The only thing that the memo does is set priorities, and establish guidelines as to how to utilize resources.
Here read it yourself then tell me where they said they "will not prosecute under federal law":
Since you probably will not pick up on the relevant parts:
As a general matter, pursuit of these priorities should not focus federal resources in your States on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana. For example, prosecution of individuals... ...who use marijuana... ...consistent with applicable state law... ...is unlikely to be an efficient use of limited federal resources.Indeed, this memorandum does not alter in any way the Department’s authority to enforce federal lawAlso of relevance is the fact that the DOJ maintains a strategic plan on how to carry out their mission. Part of the strategic plan is conveying where or how to allocate resources.This guidance regarding resource allocation does not “legalize” marijuana or provide a legal defense to a violation of federal law, nor is it intended to create any privileges... ...Rather, this memorandum is intended solely as a guide to the exercise of investigative and prosecutorial discretion.
here from the DOJ strategic plan under the DOJ goals and objectives section Strategic Plan 2007-2012:
from the same section of the strategic plan (goals):Integrity.
Our leadership role and the funds entrusted to us by the taxpaying public demand that we maintain the highest levels of integrity and trustworthiness. This affects not only the way we carry ourselves as representatives of the law, but the manner in which we manage the resources entrusted to us to carry out our mission.
The DOJ just issued guidance in the manner in which [they] manage the resources entrusted to [them] to carry out [their] mission, and effectively pursue their strategic goals. Not the first time this has happened, and certainly will not be the last.
...2.4 Reduce the threat, trafficking, use, and related violence of illegal drugs
They made a decision that resources to reduce the threat, trafficking, use, and related violence of illegal drugs were better focused where the states and the DOJ were in agreement, and that their strategy is best accomplished by maintaining the good will of the peoples and the states by not wasting resources where the people and the state do not feel there is a crime.
They made a strategic decision, and personally I think it was an excellent strategic decision. So long as there is a prohibition, and we have finite resources, then it is vital that strategic decisions set priorities so that limited resources are used prosecuting those that are of the most harm to society. That is how justice is supposed to work.
Last edited by marduc; 10-20-09 at 04:59 PM.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
Drugs are bad, prohibition is worse
Want to add that I'm not attributing this logic to you, Goobie, but that's just how I feel on the issue of the Commerce Clause.
Not sure how you think this says anything different.As a general matter, pursuit of these priorities should not focus federal resources in your States on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana. For example, prosecution of individuals... ...who use marijuana... ...consistent with applicable state law... ...is unlikely to be an efficient use of limited federal resources.
'if a state does not make this illegal, you should not prosecute these offenses in that state under federal law'.
Medicinal marijuana is still illegal under federal law.
How/why does a state making it legal change that?
If it doesnt change that, then what argument is there that, because of it being legal under state law, it shoudl not be prosecuted under federal law?
If 'effective resource management' is the REAL issue, why not simply not prosecute it in ANY state?
Everyone who thinks marijuana should be legalized smokes it.