What Will Holder Say About Medical Marijuana?
Attorney General Eric Holder, who a few weeks ago promised to clarify his department's position regarding medical marijuana, is expected to issue a new memo on the subject any day now. Yesterday Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), the ranking member (and former chairman) of the House Judiciary Committee, sent Holder a letter urging him to follow through on his signals of tolerance, despite recents threats to the contrary from U.S. attorneys:
My understanding is that you soon will be offering clarifying guidance about this policy. I was, and remain, very supportive of the Administration's policy in the Ogden memo, which respects the rights of states to provide safe access to medical marijuana….I hope you will continue to honor the spirit of that policy.
Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Jared Polis (D-Colo.) sent Holder a similar letter the day before.
Holder's "clarification" may signal a retreat, saying that the October 2009 memo (PDF) to which Conyers refers was meant only to reassure patients, not providers. If so, Obama's policy will be essentially the same as Bush's. Alternatively, Holder could reaffirm his publicly stated position that state-licensed dispensaries need not worry about federal prosecution, at the risk of encouraging more such operations.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
As a Rationalist and Capitalist who supports Obama I can honestly admit that he has been a complete failure in regard to the War on People/Drugs.
As an Irrationalist and Socialist who doesn't support Obama, I can't honestly admit the he has been a complete failure in regard to the War on People/Drugs.
How can you be a capitalist AND support Obama?
Answer: You can't, you fucking liar.
For that matter... how can one be at all "rational", and support Obama?
Call Buffett, Gates, Ellison, Soros, Woz, Allen, Brin, Page etc liars too.
The top capitalists are all liberals, you fucking idiot.
I meant to say "all the top socialists are liberals, and I'm a cocksucker".
and look where they got us!
TOP. Capitalists.
You mean the guys who are already rich and want to maintain their status by restricting upwards movement?
Um, having control over a lot of capital doesn't actually make you a capitalist; otherwise Stalin was one of the most successful capitalists in history.
Nonsense. Record corporate profits under Obama. Historically low taxes too. You suffer from a bad case of truthiness.
And the Libyan war is not a war either!
exactly. Record CORPORATE profits under Obama. Hello. Corporatism != Capitalism != free market.
GM Thanks Mr. Obama for all those profits that were wired to their account. As does AIG.
Are you factoring in "profit margin", Tony? Or are you just bitching about profits in and of themselves, as usual?
They're all liars AND borderline seditionists, shrike.
Liberalism and capitalism do not mix.
I have my religion... you have yours.
The posters on this site are fucking dirtbag nutcases like you.
Liberalism - the founding idea of the USA from Locke/Jefferson on to Lincoln and Ayn Rand is "seditious"?
You are truly a fucking fruitcake - go suck off Pat Robertson for crying out loud.
The word "liberal" dramatically changed its meaning in the 1930s in America. All of those people were liberal by the old definition. None would be called "liberal" today.
Nope. Look at the top capitalists of today - all are liberals due to their Atheism/Rationalism.
Money and class are nearly meaningless in political affiliation in 2011. Show me one's religion and I can predict his party 99% of the time.
An athiest/agnostic could easily be socialist OR libertarian, and those two ideologies are about as diametrically opposed as you can get.
My recommendation is that people ignore the shreek. He gets off on calling people christfags, and we shouldn't be his porn.
It's just tacky.
I only call guys who profess "love" to some ancient dead man a fag.
It fits well. A person with a healthy mind would not do such.
Says the guy who (unconvincingly) maintains over and over his allegiance to Locke, Jefferson, etc.
True - but a Rationalist is very seldom a Conservative.
Conservatism is dependent on Gawd's Law and adherence to tradition/social order.
Show me one's religion and I can predict his party 99% of the time.
Atheist. Go.
... "Hint: Not D or R" Hobbit
Those aren't capitalists, shrike.
And neither are you.
They are. They believe conservatives are their ally. When Jimmy Carter was the most liberty promoting President of the past 70 years. Deregulation, legalized home brewing, non imperialistic, wanted to end war on drugs (ramped up by freedom loving Reagan LOL, who we can thank for drug testing)
LOL. Capitalism is liberalism. Where do you think liberalism came from. Conservatives have always been against capitalists as have socialists. Idiot. doesn't even know what liberalism means.
Libertarianism is an extreme form of liberalism
I'm against it.
I was for it before I was against it.
Holder's going announce a drawdown of 5,000 drug warriors, but leave the other 130,000 in place to placate the neocons. No wait sorry, that's Obama's speech on Afghanistan. I don't know what Holder's going to do about pot, except that whatever he says, it's probably a lie.
My plan is to release several batches of poisoned pot into circulation, and then try to leverage the media frenzy about new, deadly pot into getting gullible lawmakers to pass more draconian marijuana legislation and getting more funding for the DEA.
I call it "Operation Potsticker". Hmmm... not catchy enough. "Operation Roundup". Maybe.
the last statement in this article is entirely false:
"Alternatively, Holder could reaffirm his publicly stated position that state-licensed dispensaries need not worry about federal prosecution, at the risk of encouraging more such operations."
--holder NEVER publicly stated a word regarding non-profit commercial enterprises. the ogden memo says that it aims to protect patients who use and the caregivers who grow on their behalf, and the ogden memo says the feds will continue to go after *for-profit* commercial enterprises. yet no mention of non-profit commercial enterprises, which state laws require mmj dispensaries to be, is ever mentioned.
for a detailed look into what motivated this latest federal confusion, read this: WHAT'S BEHIND THE HAAG MEMO AND THE RECENT CRACKDOWN ON MMJ? the truth may surprise you.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/.....36?ref=ts#!/notes/dragonfly-de-la-luz/whats-behind-the-haag-memo-and-the-recent-crackdown-on-mmj/169313539795240
Hey can I get some of that poison weed Mr. Holder? I hear it's potent stuff.