Tag: california

Interstate Marijuana Commerce Could Put California At ‘Significant Legal Risk’ Of Federal Action, Attorney General Says

The attorney general of California has determined that the state could put itself and its employees at “significant legal risk” of federal enforcement action if it were to authorize interstate marijuana commerce.

In a legal opinion sent to state cannabis regulators on Tuesday, Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) said there are “strong arguments” that state officials could be federally prosecuted for implementing a law that permits cannabis imports and exports between consenting legal states.

The opinion comes in response to a request earlier this year from the California Department of Cannabis Control (DCC), seeking the attorney general’s assessment of potential liability for permitting interstate commerce under a law Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed last year.

While DCC argued in its request that the state would not find itself at substantial legal risk for allowing the activity, the attorney general’s opinion says it cannot rule out that possibility given the threat of federal preemption under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) that strictly prohibits cannabis.

The law Newsom signed stipulated that the governor would be authorized to enter into interstate commerce agreements with other legal states if federal law or guidance changed, or if the state attorney general ruled out the possibility of “significant legal risk.”

“We appreciate the Attorney General’s conclusion that the arguments supporting interstate agreements are ‘strong,’” a DCC spokesperson said in a statement shared with Marijuana Moment on Wednesday. “Unfortunately, even strong arguments cannot put novel questions beyond all debate. If you are looking for certainty, you will not find it in cannabis.”

Keep reading

Why Are California’s Animal Shelters Killing So Many Pets?

As I write this column, Marigold—my long-haired orange tabby who demands constant attention—is purring next to me. She’s a delightful creature that I adopted at a local shelter’s Five Dollar Fridays, where they adopt out vaccinated and spayed adult cats for that modest fee. I got her (and Fluffy) when my wife was out of town, so she’s now forbidden me from visiting a shelter alone.

I don’t blame my wife for setting some ground rules, given that I can’t wander through the aisles of forlorn animals and not bring at least one home. So I’ve been filled with disgust at California’s government-funded animal shelters, which claim to be models of compassion but really are killing fields that euthanize many healthy and adoptable animals.

In Orange County, critics complained that high euthanasia rates were the result of limited government resources. As a result, the county in 2018 opened a new $35-million Animal Care shelter in Tustin that includes all the cool features (dog runs, play areas) lacking at the decrepit former facility. One news report compared it to a five-star resort and noted that it had a paid staff of 140 plus 400 volunteers. That’s quite the operation.

Yet The Orange County Register‘s Teri Sforza reported on data analyzed by a former volunteer and found the “kill rate for adult dogs…has nearly doubled since 2018, and the amount of time they spend behind bars has jumped 60 percent.” During the pandemic, the shelter stopped walk-in visits and required appointments. That was understandable then, but even after the pandemic ended the shelter continued focusing on appointments and requiring accompanied visits.

Obviously, fewer people will fall in love with a purring or barking buddy if they can’t wander through the kennels and see which animal pulls at their heartstrings. You can no more pick out a pet based on a shelter’s photo than you can pick out a spouse solely on their dating website bio. Animal Care increased the number of walk-in visits amid criticism, but it’s still absurdly limited and I gave up trying to get info after a really long wait on its phone line.

The bureaucrats who run the facility—the largest municipal “animal-care” operation in the West—depict these customer-unfriendly, animal-harming policies as a means to protect the critters from stress and protect the public from animal bites. In reality, it’s just the latest instance of government putting the employees’ convenience above the public good—like the way public schools and teachers’ unions dragged their feet on school re-openings.

Keep reading

Former sheriff’s deputy pleads guilty to child sex abuse, child porn charges

A former San Diego County sheriff’s deputy Wednesday changed his plea to guilty on multiple charges, including child sex abuse and possession of child pornography.

Jose Soto Jr. was arrested in May and charged with possession of child pornography and an assault weapon.

In addition to his guilty pleas on the child pornography charge, Soto pleaded guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious acts on a child and one count of continuous child sexual abuse.

Under California code, a “continuous sexual abuse of a child” charge applies to a person who has regular access to a child under 14 and has committed three or more lewd acts on them for three or more months.

Keep reading

Terrorists Win: Gavin Newsom Cancels Public Christmas Tree Lighting to Avoid Pro-Hamas Protesters, Plans “Pre-Recorded Virtual” Lighting Instead

California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) canceled Tuesday’s scheduled annual public lighting of a Christmas tree on the grounds of the state Capitol in Sacramento in the face of a permitted 300 person pro-Hamas demonstration planned for the event. Newsom announced he will instead hold a “pre-recorded virtual ceremony” lighting of the Christmas tree on Wednesday.

Pro-Hamas demonstrators have disrupted Christmas tree lighting ceremonies around the country in the past two weeks, most famously in Nantucket, Massachusetts, with Joe Biden in attendance and at Rockefeller Center in New York City.

KCRA-TV reporter Ashley Zavala reported from the Capitol on the cancellation of the lighting and a planned holiday market. Zavala said a spokesperson for the governor said the public lighting was canceled for the “safety and security of all participating members and guests, including children and families” because of the protests that have occurred at other recent events.

Keep reading

California To Start Fining Stores That Don’t Have a ‘Gender Neutral’ Kids Toy Section

California is set to implement a new law on January 1, 2024, which mandates that stores selling children’s items must include a gender-neutral section.

This law targets retailers with at least 500 employees across their various store locations. These stores are required to display a reasonable selection of childcare items and toys in a way that does not conform to traditional gender marketing norms.

The text of the law claims that this approach allows consumers to more easily identify unjustified differences in similar products traditionally marketed to either girls or boys. It also suggests that separating these items by gender makes it harder for consumers to compare products and implies that their use by one gender is inappropriate.

“Unjustified differences in similar products that are traditionally marketed either for girls or for boys can be more easily identified by the consumer if similar items are displayed closer to one another in one, undivided area of the retail sales floor,” the text of the law says. “Keeping similar items that are traditionally marketed either for girls or for boys separated makes it more difficult for the consumer to compare the products and incorrectly implies that their use by one gender is inappropriate.”

Retailers who fail to comply with this new regulation could face a civil penalty. A fine of $250 is imposed for the first offense, escalating to $500 for subsequent offenses.

Keep reading

California Defies SCOTUS by Imposing Myriad New Restrictions on Public Gun Possession

A California law that is scheduled to take effect on January 1 will impose a host of new restrictions on public possession of firearms. That may seem counterintuitive, since Senate Bill 2 is the state legislature’s response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which upheld the Second Amendment right to carry guns for self-defense outside the home. But California, like several other states with discretionary carry-permit policies that had to be revised because of Bruen, is attempting an end run around that decision by simultaneously making permits easier to obtain and much harder to use.

In Bruen, the Supreme Court said states may not require permit applicants to demonstrate “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community.” Accordingly, S.B. 2, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law on September 26, eliminates California’s “good cause” requirement, along with a similarly amorphous “good character” criterion (although it still disqualifies applicants deemed “reasonably likely” to pose a danger to themselves or others). By limiting the discretion of licensing authorities, S.B. 2 notes, those changes could have opened the door to “broadly allowing individuals to carry firearms in most public areas.” Deeming that outcome intolerable, legislators instead decreed that guns may not be carried in most public areas.

Copying the constitutionally dubious approach taken by states such as New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and Hawaii, S.B. 2 designates myriad locations as “sensitive places” where guns are not permitted. It also establishes a default rule that people may not bring guns into a business unless the owner “clearly and conspicuously posts a sign at the entrance of the building or on the premises indicating that licenseholders are permitted to carry firearms on the property.”

As a federal lawsuit challenging those rules notes, the law “turns the Bruen decision on its head, making nearly every public place in California a ‘sensitive place’ (in name only)” and “forbidding firearm carry even after someone has undertaken the lengthy and expensive process to be issued a concealed handgun license.” California’s gun-free zones  “include every park and playground, every hospital, all public transportation, any place that sells alcohol (which, in California, includes most gas stations and convenience and grocery stores), all land under the control of the Department of Parks and Recreation or the Department of Fish and Wildlife (with exceptions for hunting), libraries, churches, banks, and many more.” S.B. 2 “even transforms private businesses into ‘gun-free zones’ by default, imposing an unprecedented affirmative duty on private business owners to post signage to authorize people exercising an enumerated constitutional right to enter the property.”

As a result, says the complaint in May v. Bonta, “Californians who desire to exercise their enumerated right to carry are essentially limited to some streets and sidewalks (so long as those public places are not adjacent to certain other ‘sensitive’ places), plus a few businesses willing to post a ‘guns allowed’ sign at the risk of potentially losing other customers by doing so.” The law “creates a patchwork quilt of locations where Second Amendment rights may and may not be exercised, thus making exercise of the right so impractical and legally risky in practice that ordinary citizens will be deterred from even attempting to exercise their rights in the first place.”

Keep reading

California Opens Applications For $15 Million Marijuana Equity Grant Round To Local Jurisdictions

California officials have begun accepting applications for the Cannabis Equity Grants Program for Local Jurisdictions for the coming fiscal year. The grants are part of the state’s effort to use cannabis tax revenue to fund equity programs for people disproportionately impacted by the drug war.

The purpose of the program is “to advance economic justice for populations and communities impacted by cannabis prohibition and the War on Drugs by providing support to local jurisdictions as they promote equity in California and eliminate barriers to enter the newly regulated cannabis industry for equity program applicants and licensees,” a description says.

The funding round is open to any local California jurisdiction “that demonstrates an intent to develop a cannabis equity program or that has adopted or operates a cannabis equity program.”

Applications for the grants program will be accepted through December 14, with awards expected to be announced in January. The online application is available through the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) website.

Money from the program funds local programs offering technical support, regulatory compliance and assistance with securing startup capital to equity applicants and licensees. The grants “will further the stated intent of the AUMA by reducing barriers to licensure and employment in the regulated industry,” according to a description posted on the California Grants Portal. “Offering these types of support will also aid the state in its goal of eliminating or reducing the illicit cannabis market by bringing more people into the legal marketplace.”

Grants for last fiscal year, announced this past February, went to 16 cities and counties across the state, ranging from $350,000 for San Diego County to nearly $2 million for Oakland.

Keep reading

California And New York State Officials Tell People To Buy Marijuana On Black Friday

Marijuana regulators in California and New York are encouraging people to take advantage of Black Friday deals and support small businesses by shopping for cannabis at licensed retailers.

As companies promote savings on the post-Thanksgiving sales occasion, both the California Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) and the New York Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) shared posts on Friday to help people find marijuana from authorized venders.

“Don’t follow the hordes of shoppers today!” California’s DCC said. “This Friday shop smart, shop licensed cannabis.”

The New York OCM, meanwhile, shared a video of Empire State Development Commissioner Hope Knight, who also serves on the state Cannabis Control Board (CCB), urging consumers to support small and local businesses this weekend to “sustain jobs and generate regional economic growth.” That same sentiment applies to the marijuana market, regulators said.

“While you grab some #BlackFriday deals, take a note from #NYCCB member, Hope Knight and support #SmallBusinessSaturdays at one of your local dispensaries,” they said.

Keep reading

Up In Smoke: California’s Largest Pot Distributor Collapses Amid $17 Million In Unpaid Taxes

In mid-May, as rumors of the company’s dire situation swirled, CEO Mike Beaudry insisted “these rumors are categorically not true.”

HERBL completely collapsed less than a month later, following in the footsteps of other California cannabis startups like Flow Kana and MedMen.

The company leaves behind $17 million in unpaid taxes, while several smaller pot companies which have been left in the lurch, SFGate reports.

“Mike [Beaudry, HERBL’s CEO] and his team did a really good job of hiding that fact from their own brands… that’s how they kept getting our products,” said Ali Jamalian, owner of San Francisco cannabis company Sunset Connect, who claims that HERBL owes him $180,000.

Another CEO, Tyler Kearns of Sacramento-based cannabis company Seven Leaves, said HERBL owes his company $880,000. He says he knew the collapsed distributor was in trouble when he found out in June that they were laying off delivery drivers, and that it was going to be near impossible to get that money back.

“I knew this was going to be the biggest failure in U.S. cannabis history,” he told the outlet.

HERBL’s role in the California cannabis ecosystem was crucial, acting as a middleman between pot producers and retailers. Its downfall isn’t just a bad trip for the company; it’s a red flag for the industry, indicating that even the mightiest can fall due to systemic issues.

“I do feel like we’re going to see a significant and material number of closures, up and down the supply chain,” said Wesley Hein, president of the Cannabis Distribution Association, who attributes HERBL’s failure in part to poor business decisions – particularly its continued reliance on traditional distribution models while pot retailers struggled to pay their bills. He says the collapse also exposes systemic issues in the state’s pot industry that will doom other industries – such as overtaxation, competition from unlicensed businesses, and “very excessive and overly burdensome regulations.”

He compared the collapse of HERBL to Lehman.

Keep reading

Football Eye Black Isn’t Blackface

When La Jolla High School played Morse High School under the Friday night lights on October 13, students from the surrounding San Diego area filled the stadium to cheer on their prospective teams. Making posters, dawning face and body paint, yelling chants, and sporting jerseys were all part of the electric football game atmosphere.

J.A., a middle-schooler from Muirlands Middle School, attended the game with another student and that student’s mother. To show support for his team, J.A. let his friend put eye black paint on his face. A security guard even complimented the design. The game was largely uneventful with La Jolla winning handedly (56–6). But almost a week later, J.A. was called into a disciplinary meeting with his parents at Muirlands. 

In that meeting, J.A. was told he would be suspended from school for two days and was no longer allowed to attend future athletic events because he wore “blackface” to the football game. The suspension notice only specified that he was being suspended because he “painted his face black at a football game,” and the alleged offense was marked as “Offensive comment, intent to harm.” J.A.’s father told the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a First Amendment nonprofit, that no one complained or said anything negative about his son’s eye black while at the game. The school’s principal also failed to specify how they found out about the incident.

As Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy at FIRE, notes in a November 8 letter to Muirlands Middle School, “J.A.’s non–disruptive, objectively inoffensive” face paint is absolutely constitutionally protected expression.

In the letter, FIRE reminds school officials that “public school students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.” It argues that “the First Amendment protects J.A.’s non-disruptive expression of team spirit via a style commonly used by athletes and fans.”

Eye black applied under the eyes and even on the cheeks is not blackface, and to suggest as such is a gross mischaracterization. Blackface is dark makeup applied all over the face to mimic, exaggerate, and mock black people. J.A. was simply cheering on his local football team with friends—and there is no reason to punish him for that.

Keep reading