Tag: legalized marijuana

GOP Senators Tell DEA To Reject Marijuana Rescheduling, Arguing It Would Violate International Treaties

Three Republican senators are urging the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to reject the top federal health agency’s marijuana rescheduling recommendation, arguing that it would put the U.S. out of compliance with international treaty obligations and make it harder to ensure that other countries continue to enforce drug laws, “including for deadly narcotics like fentanyl.”

In a letter sent to DEA Administrator Anne Milgram on Wednesday, Sens. Mitt Romney (R-UT), James Risch (R-ID) and Pete Ricketts (R-NE) said the agency should adhere to precedent and decline to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has advised.

“Any effort to reschedule marijuana must be based on proven facts and scientific evidence—not the favored policy of a particular administration—and account for our treaty obligations,” the Senate Foreign Relations Committee members wrote.

“Marijuana is controlled under the Single Convention—which is not surprising given its known dangers and health risks—and the United Nation’s International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) has fiercely criticized efforts to legalize marijuana in other countries as a violation of the treaty,” they said.

The letter notes that the Senate ratified the Single Convention that contains drug policy mandates for member states in an unanimous vote in 1967. And they pointed out that DEA has previously cited international treaty obligations in denying past rescheduling petitions.

“It is important that the DEA continues to follow the law and abide by our treaty commitments,” they said, listing a series of questions they’re asking the agency to answer.

For example, the senators asked if DEA still considers it necessary to keep marijuana in either Schedule I or Schedule II to comply with the Single Convention, as it concluded under the Obama administration.

Keep reading

Germany’s Marijuana Legalization Bill Is Officially Signed Into Law And Will Take Effect On Monday

A bill to legalize marijuana nationwide in Germany has officially been signed into law, with the reform set to take effect next week.

Bundesrat President Manuela Schwesig signed the legislation on Wednesday, the last step to enactment. Usually German Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier would sign legislation, but because he’s currently away on vacation, that responsibility was handed down to the head of the legislative chamber representing individual states.

This comes one week after members of the Bundesrat reached a deal with Health Minister Karl Lauterbach and other government ministers and declined to refer the cannabis legislation to a mediation committee that would have delayed implementation by six months. Instead, the law will go into force on Monday as planned.

The Bundestag passed the marijuana legalization measure last month. The Bundesrat previously tried to block the proposed reform in September but ultimately failed.

Effective April 1, adults will be allowed to possess up to 25 grams of cannabis and grow up to three plants for personal use. Then, beginning July 1, adults could join “social clubs” where they could buy up to 25 grams of cannabis, with a cap of 50 grams per month. That cap is 30 grams for members under 21 years old.

Keep reading

Delaware Treasurer Promotes New Marijuana Banking Bill To Provide State-Level Protections

Delaware’s treasurer is promoting new legislation that would provide state-level protections to banks that provide services to licensed marijuana businesses.

The bill was filed by Rep. Ed Osienski (D) and Sen. Trey Paradee (D) in partnership with state Treasurer Colleen Davis (D). It comes amid mounting pressure on Congress to enact federal cannabis banking reform.

The Delaware measure is designed to clarify that banks, credit unions, armored car services and accounting services providers are not subject to state-level prosecution simply for working with cannabis businesses.

“This Act aims to facilitate the operation of cannabis-related businesses by helping to ensure that such businesses have access to necessary financial and accounting services,” the bill synopsis says.

Davis, the treasurer, said in a press release last week that “H.B. 355 will provide state-level legal protection, and a clear legal framework for banks, payment processors, and other financial service providers to follow.”

“It can also ease concerns about federal enforcement and regulatory compliance among these businesses—since it allows them to demonstrate to federal agencies that they’re following a clear legal framework, ultimately leading to a safer and more transparent marijuana industry,” she said.

A press release from Davis’s office also says that, in addition to providing the basic protections, the bill would effectively boost the economy, enhance safety and promote competition.

“Across the country, we’ve witnessed dispensaries and banks alike struggling with legal uncertainty surrounding financial and accounting services for cannabis businesses,” Osienski, the House sponsor, said. “This uncertainty not only undermines the operations of state-compliant dispensaries but also hinders their access to basic business functions such as access to banking, acquiring loans, or paying taxes.”

Keep reading

House GOP Committee Urges Opposition To Marijuana Banking Bill, Saying ‘Gateway Drug’ Causes ‘Violence, Depression And Suicide’

A Republican House advisory committee is formally opposing marijuana banking legislation and a separate bill to remove past cannabis use as a disqualifying factor for federal employment and security clearances, while broadly criticizing the substance as a “gateway drug” that causes “violence, depression and suicide.”

The House Republican Policy Committee’s new marijuana report also says that Vice President Kamala Harris was “mistaken” when she said cannabis brings people “joy” as a 2020 presidential candidate, instead arguing that it is a “hazardous drug with short and long-term impacts.”

The guidance, which is meant to inform how the GOP caucus should approach marijuana policy issues, briefly describes the history of prohibition and the state legalization movement. It then makes the case that cannabis is a dangerous substance linked to mental health disorders such as schizophrenia, attributing that in part to “the high concentration of THC.”

The committee also cited questionable statistics to argue that state-level legalization is associated with increased violence. And it claimed that marijuana use causes workplace issues such as “decreased productivity, high unemployment claims, and lawsuits.”

“Instead of turning a blind eye to the dangers associated with marijuana and allowing states to have dispensaries on every corner, Congress should work to ensure that laws in relation to marijuana are enforced,” the guidance says.

It included two specific policy recommendations, stating that members should oppose the Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking and the Cannabis Users’ Restoration of Eligibility (CURE) Act.

That’s despite the fact that both measures enjoy bipartisan support, and certain members of the policy committee such as Reps. Tom McClintock (R-CA) and Nancy Mace (R-SC) have been vocal champions of marijuana reform. McClintock is signed onto the banking bill and Mace is the lead GOP cosponsor of the federal employment and security clearance measure.

Keep reading

California Bill Would Roll Back Marijuana Employment Protections For Law Enforcement Jobs

A California bill that was introduced last month as a minor technical fix to an existing law protecting workers from employment discrimination over legal marijuana use was substantially amended in committee this week with new section that would roll back the protections for various categories of workers, including those in law enforcement, coroners’ offices and animal control.

Under two pieces of legislation signed into law in 2022 and 2023, California employers are now prohibited from asking job applicants about past cannabis use, and most are barred from penalizing employees over lawful use of marijuana outside of the job.

The newly amended bill, SB 1264, sponsored by Sen. Shannon Grove (R), would remove those protections for “employees in sworn or nonsworn positions within law enforcement agencies who have or would have functions or activities” related to:

(1) The apprehension, incarceration, or correction of criminal offenders.
(2) Civil enforcement matters.
(3) Dispatch and other public safety communications.
(4) Evidence gathering and processing.
(5) Law enforcement records.
(6) Animal control.
(7) Community services duties.
(8) Public administrator or public guardian duties.
(9) Coroner functions.

The proposed change comes just months after the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training removed questions about marijuana from police job application forms. Several forms, the commission said at the time, were “modified to remove inquiries about a candidate’s prior cannabis use.”

Grove’s amendments were adopted on Tuesday, and the legislation currently sits before the Senate Rules Committee.

Both employment protections laws took effect on January 1 of this year. With certain exceptions, “it is unlawful for an employer to request information from an applicant for employment relating to the applicant’s prior use of cannabis,” one of them says.

Keep reading

Political Stupidity and Bureaucratic Bungling Created New York’s Pot Legalization ‘Disaster’

As of last June, more than two years after New York legalized recreational marijuana, just 12 state-licensed dispensaries had opened for business, falling far short of Gov. Kathy Hochul’s prediction that more than 100 would be operating by that summer. Six months later, Hochul was bragging that “nearly 40 adult-use dispensaries will have opened in 2023.” The current count is 87. Those stores, The New York Times notes, “are far outnumbered by more than 2,000 rogue head shops, the target of complaints that they siphon customers, sell to children and attract criminals.”

New York’s rollout of marijuana legalization has been a “disaster,” as Hochul conceded in January. “Every other storefront” is an unlicensed pot shop, she told The Buffalo News. “It’s insane.”

That disaster has frustrated would-be retailers, left farmers in the lurch, played havoc with tax revenue projections, and made a joke out of any expectation that New York, by learning from the experience of states that legalized marijuana earlier, would do a better job of displacing the black market. The insanity that Hochul perceives is a product of bad decisions by politicians who should have known better and obstruction by regulators who sacrificed efficiency on the altar of diversity.

Unlike states such as New Jersey, where voters approved legalization in 2020, and Maryland, where a similar ballot initiative passed two years later, New York did not initially allow existing medical dispensaries to start serving the recreational market. Its slow and complicated licensing process, which was skewed by an “equity” program that prioritized approval of applicants with marijuana-related criminal records or their relatives, is maddeningly hard to navigate.

Those preferences invited lawsuits by people who were excluded, which further delayed approval of licenses. Guidance and financial help for people struggling to jump through the state’s hoops never materialized. And as in other states, high taxes and burdensome regulations have made it hard for licensed businesses to compete with unauthorized dealers.

Keep reading

Nebraska Lawmakers Approve 100% Tax Rate For CBD And Hemp Products To Help Offset Property Taxes

A Nebraska legislative committee has given preliminary approval to a bill that would tax hemp and CBD products in the state at a whopping 100 percent rate.

The cannabis product tax hike is part of legislation designed to bring in more money to state coffers to offset property tax bills, according to an outline of the plan from Sen. Lou Ann Linehan (R), the legislation’s sponsor, that was posted by a Nebraska Public Media reporter.

The legislature’s Revenue Committee advanced the underlying measure, LB 388, on a 7–0 vote on Thursday, according to a report in the Nebraska Examiner. The state’s full unicameral legislature could take up the bill as soon as Tuesday.

“We are going to tax hemp and CBD at 100%,” Linehan’s document says, adding that, along with other reforms—including removing sales tax exemptions on soda, candy, pet services, advertising revenue over $1 billion and lottery tickets—the change is estimated to bring in $182 million in new revenue for the state.

The changes are not currently reflected in the bill’s language as available online, nor has any relevant amendment been posted to the bill page. Linehan, who also chairs the panel that approved the measure this week, did not immediately respond to emailed questions from Marijuana Moment.

Adam Morfeld, a former Nebraska state senator who co-chairs the advocacy group Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana, reacted to the proposal with shock.

“The Legislature is going to tax hemp and CBD at 100 percent!??” he posted on social media.

Keep reading

Legalizing Marijuana For Adults Does Not Drive Increases In Youth Use, New Federally Funded Study Finds

New federally funded research into the impacts of marijuana legalization on youth use found no association between legal adult-use cannabis sales and the prevalence of consumption among middle-school students.

To test whether legal sales led to an uptick in youth use, authors compared middle-school use rates in Nevada and New Mexico, looking at 2017 and 2019 data from two state-run surveys. At the time, adult-use marijuana sales were legal in Nevada, while New Mexico allowed only medical marijuana.

In both states, researchers found increases in the proportions of students that had ever consumed cannabis as well as those who had consumed within the past 30 days.

In Nevada, the share of middle-school students who said they’d ever consumed cannabis rose during the study period, from 9.7 percent in 2017 to 13.3 percent in 2019. Past 30 day (P30D) use also rose, from 6.3 percent to 8.9 percent.

New Mexico, where recreational marijuana remained illegal, saw lifetime use rise from 14.1 percent to 17.4 percent over the same period. Past 30 day use rose from 8.9 percent to 10.5 percent.

Keep reading

Colorado Bill Would Force Social Media Platforms To Ban Users Who ‘Promote’ Marijuana, Psychedelics And Hemp Products

A center-right think tank is raising alarm about a Colorado bill that it says would make it illegal to talk positively about marijuana online. The prohibition would also apply to many hemp products as well as some federally legal pharmaceuticals.

Among other provisions, SB24-158—a broad proposal around internet age verification and content policies—would require social media platforms to immediately remove any user “who promotes, sells, or advertises an illicit substance.”

The bill’s definition of illicit substance includes not only illegal drugs but also many that are legal and regulated in Colorado. It pertains to any controlled substance under state law, including schedules I through V under state law.  That means the bill would affect state-legal marijuana, certain psychedelics—which voters legalized through a 2022 ballot measure—and even some over-the-counter cough syrups that contain small amounts of codeine.

Beyond scheduled drugs, the bill specifies that its restrictions also apply to certain hemp products with more than 1.25 milligrams THC or a CBD-to-THC ratio of less than 20 to 1 and most other hemp-containing products intended for human consumption.

If enacted onto law, companies would also need to publish “a statement that the use of the social media platform for the promotion, sale, or advertisement of any illicit substance…is prohibited.”

The R Street Institute says the restriction would impact not only cannabis companies but also any individual who posts positively about marijuana.

“Basically, the Colorado Legislature is trying to force social media companies to ban the promotion of marijuana,” the group’s social media director, Shoshanna Weissman, wrote in a new article. “And because what constitutes ‘promotion’ remains undefined, the bill would likely force platforms to remove all pro-marijuana free speech in a state where recreational use is legal.”

Not only is the ambiguity of “promotion” an issue, but the bill’s broad definition of illicit substances could also cause confusion, R Street says.

The think tank points out that the bill’s definition of illicit substances “would make it unlawful for businesses to promote them for sale or even for regular people to talk about their benefits online.”

“This clearly violates the First Amendment, as the bill is unconstitutionally narrow in scope,” Weissman wrote. “Basically, if speaking highly of or advertising these substances were truly dangerous, the state would have banned advertising in all its forms (e.g., print, television, digital).”

Keep reading

Federal Marijuana Prohibition Has ‘No Rational Basis,’ Companies Say In New Court Filing

In a new federal court filing, lawyers for a group of marijuana companies argue that ongoing broad cannabis prohibition has “no rational basis,” pointing to the government’s largely hands-off approach to the recent groundswell of state-level legalization.

The lawsuit alleges that while Congress’s original intent in banning marijuana through the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) was to eradicate illicit interstate commerce, lawmakers and the executive branch have since abandoned that mission as more states have moved to regulate the drug.

“Dozens of states have implemented programs to legalize and regulate medical or adult use marijuana,” the new filing from the plaintiffs in the case says. And by providing consumers with “safe, regulated, and local access to marijuana,” those states “have reduced illicit interstate commerce, as customers switch to purchasing state-regulated marijuana over illicit interstate marijuana.”

The new 32-page document comes in response to the government’s effort in January to dismiss the cannabis companies’ underlying suit. At the center of the case is a 2005 Supreme Court decision, Gonzales v. Raich, in which justices held that federal prohibition preempts state-level legalization because of Congress’s interest in preventing illegal marijuana from entering interstate commerce.

Plaintiffs argue that given the changes since then—not only at the state level, but also in terms of the government’s own tolerance of commercial cannabis activity in legal jurisdictions—”the federal government no longer has any basis for insisting that state-regulated, intrastate marijuana must be banned to serve Congress’s interstate goals.”

“The ground-shaking shifts in marijuana regulation since Raich, together with the nation’s long history of marijuana cultivation and use prior to the CSA,” lawyers wrote in the new filing, “demonstrate the widely-held understanding that Plaintiffs’ marijuana activities implicate a liberty interest that requires protection.”

In the overarching lawsuit, filed in October, the businesses behind the case claim that perpetuating marijuana prohibition in state markets is unconstitutional, creating undue public safety risks while precluding licensed cannabis operators from accessing critical financial services and tax deductions that are available to other industries.

Keep reading