• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Huff, puff, pass? AG’s pot fury not echoed by task force

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
17,854
Reaction score
8,331
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
I LOVE this headline. It is a fairly long article but it seems that Jeff Sessions obsession with marijuana is not shared by others in the DoJ

Huff, puff, pass? AG’s pot fury not echoed by task force

WASHINGTON (AP) — The betting was that law-and-order Attorney General Jeff Sessions would come out against the legalized marijuana industry with guns blazing. But the task force Sessions assembled to find the best legal strategy is giving him no ammunition, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

The Task Force on Crime Reduction and Public Safety, a group of prosecutors and federal law enforcement officials, has come up with no new policy recommendations to advance the attorney general’s aggressively anti-marijuana views. The group’s report largely reiterates the current Justice Department policy on marijuana.
(. . .)
Sessions, who has assailed marijuana as comparable to heroin and blamed it for spikes in violence, has been promising to reconsider existing pot policy since he took office six months ago. His statements have sparked both support and worry across the political spectrum as a growing number of states have worked to legalize the drug.

Threats of a federal crackdown have united liberals, who object to the human costs of a war on pot, and some conservatives, who see it as a states’ rights issue. Some advocates and members of Congress had feared the task force’s recommendations would give Sessions the green light to begin dismantling what has become a sophisticated, multimillion-dollar pot industry that helps fund schools, educational programs, and law enforcement. But the tepid nature of the recommendations signals just how difficult it would be to change course on pot.

I think AG Sessions should try smoking some good weed - might change his mind. If nothing else, getting high might loosen up his brain a bit, seems to be in a bit of self-created prison at this time.
 
I think it's up to the congress to make it legal. Sessions is only enforcing the law.

People got so used to Obama doing his on thing with the law, they have forgotten how they work. Congress writes the laws, and if passed, the AG enforces them. That is the way it works in a nation of laws.
 
I think it's up to the congress to make it legal. Sessions is only enforcing the law.

People got so used to Obama doing his on thing with the law, they have forgotten how they work. Congress writes the laws, and if passed, the AG enforces them. That is the way it works in a nation of laws.

I was under the impression that conservatives generally favour "states rights" over "federal oppression" - well, at least they do when it comes to Christians being protected in their bigotry and state control over lands within the state. Looks like some who call themselves conservative actually like federal control if it means those nasty liberals and queers and camel jockeys are the ones suffering the consequences.
 
I was under the impression that conservatives generally favour "states rights" over "federal oppression" - well, at least they do when it comes to Christians being protected in their bigotry and state control over lands within the state. Looks like some who call themselves conservative actually like federal control if it means those nasty liberals and queers and camel jockeys are the ones suffering the consequences.

States' Rights seem to only apply to the rights the Right likes.
 
I LOVE this headline. It is a fairly long article but it seems that Jeff Sessions obsession with marijuana is not shared by others in the DoJ



I think AG Sessions should try smoking some good weed - might change his mind. If nothing else, getting high might loosen up his brain a bit, seems to be in a bit of self-created prison at this time.

The states did pass a law. When those laws conflict with federal law, it is much more complicated than you lay out. In fact, unless those laws violate civil rights, cross state lines or otherwise interfere with Constitutional guidelines, the feds have no jurisdiction in those states.

Federal drug laws are technically only applicable for interstate commerce or border security matters. Intrastate drug use is outside the jurisdiction of the AG.
 
I was under the impression that conservatives generally favour "states rights" over "federal oppression" - well, at least they do when it comes to Christians being protected in their bigotry and state control over lands within the state. Looks like some who call themselves conservative actually like federal control if it means those nasty liberals and queers and camel jockeys are the ones suffering the consequences.

States rights within the framework of federal law.
 
The states did pass a law. When those laws conflict with federal law, it is much more complicated than you lay out. In fact, unless those laws violate civil rights, cross state lines or otherwise interfere with Constitutional guidelines, the feds have no jurisdiction in those states.

Federal drug laws are technically only applicable for interstate commerce or border security matters. Intrastate drug use is outside the jurisdiction of the AG.


Now don't go telling people that. They might not foam at the mouth!
 
The states did pass a law. When those laws conflict with federal law, it is much more complicated than you lay out. In fact, unless those laws violate civil rights, cross state lines or otherwise interfere with Constitutional guidelines, the feds have no jurisdiction in those states.

Federal drug laws are technically only applicable for interstate commerce or border security matters. Intrastate drug use is outside the jurisdiction of the AG.

That "technically only applicable" part wasn't followed by the DEA under Obama or now under Trump

2015 - Caught in the crossfire between state and federal law, dispensary owners in states that have legalized medical cannabis are finding their businesses raided and their products seized.

These stories fit the "interstate commerce" aspect of the growing controversy between the Administration and Congress.
2017 - DEA: Raids Target Group Exporting Colorado Pot

The Senate Just Rejected Jeff Sessions' Attempt To Crack Down On Medical Marijuana
 
I think it's up to the congress to make it legal. Sessions is only enforcing the law.

People got so used to Obama doing his on thing with the law, they have forgotten how they work. Congress writes the laws, and if passed, the AG enforces them. That is the way it works in a nation of laws.

Yes, in theory that is the way it works.... in practicality, however, law and regulatory enforcement are a matter of prioritizing resources.

You really don't want every law enforced. The expense thereof notwithstanding, do you have any idea how many arcane laws remain on the books? There are many states and localities that have laws against unwed sex, sodomy (such as oral sex) and adultery. Do you really want law enforcement on those laws?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...n-sodomy-a-decade-after-court-ruling/7981025/
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/top-craziest-laws-still-on-the-books
The 22 most ridiculous US laws still in effect today. #10 is just crazy... LOL!
Strangest most ridiculous laws in America - Business Insider
 
Last edited:
States' Rights seem to only apply to the rights the Right likes.

States don't have a right to nullify Federal law. That debate was settled in 1865.
 
Yes, in theory that is the way it works.... in practicality, however, law and regulatory enforcement are a matter of prioritizing resources.

Exactly.

And Sessions' priorities are those of someone stuck in the 1950's.
 
I think it's up to the congress to make it legal. Sessions is only enforcing the law.

People got so used to Obama doing his on thing with the law, they have forgotten how they work. Congress writes the laws, and if passed, the AG enforces them. That is the way it works in a nation of laws.

There's a thing called "prosecutorial discretion".



Rigid enforcement of all laws equally has never been required or expected.
 
States don't have a right to nullify Federal law. That debate was settled in 1865.

Nullify? No. Contradict? Pot laws in Colorado, Washington, et.al. say yes.
 
Nullify? No. Contradict? Pot laws in Colorado, Washington, et.al. say yes.

.....

Nullification, in United States constitutional history, is a legal theory that a state has the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law which that state has deemed unconstitutional. The theory of nullification has never been legally upheld by federal courts.[1]

The theory of nullification is based on a view that the States formed the Union by an agreement (or "compact") among the States, and that as creators of the federal government, the States have the final authority to determine the limits of the power of that government. Under this, the compact theory, the States and not the federal courts are the ultimate interpreters of the extent of the federal government's power. Under this theory, the States therefore may reject, or nullify, federal laws that the States believe are beyond the federal government's constitutional powers. The related idea of interposition is a theory that a state has the right and the duty to "interpose" itself when the federal government enacts laws that the state believes to be unconstitutional. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison set forth the theories of nullification and interposition in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions in 1798.
 
jeffersonliberty.jpg
 
It was called The Civil War.

How is that related to intrastate legal marijuana use, sales and growing facilities?

Slavery and the resulting Civil War involved interstate commerce, civil rights violations, and secession. All of which are under federal jurisdiction.
 
I LOVE this headline. It is a fairly long article but it seems that Jeff Sessions obsession with marijuana is not shared by others in the DoJ



I think AG Sessions should try smoking some good weed - might change his mind. If nothing else, getting high might loosen up his brain a bit, seems to be in a bit of self-created prison at this time.

It's all about Sessions and his cronies being in the pocket of the alcohol and tobacco lobby. Both industries stand to lose mucho dinero once pot is legal nationwide. I forgot prisons. Sessions and his cavalcade of knuckle-dragging scum also support harsh sentences for pot use which helps keep prisons occupied. Prisons that are operated now by for-profit organizations. All Session's morale outrage is fake.
 
States' Rights seem to only apply to the rights the Right likes.

This really isn't a state's rights issue. We are signatory to a UN convention that mandates marijuana be a Schedule I drug. That's a treaty obligation that we are required to abide by at least at the federal level.

That said the treaty does have loop holes in it that would allow countries to ignore treaty provisions. Canada has found ways to do that in their effort to legalize marijuana so I'm assuming we can as well.

As well that doesn't necessary mean that Sessions actually has to enforce the law. The executive branch has wide latitude in enforcement priorities.
 

State laws legalizing marijuana do not nullify Federal law. That's a common misconception. Nullifying a federal in this context would mean "The state of Colorado hereby declares that Federal law's prohibiting marijuana use do not apply in Colorado." Colorado has not said that. Colorado has simply chosen to not make marijuana use illegal under Colorado state law. The Feds are still free to enforce the Federal ban in Colorado if they want.
 
Back
Top Bottom