U.S. Attorney in Washington Probably Won't Crack Down on Dispensaries but Will Treat Marijuana Regulators Like Teenagers

USDOJUSDOJLast week I wondered whether the failure of medical marijuana legislation in Washington will prompt a federal crackdown on dispensaries now that state-licensed pot shops are on the verge of opening. KUOW, the NPR station in Seattle, put that question to Jenny Durkan, the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Washington, in an interview on Friday. Durkan's response was an interesting mixture of bluster and hedging. She insisted that the dispensaries, which operate as "collective gardens" under creative interpretations of Washington law but are not regulated by the state, are illegal in every respect. "Under Washington state law, dispensaries are not legal," she said. "Every dispensary that is operating is an illegal business." At the same time, she suggested that her office will take action against dispensaries only if "they cross the line into implicating one of the public-interest factors that the Department of Justice has cited."

Durkan was referring to the "enforcement priorities" listed in Deputy Attorney General James Cole's August 29 memo advising federal prosecutors on how to deal with marijuana businesses that comply with state law. Cole suggested that prosecuting such businesses generally would not be a good use of federal resources unless it was aimed at addressing one or more of eight concerns, including violence, trafficking in other drugs, involvement by organized crime, and diversion of marijuana to minors or other states. Durkan seems to be extending that prosecutorial forbearance even to businesses that, in her view, do not comply with state law, provided they do not pose any of the threats mentioned by Cole. Furthermore, she seems to be sticking to those eight priorities, although Cole warned that "nothing herein precludes investigation or prosecution, even in the absence of any one of the factors listed above, in particular circumstances where investigation and prosecution otherwise serves an important federal interest."

Durkan's description of her office's drug-related work offers further reason to think closing down dispensaries won't be a high priority for her:

The vast majority of the cases we bring are cases that involve or implicate Mexican [cartels]. There are huge quantities of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and bulk cash being transported internationally and between states. That's where we're going to focus our resources. We do not have the resources, nor is it our job, to focus on smaller drug cases that can be handled locally. 

Still, Durkan, who last year said the continued operation of dispensaries is "not tenable," emphasized that the Justice Department expects Washington to develop and enforce "a strong, robust regulatory system" and that dispensaries "fall outside the state regulatory framework." Although "it's not our job to tell them...what they need to do," she said, Washington cannot deliver proper regulation as long as there is "a huge system of illegal entities in the same business and you don't do anything to curtail that." 

Despite the Justice Departnent's desire for strict regulation, the Associated Press reported on Friday, the FBI is refusing to run criminal background checks on people applying for marijuana licenses in Washington, although it has performed that function for marijuana regulators in Colorado. "We are evaluating what the background check policy for the FBI will be," Durkan said. "The systems may be very different in terms of what the FBI is being asked to do." Then she implied that Washington's regulators are acting like spoiled, irresponsible teenagers:

The state is the one that decided it wanted to embark on this course. Having a comprehensive regulatory capability means you have the ability to make sure you are not putting criminals in the business. I liken it to my own own life, that on one hand my teenager may want to have a lot of independence and take the car and in the next breath he's asking me for money for gas. The state has to be able to stand up a very strong, comprehensive regulatory framework to make sure that this works. That's their job; that's their obligation. 

If the Justice Department really wants what Cole called "strong and effective regulatory and enforcement systems," this sort of tough love does not make much sense. To use Durkan's condescending analogy, the FBI is taking away the car instead of declining to pay for the gas.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Colorado's pot market has been up and running for three months already. What the fuck is Washington's problem?

  • ||

    The State Liquor Board are a bunch of lazy shithead bitches who, not only being incompetent government scum, are also probably still butthurt that liquor got privatized, and are taking their time. Plus there might be some dates set into the initiative. I don't care, I don't get mine from them and don't plan on starting regardless.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Epi I...I didn't actually ask where you plan to buy your pot.

  • Conchfritters||

    I think it is apparent that he offered that comment unsolicited.

  • Paul.||

    The problem is that everyone is now a dispensary. Post the new red tape-laden nebulae of freedoms regulations, some dispensaries were more equal than others. The state recognized that was weird and brought them under one big umbrella of freedom regulations.

    I'm finding it hard to get up in arms over the fact that marijuana patients have to buy their medicine at the 'liquor store', just like I do.

    And to reply to Episiarch below:

    are also probably still butthurt that liquor got privatized,

    Probably? PROBABLY? They are absolutely butthurt, and continue to hammer private liquor stores out of existence while the newspaper continues to talk about the problems "left by privatization".

    What you guys fail to understand here is freedom is complicated and has a shitload of rules and regulations. Welcome to Washington.

  • Gene||

    freedom is complicated and has a shitload of rules and regulations

    Then we need to call it something else.

  • Brandon||

    Yeah, it's more of a Newspeak "Freedom" than, you know, freedom.

  • ||

    That was exactly Paul's point.

  • R C Dean||

    Washington Congress and the DEA cannot deliver proper regulation as long as there is "a huge system of illegal entities in the same business and you don't do anything to curtail that."

    What was that about projection? Seriously, one of the senior enforcers of the WOD has the balls to claim that a black market invalidates the regulatory scheme?

  • Paul.||

    U.S. Attorney in Washington Probably Won't Crack Down on Dispensaries but Will Treat Marijuana Regulators Like Teenagers

    Struggling to not see this as a bad thing.

  • Sevo||

    Paul,
    One too many negatives?

  • R C Dean||

    Yeah, I'm thinking that "Won't" should be a "Will".

  • LarryA||

    The problem is "probably." That word enshrines the FYTW principle.

  • Homple||

    The Federales are watching Washington and Colorado like the proverbial cat at a mouse hole, waiting to pounce.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement