Marijuana

Jeff Sessions Is Set to Give Prosecutors Free Rein to Enforce Federal Marijuana Ban

Sources say he's rescinding a memo that restricted Justice Department's role under Obama administration.

|

Jeff Sessions
KEVIN DIETSCH/UPI/Newscom

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is planning to free federal prosecutors to decide for themselves how and whether to go after marijuana providers and users in states where consumption is legal.

The Associated Press is reporting this change in advance a formal announcement that's supposed to come later today. Sessions' decision would rescind guidance under the previous administration to limit enforcement of federal marijuana laws in states where consumption is legal to certain situations to keep it from being trafficked to other states and out of the hands of children and keeping the proceeds out of the hands of gangs.

This guidance, known as the Cole memo (after former Deputy Attorney General James Cole), is being rescinded by Sessions, the Associated Press reports. It's not entirely clear what will happen when the memo from 2013 is rescinded, but it's possibly a great big shot across the bow of a growing industry. California just legalized recreational marijuana sales and consumption at the start of the new year. New Hampshire is considering a bill right now. Despite popular opinion in favor of legalization, Sessions subscribes to the old school "gateway drug" nonsense. From the A.P.'s report this morning:

Sessions and some law enforcement officials in states such as Colorado blame legalization for a number of problems, including drug traffickers that have taken advantage of lax marijuana laws to hide in plain sight, illegally growing and shipping the drug across state lines, where it can sell for much more. The decision was a win for pot opponents who had been urging Sessions to take action.

"There is no more safe haven with regard to the federal government and marijuana, but it's also the beginning of the story and not the end," said Kevin Sabet, president and CEO of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, who was among several anti-marijuana advocates who met with Sessions last month. "This is a victory. It's going to dry up a lot of the institutional investment that has gone toward marijuana in the last five years."

Threats of a federal crackdown have united liberals who object to the human costs of a war on pot with conservatives who see it as a states' rights issue. Some in law enforcement support a tougher approach, but a bipartisan group of senators in March urged Sessions to uphold existing marijuana policy. Others in Congress have been seeking ways to protect and promote legal pot businesses.

What about the law by Congress preventing the Justice Department from spending money to try to fight marijuana use in states that had legalized it? The good news is that the Rohrbacher-Farr amendment is still intact. The bad news is that it expires on Jan. 19 if it's not renewed. It was extended briefly as part of the year-end spending bill to keep the government going.

The worse news is that the amendment only forbids the Justice Department from meddling in legalized medical marijuana use. It doesn't stop the Justice Department from going into states that have legalized recreational use. The Cole memo didn't focus on recreational vs. medical use but was about prioritizing certain enforcement goals to protect public safety in a world where marijuana use was becoming accepted and permitted.

As it stood, even with the Cole memo, we saw federal prosecutors in the Obama administration target medical marijuana producers who were operating legally under state laws. Nobody can actually say for sure what will happen if the Cole amendment is rescinded, itself a serious problem. Whether or not a marijuana grower ends up in the crosshairs of a prosecutor depends on that prosecutor's own goals and discretion, not a consistent, predictable application of law.

Reason's Jacob Sullum has previously predicted that Sessions would not start an organized crackdown on state-level legalized medical marijuana use. It would be extremely unpopular and would create massive political headaches. But tossing that memo could result in an unpredictable, disorganized, and confusing crackdown that scares away legal growers, fostering cartels in a dangerous black market.

There will be a lot more news and analysis coming out of Sessions' decision to give prosecutors free rein to ramp the drug war right back up. The Daily Beast just reported yesterday about how one of Sessions' marijuana advisers is a great big drug warrior who wants to mandate (and potentially profit from) drug-testing.

UPDATE: Here's the formal Sessions memo rescinding the Cole memo.

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.

93 responses to “Jeff Sessions Is Set to Give Prosecutors Free Rein to Enforce Federal Marijuana Ban

  1. Bitter Prohibition Clinger.

    1. It sucks for sure, but the state/Fed split had to be settled eventually.

      1. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

        This is what I do… http://www.onlinecareer10.com

      2. Speaking of state/Fed splits, when local police pair with feds to ‘work’ a case, the Feds take half the cut of the seizures. So, what they do is put a couple suits at a station and work high value cases. As is well covered by Reason and others, drug busts are the thin pretense for civil asset forfeiture scams. Perhaps that is too much of a temptation for money-hungry feds trying to justify their ubiquitous presence.

      3. Much as I think pot (and all drugs, really) should be available without restriction (including the requirement for a prescription), Sessions is right. His job is to enforce the law – not evade it (as was popular with Obozo, Holder and Lynch).

        If the law is bad (and I think it is) then Congress should fix it. Until then, Sessions should enforce it. It is, after all, what he’s paid to do.

    2. On August 13, 1929, a couple of Illinois youths were busted smuggling liquor on Lake Michigan to pay college tuition. In September, Frank Hawley, 18, was arrested with others as young as 14 for bringing liquor across at Buffalo the day of a Sept 9 gunfight between border agents and bootleggers. The same thing occurred a year later at Seaside Heights, NY, and a Brooklyn schoolboy was grabbed in March 1931 operating a still. In South America kids nowadays take contracts as hitmen to take out politicians and narcs. Prohibitionism is educational, ya gotta admit.

    3. If Sessions isn’t spending every waking moment prosecuting prominent democrats for their many, many crimes, then he’s doing it wrong.

  2. I’ve been wondering what the hell Dobby has been up to lately.

    1. Sessions is clearly Kreacher, not Dobby.

      1. Sessions is a Death Eater, he ain’t no house elf.

  3. Also it’s worth reading that DB article about DuPont. That sick fuck has been at the forefront of the push for widespread drug testing, and oh yeah also happens to be profiting massively off of it.

  4. Those who complain about Session’s decision to revoke the policy decision of Obama Administration policy haven’t a clue about the structure of liberty embodied in the separation of powers.

    At his confirmation hearing Jeff Sessions in reply to U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R) Utah, “I think one obvious concern is that the United States CONGRESS MADE THE POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA IN EVERY STATE AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF IT AN ILLEGAL ACT. IF THAT’S SOMETHING THAT’S NOT DESIRED ANY LONGER, CONGRESS SHOULD PASS A LAW TO CHANGE THE RULE. It is not much the attorney general’s job to decide what laws to enforce. We should do our job and enforce laws effectively as we are able.” By able he’s referring to budgetary constraints.
    (Resources) Source: Reason, Sessions Offers Unclear, Useless Answers on Marijuana During Confirmation Hearing 1/10/17

    1. It is not much the attorney general’s job to decide what laws to enforce.

      That is factually wrong on its face. That should strip Sessions of credibility if he had any to begin with.

      1. Yep. Congress gave the executive the power to schedule drugs, but it didn’t put any particular drug at any particular schedule. That decision ultimately lies with the AG and the president. Also, all prosecutors have always had to use prosecutorial discretion. The justice system literally doesn’t have the resources to enforce 1/10th of the laws that are on the books. Sessions is just using Congress as an excuse to bully a bunch of harmless people that he doesn’t like.

        1. Actually the vast majority of federally controlled substances are in the schedules Congress put them in.

    2. If you’ve ever bothered reading the rule, you’d know Congress set the preliminary schedule and left it up to the AG to reschedule at his discretion. I’m pretty damn sure Jeff Sessions knows full well – just as Obama knew – that it doesn’t take an act of Congress to change marijuana’s classification.

      1. But if Congress did so, no way he’d try to change it back administratively.

      2. Why didn’t Obama’s DOJ change it then? Hypocrites.

        1. You’re just now figuring this out?

          How about when Obozo claimed that 90% of all guns used in crime in Mexico came from the US?

          Someone crunched the numbers and came up with 17%. Obozo had overstated his case by a factor of 5+. But there’s more than one way for a hypocritical criminal to get what he wants. If the number wasn’t 90%, he could damned well MAKE it 90%. And operation “Fast & Furious” was born – a program to see that assault weapons were smuggled from America to Mexican drug cartels. Over 2000+ assault weapons were sent – and many more would have followed – except an American border patrol agent was killed with one of the smuggled weapons.

          Hypocritical? How about “working to end gun violence” by smuggling guns to criminals so they will engage in gun violence, thus increasing justification for more gun control laws?

    3. “haven’t a clue about the structure of liberty embodied in the separation of powers.”

      In that case, I’d have been much more impressed if he’d suggested the Fed should STFU about just about everything.

    4. Would you also concede that the authority claimed by the federal government in enacting drug prohibition has no basis in the text of the Constitution? The government clearly overstepped its lawful authority in enacting these laws (bullshit SCOTUS decisions notwithstanding). We should go back and correct the original error–if the government wants the authority to ban harmless substances, they should ask the people to ratify an amendment to the constitution granting them that power. I’m not going to get hung up on arcane procedural niceties when it comes to undoing policy that is by any standard monstrous, deleterious to liberty, and an active cause of destruction and misery in the lives of millions of innocent people.

      1. If a majority of the SCOTUS thought like Justice Thomas the entire the entire CSA would fall.

    5. The structure of liberty demands that we go after these marihuana pushers, good and hard.

    6. It is not much the attorney general’s job to decide what laws to enforce.

      Actually it is much part of his job.

    7. I tend to agree with this point of view. Just like DACA. It’s unhealthy for the Executive Branch to substantively shape policy contrary to existing legislation. I agree that DoJ has some wiggle room regarding drug schedules, but they can’t take it off altogether.

      I don’t have to agree with drug prohibition to agree with Sessions, at least so far that if what he’s doing is truly contrary to the “will of the people”, it’s up to Congress to deal with it. What’s he’s doing is certainly in line with established precedent for the application of the CSA and the DoJ’s role as an enforcement arm and not a policy arm.

      1. I agree that DoJ has some wiggle room regarding drug schedules, but they can’t take it off altogether.

        Sure they can. Why, they wouldn’t even have to do anything.

        Why is law enforcement the one function in which the government seems to be so eager to achieve efficiency?

        1. Why is law enforcement the one function in which the government seems to be so eager to achieve efficiency?

          Well how else do you expect to run an empire unless you keep the serfs in line?

      2. I agree that DoJ has some wiggle room regarding drug schedules, but they can’t take it off altogether.

        Gosh, if only someone had written down somewhere what the DoJ can and cannot do in regards to these schedules to settle this dispute!

        Meet 21 U.S. Code ? 811 – Authority and criteria for classification of substances

        Except as provided in subsections (d) and (e), the Attorney General may by rule…remove any drug or other substance from the schedules if he finds that the drug or other substance does not meet the requirements for inclusion in any schedule.

        So in fact, they *totally can* just remove it from the schedule.

        1. he finds that the drug or other substance does not meet the requirements for inclusion in any schedule

          He’s obligated to formally justify that. Congress pretty clearly acted to have marijuana be covered under the CSA, and they set a high bar for DoJ to re-schedule it. DoJ can’t simply say “because”.

          1. I think any doofus here could formally justify it without ever using the word “because”.

          2. Well, there is abundant evidence that marijuana does not meet the criteria for Schedule 1 at the very least.

            1. Agreed. But considering the DEA’s prior finding on this matter, it would be a fairly substantial reversal.

              Sure, if Sessions really wanted to push for it, he could. He could go all in on assembling a review committee, drafting the proposal, running the meetings and so forth. There is a process and some wiggle room. But it really is a place where Congress should be the overriding authority. They clearly, 45 odd years ago, had marijuana in mind as a Schedule I drug. It didn’t become that as a result of Executive action. So it shouldn’t be Executive action that changes it.

              1. This is a horseshit rationalization for Sessions’s actions. Congress may have put it their 45 years ago, but they explicitly gave the AG power to reschedule, there is no legal, constitutional, or other good reason to refrain from using that power. Any explanation for removing marijuana from schedule I will be better than the rationalization used to put it their in the first place. The National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse, which Congress themselves created the year prior to passing the CSA in order to study marijuana abuse, recommended decriminalizing possession of marijuana (in small amounts). There is plenty of justification for changing it, and the legal authorization is right there in the law passed by Congress.

                1. But… you knew I’d have one, right?…

                  if Congress didn’t establish rules or criteria for the AG to MAKE that kind of decision, well,

                  first they were (aside from still are) morons lacking the ability to consider Unintended Consequences, and,

                  maybe second, what IS the process, other than coin-flipping and knee-jerk-emotional reactions, that the AG could, should or would use to MAKE such decisions as to which drugs to put on or off specific schedules OR decide whether or not to enforce?!

                  Hey, it also occurred to me that the States might be able to sue the AG or Congress for stripping them of TAX REVENUES which they’d lose if Sessions’ “decisions” go into effect in a way that harms them!

                  THAT should be a fun show to watch!

                  1. The trouble is, pot’s been used, among others, as a predicate substance for deciding what controls to put on others. If it’s like one that’s already controlled, that’s taken as evidence it should be subject to like controls. This applies especially to the great legal weasel word “abuse”. DEA says, whatever “abuse” is, it must be (in some cases) like using cannabis, since Congress decided its use was “abuse”. So it’d be very hard for DEA to take a position that pot doesn’t have such potential for abuse, since it’s taken as a gnomon for such.

          3. He’s obligated to formally justify that. Congress pretty clearly acted to have marijuana be covered under the CSA, and they set a high bar for DoJ to re-schedule it. DoJ can’t simply say “because”.

            Well, the original prohibition was justified based on ginned-up scared stories of Mexicans all high on the reefer raping white women, so I’m sure they can find an equally persuasive reason for undoing it.

            1. And that’s why no Attorney General has done so since the law’s passage, right? Congress should fix this.

      3. You know, ‘shaping policy contrary to existing legislation’ is no small point. It is in fact a breach of separation of powers – the law begins and ends with congress, as they control the money to say what is what and who can do it when they stick to defined powers. The opinions of SCOTUS stand on the work of congress [starting with the constitution, we hope], and the executive is relegated to a mere poster boy without laws to apply.
        I don’t know what kind of presidency the GOP is going to allow Trump to have, but it seems to me that his internal actions are 99% geared to overturning the problems found in your point. Hillary had a goofy reset button made for her at State, but the president is actually doing it. The occupation is over, but we have a new breach in progress: courts are helping themselves to statutory authority [under cover of the rogue 9th circuit] that is granted the president by congress where national security issues intersect with what otherwise might be normal immigration policy. I doubt any more than 5% of the loons in congress ever heard of a writ of mandamus, but somebody on WH staff better wake up and do the necessary reading.

    8. I don’t think the “structure of liberty” means what you think it means.

  5. This is just the kick in the ass the legislature needs to start moving on-

    Aw, who am I kidding.

    1. … yep, a pipe dream…

      oops… unintended pun… I think, but topical referent.

  6. I blame Obama. The gutless fucker had the opportunity to reschedule marijuana but ducked taking responsibility, claiming such a move would require Congressional action. However much I despise CNN, I’ll always have a soft spot for Jake Tapper for irritating the shit out of Obama by pushing him on that issue and refusing to take Obama’s bullshit.

    1. Pres. Obama’s timidity with respect to the drug war was a major disappointment, but he is not in the Republicans’ tawdry league with respect to treatment of drug warriors.

      Blaming Pres. Obama while remaining silent about the authoritarian, bigoted movement conservatives would be childish.

      1. Does this thread look like people are remaining silent? Obama is a pussy. Sessions is an asshole. Trump is a Dick. I say we nuke ’em all from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.

        1. You’ll have to forgive the Rev. Artie, he’s only got 1 go to argument. “Muh, movement conservatives, derp”.

    2. I blame Obama. The gutless fucker had the opportunity to reschedule marijuana but ducked taking responsibility, claiming such a move would require Congressional action.

      Obama was clearly dishonest on the issue, presumably out of a lack of desire to expend political capital on an issue that wasn’t that important to him. But “blame” is a little far. Even if he *had* rescheduled it, Trump and Sessions would have the authority to reschedule it right back for any reason they could dream up. I imagine that would be an extremely unpopular move in that timeline, but do Trump/Sessions really give a fuck?

      Ultimately it’s those limpdicks in Congress who are to blame. Overstepping their authority in enacting these laws in the first place, and refusing to shoulder the burden of helping undo them. It should all be laid on them.

      1. Are you saying Obama foresaw the Trump Presidency, and not wanting to have one of his decisions reversed, he decided to do nothing about Marijuana scheduling?

        There is plenty of blame to go around. Obama is a major league pussy. A spine of cartilage.

        1. Are you saying Obama foresaw the Trump Presidency, and not wanting to have one of his decisions reversed, he decided to do nothing about Marijuana scheduling?

          Not at all. Point one, it is a fact not in dispute that the President has the authority to request the DoJ reschedule a drug. I would say it’s a near certainty that Obama knew that at the time, so his claim that it would take an act of Congress can be fairly characterized as a willful deception.

          *Why* he lied is not known to me, but I can speculate. My best guess was that he didn’t have much emotional investment in the policy one way or the other, but was averse to the optics of the first black President “legalizing it” (of course that’s not an accurate description of rescheduling, but that’s how it would be presented in the media); perhaps he thought it would tarnish or reflect badly on his “legacy” which he wanted to be about health care or whatever else. Could be something else entirely. But I don’t think “fear that the policy would be reversed” was among his motivations.

          1. That’s a lot of words. I think my Pussy evaluation holds more water, and is pithier.

      2. Trump and Sessions would have the authority to reschedule it right back for any reason they could dream up.

        They’d use the same reason they use for everything: it was an Obama era rule. And the Trumptards will lick it up.

        1. ” it was an Obama era rule. ”

          You mean like all those regulations he threw out?

          Seriously though, Trump is an idiot. Don’t let that make you an idiot too.

          1. Seriously though, Trump is an idiot. Don’t let that make you an idiot too.

            It’s turtles all the way down with Stormy.

            1. He bitched about his broken computer and I told him to sue. He called me a pro fraud libertarian.

              What the fuck can you say to someone like that, you know?

              1. I called you a pro-fraud libertarian because your response to a company knowingly selling defective parts was “well that’s your fault for not figuring out what they were hiding from you”.

    3. Re: Jerryskids,

      I blame Obama.

      I blame Obama, too! If it wasn’t for him, we wouldn’t have the p…y-grabber-in-chief win the election and name that authoritarian throwback from another era as his DOJ. The only reason he’s there is because Sessions jumped early on into the Trump bandwagon the moment Trump said “Wall” and “Mexican rapists” in the same breath.

    4. Obama had zero interest in doing anything about marijuana. Nor do most democrats. It’s a potential wedge issue for them, and they don’t give those up, as it does not increase their power and control over the American people.

  7. In a related article yesterday, I saw “Iron Mike” Tyson just broke ground on a huge pot farm in Cali. I would give anything to see a “Celebrity Deathmatch” between Tyson and Sessions. Since I’ll never get a chance to beat the living shit out of that dumbfuck, half-pint Keebler Elf wannabe, I would love to see someone do it. Oh yeah, FUCK YOU Sessions and that Alabama Crimson Tide wave you rode in on. GO DAWGS!!!

    1. Or what if they have a smoke off? The one that can smoke the most weed before getting the munchies is the winner.

    2. Sessions would bring an entire FBI SWAT team into the ring. They’d shoot Tyson’s pigeons. He’d go Hulk on them. It would be entertaining.

  8. The sooner cranky, old, superstitious, backward movement conservatives take their stale thinking, prudishness, and authoritarianism to the grave, the better. America improves each time one of these goobers performs a civic service recounted in an obituary and is replaced in our electorate by a younger, less rural, less religious, less old-timey, more tolerant American.

    (Until then, the yahoos will be boasting about their love of limited government and freedom even as they cheer on the drug warriors, of course.)

  9. Isn’t Sessions rescinding ALL these guidance memos? I seem to recall that Title IX “Dear Colleague” memo was one of many and he was getting rid of them all.

    1. Trusty ole SIV is always good for some whataboutism.

      1. That may be true generally, but this seems like a strange place to mention it.

        1. I’d wager Chipper put no more thought into that retort than “Ctrl+C” “Ctrl+V”.

  10. Fuck you sessions your name isn’t worth a capital letter, just like karl marx.

  11. Almost forgot.

    Christ, what an asshole.

  12. Well, Rand Paul has wagged his finger in disapproval, so I’m satisfied.

  13. “Threats of a federal crackdown have united liberals who object to the human costs of a war on pot with conservatives who see it as a states’ rights issue.”

    Since when have liberals objected to the human costs of . . anything?

    Progressives aren’t even sure people should be free to consume tobacco or sugary soft drinks.

    When they’re not busy using the coercive power of government to force people to violate their religious convictions, siccing the IRS on people for not buying health insurance, driving up both premiums and deductibles for health insurance, looking the other way while Obama kills hundreds of children in drone strikes, and lashing out at middle America for being white and blue collar, liberals object to the human costs of the war on pot?

    Anybody got a link for that?

    1. That is a lucid, intelligent, well-thought out objection….. OVERRULED!

    2. I’m sure there’s one or two under a rock somewhere.

    3. The libs are the real villains here.

      1. Well, they are wrong about everything, always.

  14. What an asshole.

    On a positive note, the left will be for states rights as long as Sessions is AG.

    1. I hope Beauregard sends SWAT teams to kill the kids of state legislators and rifle a few Governors’ mansions after breaking down the $10,000 doors. Then when the Republicans are back in the gutter like Herbert Hoover going “Dude, where’s my graft? my power? my pelf?” The Dems will be lighting fat joints with ten-dollar bills because they finally copied part of the LP repeal plank and quit trying to ban electricity.

      1. You’re a real idiot.

  15. Damn and I was SO CLOSE to finally achieving sentience.

    1. I don’t see how enforcing the law makes Sessions the bad guy here.
      Doesn’t congress still make the federal laws? How much work would it take to remove Mary Jane from the schedule 1 narcotics list. It looks like a perfect compromise to cancel DACA 100%, deport illegal aliens, limit immigration and build the wall in exchange to allow states to grow, sell and tax pot. A ‘uge win for everyone.
      I do love a good conspiracy theory. Did CA Democrats burn the vineyards to clear some farmland and collect some federal relief money for seeds and clones to get a crop going in the spring. What do you suppose the 50,000 illegal alien indentured servants living in the woods that ICE promised not to deport were hanging out in the woods waiting for? If you could grow buck a pound grapes or $50 for an eighth of an oz. ghanga what would you do. If you like it so far did Nunes sniff out the plot and pass it along to Sessions.

  16. “This guidance, known as the Cole memo (after former Deputy Attorney General James Cole), is being rescinded by Sessions, the Associated Press reports. It’s not entirely clear what will happen when the memo from 2013 is rescinded”

    I’m not sure what happens after that either, but if it’s like the Obama administration was from 2008 until the Cole Memo in 2013, the Obama administration raided state legal medical marijuana clinics hundreds of times during that period.

    My guess is that swing states where recreational marijuana is legal–like Colorado and Nevada– have little to fear. The Trump administration would have little to lose by raiding growers and retailers in California or Massachusetts.

    My second guess is that medical marijuana is probably pretty safe–I doubt anybody will be as cold and heartless as Obama was on that issue during his first term ever again. Going after cancer patients on chemo is just too far outside the Overton window.

    1. Mostly agree, I don’t think CO and NV are all that safe though.

      Both states voted for Obama twice, and then Clinton in 16. CO being the first to legalize cannabis and NV already allowing other “vices” like gambling and sex workers, I think makes dispensaries in both of those states yuge symbolic targets for the DOJ.

      I agree that Dispensaries in CA and MA are generally screwed from the get go.

      I agree that Medical Cannabis dispensaries are probably safe particularly dispensaries in swing states like Florida and Ohio, both supported Trump this time around and are more the type of states Trump would be worried about losing as compared to CO and NV.

      The dispensaries that are probably the safest aside from the ones in Florida and Ohio are in the Red States: Alaska, etc.

  17. #1 on the National Chipper List

  18. Huh? If the idea is to keep hemp leaves out of the hands of children, and the proceeds out of the hands of gangs, then the California approach is the right one. When I was 16 any fool knew there was no money in stuff that was already legal. Plus if the straights caught you, there wasn’t much they could do to a minor. It was the laws making things illegal (hence worth 4x as much) that made dealing worthwhile to kids.

  19. Naturally. Things like this is why I have come to label the GOP as the party of the stupid [at least where DC hacks are concerned]. We have sanctuary cities turning into sanctuary states like a cancer, functioning as a de-facto secession from the union and we get a Nixon rerun on a topic as if the rule of law was functioning normally. We still haven’t ferreted out those in the DOJ who turned it into a gun running operation [taking sides with our opponents in the war on drugs], and pardon me but… what kind of schizophrenia is this? If Sessions wants to crank the war on drugs back up, he needs to start in his own agency and get some people fitted for their orange jumpsuits as outfitting drug cartel members cost lives. Did any of the lawyers involved in that debacle have their FFL, hmm? Despite him speaking, I still find myself asking the same question I did throughout 2017: where’s Waldo?

  20. Appointing Sessions was Trump’s biggest misstep to date.

  21. What I can’t understand is how all you “libertarians” are able to cope with the cognitive dissonance you must be experiencing after voting to empower this nanny-state authoritarian. This man is about as un-libertarian as you can get, and you put the reins of power in his hands.

    Thanks for taking us all back a few years, here’s hoping the regression stops there! (It won’t)

    Signed,
    Reasonable People

    1. YC, More than likely the libertarian vote went for the libertarian candidate. While there may have been libertarians who voted for Trump, it is highly unlikely that the reason was for the love of Trump, rather, for the lesser of two evils.

  22. Jeff Sessions is about to realize that there’s more than enough money in the legal cannabis industry to hire the very best lawyers. The AG will soon find-out that some very smart and powerful people do smoke pot.

  23. Let’s not be to hasty to not collect on a windfall. CA is shopping for a big federal grant handout right now. As luck, or misadventure would have it. Nancy’s new nightmare is now that the corporate vineyards have been purged by fire. if the hemp farms are encumbered by federal law and ICE agents with flame throwers; whatever is she to do with 2.3 million pot farming, illegal alien, indentured servants? Solution: It must be Sessions’ fault. It looks like a perfect compromise to cancel DACA 100%, deport illegal aliens, limit immigration and build the wall in exchange to allow states to grow, sell and tax pot. A ‘uge win for everyone.

  24. Sessions is a total propagandized asshat and pimp for the elite. He needs to back off and mind his own business.

  25. He’s a twerp with a Napoleon complex. Hopefully, Trump will fire him for not controlling the special prosecutorl

  26. Let’s see here. Jeff Sessions is tasked with enforcing the laws that Congress has passed. Not that I’m defending the man, but the laws were put there by Congress, and must be changed by Congress. We all get our shorts in a wad when a particular administration ignores or chooses to enforce / not enforce certain laws, and it’s so easy to point a finger at one man (many times the President or AG). It’s also a handy skirt for elected officials to hide behind. Changing laws is the hard part, but that is what must be done. And you still may not like the finished product. There are liberal politicians out there whose sole aim is to disarm gun owners in any way they can. Marijuana users like them. Gun owning marijuana users will be singing a different tune when they must make a choice between guns and pot. Look at Hawaii. Medical Marijuana users are now being required to turn in their firearms. That is a state enforcement issue, and that state is controlled by liberal Democrats. Either way the legalization of marijuana goes, there are going to be folks that aren’t happy with it.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.