Oregon Governor Pardons 45,000 Marijuana Offenders
The ACLU of Oregon is calling on other state governors to follow suit.

Democratic Oregon Gov. Kate Brown announced yesterday she will pardon 45,000 people convicted of simple possession of marijuana, in one of the largest uses of the pardon power by a governor to wipe weed offenses off the books.
Brown's office says the pardons will remove 47,144 convictions for possession of a small amount of marijuana from individual records and forgive more than $14 million in associated fines and fees.
"No one deserves to be forever saddled with the impacts of a conviction for simple possession of marijuana—a crime that is no longer on the books in Oregon," Brown said in a press release. "Oregonians should never face housing insecurity, employment barriers, and educational obstacles as a result of doing something that is now completely legal, and has been for years. My pardon will remove these hardships."
Brown's announcement follow similar actions by President Joe Biden, who announced in October that he was pardoning roughly 6,500 people with prior federal convictions for simple possession of marijuana.
As Reason's Jacob Sullum wrote, Biden's pardons were a welcome step, but the actual impact of his orders will be modest:
His blanket pardon for low-level marijuana offenders, while long overdue, will affect a small percentage of people with federal drug records. Without new legislation, marijuana use will remain a crime under federal law, as will growing and selling marijuana. And while rescheduling marijuana will make medical research easier, it will not make cannabis legally available to patients unless and until the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves specific products as safe and effective….
To put the impact of Biden's mass pardon in perspective, about 400,000 people are currently incarcerated for drug offenses in the United States, including about 67,000 federal prisoners. During the last two decades, police typically made between 1.5 million and 1.9 million drug arrests every year. In recent years, marijuana arrests have accounted for more than a third of the total, and the vast majority of those cases (92 percent in 2019) involved possession rather than cultivation or trafficking.
Still, the broad, largely unencumbered clemency powers wielded by governors and the president are one of the fastest and most direct ways to alleviate the injustices of the drug war. In 2019, Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker granted roughly 11,000 pardons for low-level marijuana convictions, and in 2021 Democratic Colorado Gov. Jared Polis pardoned 1,351 convictions for possession of two ounces or less of marijuana.
Civil liberties groups applauded Brown's actions and urged other governors to follow suit.
"By embracing the power of clemency, Governor Brown and President Biden have taken significant first steps in addressing unfair sentences and racial disparities in our criminal legal system," Cynthia W. Roseberry, acting director of the ACLU's justice division, said in a press statement. "But we cannot stop here. We call on other governors with clemency authority to correct past wrongs, and embrace the power of redemption."
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
So executive orders are cool now?
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> http://WWW.WORKSFUL.COM
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35000 dollars each month simply by (ins-52) doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
Just open the link———————————————>>> http://Www.RichApp1.Com
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> http://WWW.RICHSALARIES.COM
I am making $92 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $16,000 a month by working on a laptop, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website. http://www.LiveJob247.com
Oh look, someone doesn't know the difference between a pardon and an executive order.
One is a power explicitly given to the governor, while the other gives direction to alphabet agencies that shouldn't exist in the first place.
And?
That doesn't answer his question.
How can the question be answered? That's like seeing you eat an orange and asking "So apples are cool now?"
non sequitur: a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.
How can the question be answered?
Either the outcome (using the executive to get around the legislative branch) trumps the principle of a limited executive (which most libertarians think should be) or it doesn't.
Since when did libertarians oppose the executive having the power to pardon?
Pardoning involves the Executive considering the merits of an individual case. There is nothing in the US or Oregon Constitutions that suggests a pardon should or can be applied to an entire class of criminals. There is no history in common law of it. There is certainly an argument to be made that it is effectively an executive order disguised in the language of a pardon.
I was about to argue with you, but the mass pardon after the English Civil War was an act of Parliament. Still, the President’s power of Pardon is essentially unlimited (to federal offenses) and useful when you’re trying to resolve a national conflict like the Civil War or rebellion against the Vietnam War. It’s a great way to heal national wounds.
Yes, when specifically granted that power by constitutions. Like Oregons does in regards to pardons. Now levying taxes or paying students loans aren't powers granted by the constitution to the executive so they are not.
Plus, apparently the laws defining these offenses have now been repealed, so that someone doing these acts today would not be breaking the law. So it seems only fair that people who did those acts in the past should be pardoned.
There's some fine print, even in the gov's press releases (I couldn't find the pardon proclamation itself): You have to have been 21, no victims of the crime, no associated crimes, and a person will only get the pardon if the governor can confirm, through electronic databases, that the person meets the criteria. So if the conviction is old enough that it's just in a courthouse record somewhere, not online, then you're out of luck. At least for the moment.
Alleviating the injustice of the drug war is good, but ending the drug war would be better. Marijuana is a no-brainer, of course, while ending the bans on much more dangerous drugs is a tougher sell. But the drug war in toto has big problems including failure to end drug abuse while causing massive collateral damage.
"Marijuana is a no-brainer, of course, while ending the bans on much more dangerous drugs is a tougher sell."
This is true. And, due to the rhetoric, much of the populace, who hear "legalize all drugs now!" interpret that to mean that someone should be able to purchase heroin at the local "Quicky Mart."
I laughed at Gary Johnson, when confronted by a member of his audience about the death of her son due to a heroin overdose, when he failed to say something like: "If your son had had access, through a prescription, to pharmaceutical grade opiates from a drug store, he might very well still be alive."
"Legalization" does not mean "de-regulation." Indeed, it's much, much easier to regulate a legal drug than one which is illegal.
ending the bans on much more dangerous drugs is a tougher sell
Which it shouldn't be, since we already legalized alcohol decades ago. It's available at corner stores even.
If we are just going to use the pardon power to either retroactively repeal laws or preemptively fail to enforce them, why even have a legislature?
I realize that Reason has a preferred outcome, but whatever happened to lawmakers being the ones who, ya know, amend the system?
The governor in this particular case claims that the acts would not be crimes if committed today. If so, she's just bringing past convictions into line with today's legislative policy.
I’ve never understood what that isn’t automatic.
Because the constitution specifically forbids ex post facto acts.
Ex post facto retroactively punishes. That's the literal opposite of what we're talking about.
Ex post facto *used* to mean you can’t pass a law punishing someone for what he did before the law was passed, or increasing the punishment for some crime committed before the law was passed.
(Today, of course, we know that it’s OK for the legislature to enhance the punishment of past crimes, at least in the case of sex offenders. This is based on the Bad Person Exception to the Constitution.)
Retroactive pardons, in contrast, make things easier on the (alleged) criminal, not tougher.
the legislature is literally the worst option of the 3 for expecting good laws.
Hence the executive, who must sign whatever these idiots try to pass, and the courts, who can strike it down anyway.
the pardon power is literally a check on the legislature, and on prosecutors, and a defense against idiot juries. Sorry, I repeat myself here, I just mean juries.
The Enumerated powers of Constitutions is why. And it has a long standing history in English Common law which our laws are based.
good first step.
I've made $84,000 so far this year working online and I'm a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I've made such great money. It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it. The potential with this is endless.
Here’s what I do..............>>> onlinecareer1
Glad they’re out of the joint. Hopefully we can hit on ways to weed out remaining Prohibitionist laws. Folks need to pipe up—time for a blunt national discussion!
I'm tired of these chronic puns.
It’s good to seed the comment section with comedy, or everyone might leaf.
I like them on kush afternoons such as this
The grass is greener on this thread (that shroom one is full of it!)
Puns aside, why hate on Mary Jane? She’s a mellow enough gal. (Wait til you getta load of her sister, Chrystal Beth!!)
She’s smokin’ hot!
I'm in love with Mary Jane, she's my main thing.
I am sure this will have no unintended consequences. Like releasing criminals guilty of serious crimes who were plead down to possession charges to insure getting them off the street.
Consider this: possession of weed has been legal in Oregon since 2014. Who is still in prison 9 years later who was only ever guilty of simple possession?
The governor claims this is about clearing their records, and that she isn't pardoning anyone whose crime had a victim.
I'm just going by her press release, so I'm not saying it's accurate. Maybe there's something concealed in the fine print.
Now I get it. It's publicity stunt. She is not letting anyone out of jail, just removing some arrests and convictions that are over 9 years old from the records.
These characters will finally be able to get a CDL now. Or work for police departments. Woohoo!
At least it's not raising separation-of-powers issues like in Kentucky, where those laws are still on the books but the governor seems to suggest he'll pardon violators anyway.
2.1 oz in Colorado and you are still in jail? So very libertarian of Polis.
Obiwan Kenobi: These ARE the marijuana convicts you were looking for.
similar actions by President Joe Biden, who announced in October that he was pardoning roughly 6,500 people with prior federal convictions for simple possession of marijuana.
Obiwan Kenobi: These aren't the convicts you're looking for.
"No one deserves to be forever saddled with the impacts of a conviction for simple possession of marijuana—a crime that is no longer on the books in Oregon,"
What's the status of complex possession?
and in 2021 Democratic Colorado Gov. Jared Polis pardoned 1,351 convictions for possession of two ounces or less of marijuana.
Two ounces, most Libertarian Governor in 'Murrica? Be still my heart. For funsies, I just weight a very small pocket knife I carry around... 3.2 oz. I know weed will be less dense than my pocket knife, but man, that doesn't sound like a whole lot of weed.
In the 70s, it was a way of measuring how much weed was in a baggie by holding your fingers up to it. A 'four finger ounce' was a baggie filled up enough to cover four fingers, a half ounce was two fingers, a quarter was one finger...
"Hey Cheech, did you score?" "Yeah, I got a 4 finger ounce."
You plagiarized that!!!
*Hangs head in shame for forgetting link*
At modern strengths it is quite a bit, but it's still a stupid arbitrary amount.
I've made $84,000 so far this year working online and I'm a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I've made such great money. It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it. The potential with this is endless.
Here’s what I do..............>>> onlinecareer1
They also refuse to prosecute AntiFa terrorists who attack and murder people.