• 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!

Sessions may end Obama era policy that allows for legalization of pot

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
52,009
Reaction score
33,942
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
AP NewsBreak: US to end policy that let legal pot flourish


Well, maybe. We should find out tomorrow for sure:


The people familiar with the plan spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it before an announcement expected Thursday.






Sessions, who has assailed marijuana as comparable to heroin and has blamed it for spikes in violence, had been expected to ramp up enforcement. Pot advocates argue that legalizing the drug eliminates the need for a black market and would likely reduce violence, since criminals would no longer control the marijuana trade.


Comparable to heroin, the drug that currently kills more Americans than traffic accidents? That must be a bit difficult to support. Also difficult to support: outlawing pot actually keeps people from smoking pot. All it does is drive the market underground and line the pockets of the drug dealers and gangsters.
 
AP NewsBreak: US to end policy that let legal pot flourish


Well, maybe. We should find out tomorrow for sure:












Comparable to heroin, the drug that currently kills more Americans than traffic accidents? That must be a bit difficult to support. Also difficult to support: outlawing pot actually keeps people from smoking pot. All it does is drive the market underground and line the pockets of the drug dealers and gangsters.

Part of me is kind of pissed at this. One man pushing his personal agenda, and the president who appointed him silent on the issue since his campaign. Such great strides made in eliminating this unjustified prohibition, now threatened by a man who found a different angle to play, and angle that doesn't require congressional funding.

But, I'm still optimistic. Public opinion on the matter is clear, with a strong majority supporting legalization. Sessions could very quickly find most of the country against him, including many politicians who need those votes to keep their jobs. This will further unite and strengthen the pro legalization movement. This push could trigger the counter push that finally breaks through all the bull**** and initiates a change in marijuana's legal status at the national level.
 
Yes they were cutting out the kick backs from the illegal drug trade.....They want their money back.
 
Sessions probably graduated from Big Tobacco to Big Pharma after he realized that well of money from tobacco companies was going up in smoke.
 
Conservatives' self-professed belief in federalism was always a huge fraud. It never extended to any state policies that they disliked, and still doesn't.
 
Unless Sessions is forced out by the freedom caucus ...
 
AP NewsBreak: US to end policy that let legal pot flourish


Well, maybe. We should find out tomorrow for sure:












Comparable to heroin, the drug that currently kills more Americans than traffic accidents? That must be a bit difficult to support. Also difficult to support: outlawing pot actually keeps people from smoking pot. All it does is drive the market underground and line the pockets of the drug dealers and gangsters.

This is all Sessions really cares about. He doesn't care about Hillary or the corruption of the FBI or IRS leadership. Hopefully, Trump will be able to rein him in because attacking pot would be a disaster.
 
As always, state's rights and small government only apply when they want them to.

What a miserable bastard.





Asked by a Colorado TV station in 2016 about using federal authority to shut down sales of recreational marijuana, President Trump said, “I wouldn’t do that, no,” but he was noncommittal on whether he would block his attorney general from doing so.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...&utm_term=.b380482e6ef4&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

Yeah, ok. :roll:








Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) said on Twitter the move “directly contradicts what Attorney General Sessions told me prior to his confirmation.”

“With no prior notice to Congress, the Justice Department has trampled on the will of the voters in CO and other states,” he wrote. “I am prepared to take all steps necessary, including holding DOJ nominees, until the Attorney General lives up to the commitment he made to me prior to his confirmation.”


Well, at least there's one.... maybe.....
 
Part of me is kind of pissed at this. One man pushing his personal agenda, and the president who appointed him silent on the issue since his campaign. Such great strides made in eliminating this unjustified prohibition, now threatened by a man who found a different angle to play, and angle that doesn't require congressional funding.

But, I'm still optimistic. Public opinion on the matter is clear, with a strong majority supporting legalization. Sessions could very quickly find most of the country against him, including many politicians who need those votes to keep their jobs. This will further unite and strengthen the pro legalization movement. This push could trigger the counter push that finally breaks through all the bull**** and initiates a change in marijuana's legal status at the national level.

When did enforcing current federal law become "pushing a personal agenda"? I too, disagree with the ridiculous treatment of marijuana as a schedule I dangerous substance but that does not make enforcing the current law into a personal agenda.
 
When did enforcing current federal law become "pushing a personal agenda"? I too, disagree with the ridiculous treatment of marijuana as a schedule I dangerous substance but that does not make enforcing the current law into a personal agenda.

It's not "just enforcing federal law" when it hasn't been enforced in decades, most don't want to start now, and he has been denied funding and manpower to crack down on medical states already by congress. Sessions and a small fraction of congress want to keep marijuana illegal and fight the legalization movement. So yeah, I see this as his personal agenda, one he was open about long before becoming AG and has continued to push for. Almost any other human being could be AG and this wouldn't be happening.

And that's part of the reason I see this just galvanizing the legalization movement. So far Sessions has been mostly harmless and states have continued to legalize and allow businesses to grow. Now he's threatening that movement, and they will make their opinions known everywhere they can, including the polls. This is borderline political suicide imo and not supported by the Republican party in general, don't be surprised if is his final straw and Sessions is history in a few weeks-months.
 
It's not "just enforcing federal law" when it hasn't been enforced in decades, most don't want to start now, and he has been denied funding and manpower to crack down on medical states already by congress. Sessions and a small fraction of congress want to keep marijuana illegal and fight the legalization movement. So yeah, I see this as his personal agenda, one he was open about long before becoming AG and has continued to push for. Almost any other human being could be AG and this wouldn't be happening.

And that's part of the reason I see this just galvanizing the legalization movement. So far Sessions has been mostly harmless and states have continued to legalize and allow businesses to grow. Now he's threatening that movement, and they will make their opinions known everywhere they can, including the polls. This is borderline political suicide imo and not supported by the Republican party in general, don't be surprised if is his final straw and Sessions is history in a few weeks-months.

That (bolded above) is true of many federal laws, especially our immigration laws, so are we now (and forever?) an open border nation? I doubt seriously if only a small fraction of congress want to keep the "war on drugs" going - they just want to keep it as a backup for "bad guys" that they can't catch any other way. The problem, as I see it, is that once enforcing part of the schedule I drug law is deemed merely an option then selective enforcement (on a case by case basis?) of any and all of that federal law should be OK. If folks in some states can possess, sell and distribute with absolute federal immunity then why not equal protection from the law?
 
"... What a miserable bastard. ..."

- - - - - - - - -

That's what you get when you let a community organizer rule with a pen and phone.
He would have been better off had he studied what the job of the 3 branches are.
"... The Obama administration back in 2013 announced via a memo ..."

Now we have DACA and marijuana problems because of Obama's memos. :lol:
 
Borrowed someone else's nice explanation on how the law works in the US of A:

"That is why Congress was created to write the law.

Sessions is the executive branch which is enforcement of the Law.

Last I checked it was Illegal under Federal Law. Executive branch should never choose to ignore a law because it does not like it. That sets a dangerous precedent."



Obviously, many of my fellow American citizens - and that includes senators, republicans, governors, mayors and other "highly educated" guys - have either never learned what "law" means or decided to just become lawless.
 
AP NewsBreak: US to end policy that let legal pot flourish


Well, maybe. We should find out tomorrow for sure:












Comparable to heroin, the drug that currently kills more Americans than traffic accidents? That must be a bit difficult to support. Also difficult to support: outlawing pot actually keeps people from smoking pot. All it does is drive the market underground and line the pockets of the drug dealers and gangsters.

What happened to states rights?
 
Old Man Sessions is not going to do Squat about legalized pot, the States, those that have legalized it, those that have reduced their penalties, and those that simply believe in a States right to run their own laws. Besides when his boss goes so does he, and that clock is ticking down quickly, I doubt Pence or Ryan would leave the old man in charge of the Dept. of Justice.
 
That (bolded above) is true of many federal laws, especially our immigration laws, so are we now (and forever?) an open border nation? I doubt seriously if only a small fraction of congress want to keep the "war on drugs" going - they just want to keep it as a backup for "bad guys" that they can't catch any other way. The problem, as I see it, is that once enforcing part of the schedule I drug law is deemed merely an option then selective enforcement (on a case by case basis?) of any and all of that federal law should be OK. If folks in some states can possess, sell and distribute with absolute federal immunity then why not equal protection from the law?

I was only pointing out that congress has resisted Sessions attempts to enforce federal marijuana laws to a degree already. Immigration is another thing where changes in practice without changes in the laws has eroded respect for those laws and lead people to see them almost as a joke.

I would say its the reluctance to change federal laws, particularly marijuana laws. I have never understood the federal governments stubbornness with regards to marijuana laws, to the point they gave the thumbs up for states to legalize without changing federal law! That never should have happened that way, federal law should have changed to allow states to make their own decisions, so that everyone was in accordance with the law at all times through the whole process. It's easier in the short term to just stop enforcing them, and politically it scores almost as many points (Cole Memo).

There may be more than a small fraction of congress that wants to keep prohibition, but most know how voters feel about it and value their job. The fraction that is willing to publicly oppose legalization is small.

Selective enforcement is really one of the big issues here too. It undermines respect for the law in general, and makes it easier for people to justify breaking laws (to themselves or others) in general. When I was a teenager and knew everything, I used to go on this rant about speed limits. Why have a 35mph limit but only pull over people going 45+ ? Why not just have a 45mph limit and enforce it strictly? It's a lot easier to justify trying to get away with a little more than usual than to cross that line from OK (or legal) to not OK (or illegal). And when enforcement finally does come around, people feel unfairly singled out (and sometimes they are). It's just a poor way to do things. But I suppose that's normal for us....
 
That's what the Southern states asked, too, before they got set on fire by the Northern states.

I think individual rights to be free outweigh state rights to enslave them
 
I think individual rights to be free outweigh state rights to enslave them

Would only somebody say who thinks the Civil War was fought over slavery. (But I will not discuss that subject in this thread; I'm sure there are lots of threads already existing on that matter.)
 
For pro-legalization, this is bad in the short term but good in the long term. Congress won't fix the laws as long as the waters are calm. Federal enforcement in legal states is exactly the kind of friction that should either light a fire under Congress to finally act, or send the right kind of case to SCOTUS for them to finally rule the Federal laws unconstitutional because they violate the 10th Amendment. This is a Constitutional issue regarding Federal authority vs. States rights that should be addressed properly, not swept under the rug.
 
Part of me is kind of pissed at this. One man pushing his personal agenda, and the president who appointed him silent on the issue since his campaign. Such great strides made in eliminating this unjustified prohibition, now threatened by a man who found a different angle to play, and angle that doesn't require congressional funding.

But, I'm still optimistic. Public opinion on the matter is clear, with a strong majority supporting legalization. Sessions could very quickly find most of the country against him, including many politicians who need those votes to keep their jobs. This will further unite and strengthen the pro legalization movement. This push could trigger the counter push that finally breaks through all the bull**** and initiates a change in marijuana's legal status at the national level.

Sessions is sworn to uphold the law. The law prohibits pot sales. You want to change the law, call your Congress critter.
 
That's what the Southern states asked, too, before they got set on fire by the Northern states.

So no more states rights? The right doesn't believe in them anymore?
 
AP NewsBreak: US to end policy that let legal pot flourish


Well, maybe. We should find out tomorrow for sure:












Comparable to heroin, the drug that currently kills more Americans than traffic accidents? That must be a bit difficult to support. Also difficult to support: outlawing pot actually keeps people from smoking pot. All it does is drive the market underground and line the pockets of the drug dealers and gangsters.

Session wants more inmates in private prisons. Slave labor is becoming a trend here and there is a shortage of "workers" in the cooperatives.

Private Prisons: Chilling Facts About The New Slavery
 
Back
Top Bottom