
and from the spirit of a previous memo issued by Deputy Attorney
General David Ogden in October 2009. "It is disingenuous of the
Obama Administration to say it is not attacking patients while
obstructing the implementation of local and state medical marijuana
laws," said Steph Sherer, Executive Director of Americans for Safe
Access, the country's largest medical marijuana advocacy group. "The
president is using intimidation tactics to stop elected officials
from serving their constituents, thereby pushing patients into the
illicit market."
Despite the wording of the Ogden memo that federal resources should
not be used for "individuals whose actions are in clear and
unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the
medical use of marijuana," Cole claimed that his memo was consistent
with that of his predecessor. However, patient advocates are
questioning what they call glaring inconsistencies. "How are federal
threats against local and state officials who are adopting public
health measures warranted at any time, let alone at a time of fiscal
constraint?" asked Sherer. The Cole memo rejects attempts by state
governments to design laws under which medical marijuana providers
could be in "clear and unambiguous compliance."
Over the past few weeks, U.S. Attorneys have sent letters
threatening public officials from at least 10 states with criminal
prosecution if they implement laws regulating the production and
distribution of medical marijuana. The Cole memo appeared to be an
attempt to reinforce those threats. "At the same time the federal
government is recognizing the rights of people living with cancer
and other debilitating diseases to use medical marijuana, it is also
denying them the means to obtain it legally," continued Sherer.
Unwilling to accept this level of hostility from the federal
government, patient advocates are putting energy behind a number of
initiatives, including a pending petition to reschedule marijuana
from its current status as a drug with no medical value, and a
number of Congressional bills that aim to reduce federal
restrictions on how states implement their own medical marijuana
laws. "Until states and localities have the ability to adopt and
enforce their own laws regarding the production and distribution of
medical cannabis, federal interference will continue to undermine
the rights of the very patients the Justice Department purports to
recognize," emphasized Sherer.
Sixteen states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical
marijuana for patients with physician approval. Laws regulating
dispensaries exist in 10 states -- Arizona, California, Colorado,
Delaware, Maine, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island, and
Vermont -- but some states have suspended those laws as a result of
federal intimidation. Notably, the states of Vermont and Delaware
recently stood up to federal threats and defied such intimidation by
passing laws licensing the distribution of medical marijuana.
Further information:
DOJ memorandum from June 29, 2011: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/James_Cole_memo_06_29_2011.pdf
DOJ memorandum from October , 2009: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192