Tag: the war on (some) drugs

Ohio Governor Says He’ll Sign Bill To Roll Back Marijuana Legalization And Restrict ‘Juiced-Up Hemp’ Products

Ohio’s Republican governor says he will sign a controversial bill to scale back the state’s voter-approved marijuana law and ban the sale of what he described as “juiced-up hemp” products that fall outside of a recently revised federal definition for the crop unless they’re sold at licensed cannabis dispensaries.

Just days after the legislature gave final approval to the marijuana legislation, Gov. Mike DeWine (R) said on Thursday that he intends to enact it into law.

“To me, it’s a major, major victory, and it’s a long time coming. But it’s a major victory, I think, for kids in the state,” he said, according to The Columbus Dispatch. “There’s going to be some regulation. They won’t be able to have juiced-up hemp gummies. They won’t be able to walk into a gas station and an 11-year-old buy this stuff.”

The governor did not respond to a question about whether the marijuana components of the legislation undermined the will of voters who approved adult-use legalization in 2023.

The bill on DeWine’s desk would recriminalize certain marijuana activity that was legalized under that ballot initiative, and it’d also remove anti-discrimination protections for cannabis consumers that were enacted under that law.

After the House revised the initial Senate-passed legislation, removing certain controversial provisions, the Senate quickly rejected those changes in October. That led to the appointment of a bicameral conference committee to resolve outstanding differences between the chambers. That panel then approved a negotiated form of the bill, which passed the House last month and has since cleared the Senate.

To advocates’ disappointment, the final version of the measure now heading to the governor’s desk would eliminate language in current statute providing anti-discrimination protections for people who lawfully use cannabis. That includes protections meant to prevent adverse actions in the context of child custody rights, the ability to qualify for organ transplants and professional licensing.

It would also recriminalize possessing marijuana from any source that isn’t a state-licensed dispensary in Ohio or from a legal homegrow. As such, people could be charged with a crime for carrying cannabis they bought at a legal retailer in neighboring Michigan.

Additionally, it would ban smoking cannabis at outdoor public locations such as bar patios—and it would allow landlords to prohibit vaping marijuana at rented homes. Violating that latter policy, even if it involves vaping in a person’s own backyard at a rental home, would constitute a misdemeanor offense.

The legislation would also replace what had been a proposed regulatory framework for intoxicating hemp that the House had approved with a broad prohibition on sales outside marijuana dispensaries following a recent federal move to recriminalize such products.

Last month, Sen. Stephen Huffman (R), the primary sponsor, defended the upheaval of the state’s marijuana law, saying voters approved an initiative that amended the state’s revised code, not its Constitution, so they “knew that the General Assembly could come at any time” and “pass a bill to get rid of the entire thing.”

“But we’re not,” he said. “I think overall, for the average person that does recreational or medical marijuana, this bill will make it better… It’s going to be reasonable for most Ohioans.”

Under the bill, hemp items with more than 0.4 mg of total THC per container, or those containing synthetic cannabinoids, could no longer be sold outside of a licensed marijuana dispensary setting. That would align with a newly enacted federal hemp law included in an appropriations package signed by President Donald Trump last month.

Keep reading

There They Go Again in Venezuela

Mark Twain allegedly quipped, “God created war so Americans would learn geography.” Whether or not he actually said that, it would be a good test – for the world’s mightiest military power to be prevented from waging war if a majority of Americans failed to find the alleged enemy on a world map.

This should not need to be said, but the United States has no legal authority to attack Venezuela (or Iran, Sudan, Somalia, or any other country). Nor does it have the legal right to engage in covert action to overthrow any government, including that of Venezuela. Should the United States do so, it will be opposed by everyone south of the Rio Grande, and it will rightly be seen as a racist resumption of the Monroe Doctrine. Whatever one thinks of the current government there, nearly 30 million people live in Venezuela, and they don’t deserve to be demonized or threatened for the policies of their president, since Venezuela poses no threat to the United States.

The American people get this. A recent CBS News poll shows widespread public skepticism and disapproval of any U.S. military attack against Venezuela, properly so, with 70 percent opposing the United States taking military action.

Moreover, the current U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean is an unnecessary and dangerous provocation. U.S. Navy warships and Marine deployments to the region should be reversed to ease tensions. The United States would not likely invade Venezuela with ground forces as even gung-ho-for-blood Secretary of War Pete Hegseth must know a quagmire would ensue, but the Trump administration may see political advantage to have this as a simmering, manufactured “crisis” to distract from the Epstein files, Trump’s sagging popularity, and his failed domestic and foreign policies. And Trump’s declaration closing Venezuelan air space has zero legitimacy, though it did scare many airlines into changing flight routes.

An obvious question: Is this really about oil, not drugs? Fentanyl is not coming into the United States via Venezuela, and the alleged drug ring run by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro does not exist. However, Venezuela does have the world’s largest known oil reserves.

I can’t imagine anyone wants a rerun of the Iraq wars. Let’s not test the adage that “history may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme” (which again, Mark Twain may or may not have said). We don’t want to have to dust off our “No War for Oil!” protest signs. And there is also already a metastasizing problem with violent competition for rare earth minerals in Venezuela. 

The brouhaha about the second attack on the alleged “drug boat” on September 2 possibly being a war crime misses the point, though Hegseth should be held to account. No evidence has been presented that it was a “drug boat” and even if it was, there was no legal authority to attack it, once or twice. All the attacks on the alleged “drug boats” are illegal, and unauthorized by Congress.

Speaking of which, Congress needs to not only investigate these shady “drug boat” attacks but assert its constitutional authority by passing a War Powers Resolution to stop the out-of-control Trump administration from further attacks or escalation. The U.S. Senate failed to pass such a measure last month, 51-49, with all Democrats voting in favor and all but two Republicans voting against upholding the Constitution. The “world’s greatest deliberative body” should try again. Perhaps Republicans can read the polls better now.

Keep reading

‘Kill Them All’

“Does anyone know where the love of God goes
When the waves turn the minutes to hours?”
— Gordon Lightfoot (1938-2023)
“The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald”

As we learn more about the events on Sept. 2, 2025, in international waters 1,500 miles from the United States, the behavior of the United States military becomes more legally troubling than at first blush. We have learned from members of Congress and others who have seen the videos of the attacks on the speedboat that day that the first strike mainly — but not completely — destroyed the boat and killed 9 of the 11 persons aboard.

The two survivors clung to the wreckage for 45 minutes, during which they frantically waved at what they hoped were American aircraft, expecting to be rescued. This attack was the first of many since ordered by President Donald Trump, and it was done without warning. After the passage of 45 terrifying minutes, three more attacks obliterated the two survivors and their wreckage, for “self-defense,” the White House said.

When two courageous persons privy to all this revealed it two weeks ago to reporters for The Washington Post who corroborated the revelations with five others, the Post published the story. Then, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth denied he ordered the survivors killed; it was, he said, “the fog of war.” Then, the White House countermanded that denial. Then, the admiral in charge acknowledged that he ordered the kills pursuant to the secretary’s initial orders.

The military has a duty to rescue the injured and the shipwrecked. And the military has a duty to disregard unlawful orders — a position that Attorney General Pamela Bondi herself argued to the Supreme Court when she was in private practice, and Hegseth himself argued when he was a private citizen.

Not rescuing these survivors was criminal. But the entire killing process is criminal.

Keep reading

Jaw-dropping moment US commandos storm Venezuelan ‘terror tanker’ in breathtaking airborne takedown as tensions rocket toward conflict

This is the dramatic moment when US commandos stormed a Venezuelan oil tanker in a breathtaking airborne takedown amid ratcheting tensions in the Caribbean. 

Footage released by the Trump administration on Wednesday showed American forces swooping on the tanker in helicopters and rappelling down ropes.

Troops with guns drawn darted up stairs to the bridge to take control of the vessel off the coast of Venezuela.

Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote in a statement on X: ‘Today, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Homeland Security Investigations, and the United States Coast Guard, with support from the Department of War, executed a seizure warrant for a crude oil tanker used to transport sanctioned oil from Venezuela and Iran.

‘For multiple years, the oil tanker has been sanctioned by the United States due to its involvement in an illicit oil shipping network supporting foreign terrorist organizations.’

The release of the video comes hours after it was reported on Wednesday that the tanker had been seized, sparking fears of a potential blockade and spiking oil prices. No name was given for the ‘stateless’ vessel, nor was it confirmed precisely where off the coast of Venezuela the raid unfolded.

Trump called it ‘the largest one ever seized’ and warned that ‘other things are happening.’

The capture sent oil prices climbing sharply, with Brent crude rising 1.21 percent to $62.69 a barrel amid fears the escalation could disrupt global supply. 

Venezuela is one of the largest suppliers of oil to China, which has been the destination of between 55 percent and 90 percent of the country’s oil exports. 

A Bloomberg report called the move ‘a serious escalation’ after Trump demanded Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro step down. Caracas did not immediately respond.

Keep reading

Cannabix Technologies’ Marijuana Breath Test Device Clears Key U.S. and Canadian Regulatory Hurdle

Cannabix Technologies says its handheld Marijuana Breath Test system has moved a step closer to market, announcing that its Breath Collection Unit has officially passed electronic emissions testing required for devices sold in both the United States and Canada.

The approval, issued under FCC Part 15 rules in the U.S. and ICES-003 standards in Canada, confirms the unit meets federal limits on radio-frequency emissions. The company received an ISO/IEC 17025 accredited test report verifying compliance, marking what it called a major milestone as it works to commercialize the technology.

The Breath Collection Unit, paired with Cannabix’s proprietary single-use Breath Cartridges, forms the core of a system designed to collect stable breath samples for laboratory confirmation of recent marijuana use. The company says engineering refinements over recent months focused heavily on meeting these regulatory expectations ahead of planned market entry.

Testing was performed at QAI Laboratories in British Columbia, an accredited facility recognized by regulators in both countries for electrical safety certification. Cannabix notes that passing emissions testing is one of the foundational requirements before the device can be marketed or sold in North America.

The Marijuana Breath Test system is built to support forensic-level analysis using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Cannabix is developing the platform in partnership with Omega Laboratories, a longtime drug-testing provider with federal and international certifications. The two companies are working together to bring the breath-based THC detection system to customers in the U.S. and Canada.

Keep reading

Minnesota Legalized Marijuana, But Thousands Of People Are Still Being Prosecuted For Carrying Cannabis In Their Cars

When Minnesota lawmakers legalized recreational marijuana in 2023, Democrats hailed it as the state’s most sweeping shift in drug policy in half a century and long-overdue relief for tens of thousands whose records were marred by low-level marijuana offenses.

What had been a felony—having two ounces of cannabis flower in a car, enough for about 100 joints—became legal overnight when the law took effect on August 1.

But legalization hasn’t ended marijuana prosecutions. Minnesota prosecutors have brought more than 3,500 charges and won more than 1,200 misdemeanor convictions against people with cannabis in their cars since legalization, according to a Minnesota Reformer analysis. Additionally, prosecutors have filed nearly 500 charges against people for consuming cannabis in vehicles, either as passengers or drivers.

That’s due to an important but unadvertised caveat: all cannabis products—including flower, vape pens, wax and edibles—must be in the trunk (or trunk area in the case of SUVs) unless they’re sealed in their original, labeled packaging from a dispensary.

The police stops and prosecutions have defense lawyers concerned about the threat of racial profiling and warrantless vehicle searches.

“Now there’s this whole entry point to all of these cars—officers are going to take it every time they get,” Amanda Brodhag, a Hennepin County public defender, said.

Law enforcement leaders and prosecutors say there’s an obvious public safety rationale for the law: driving under the influence of cannabis or any intoxicating substance is dangerous and they shouldn’t be easily accessible to the driver.

The packaging law has caught many consumers and even cannabis attorneys unawares.

“I’m surprised,” said Elliot Ginsburg, an attorney who helps marijuana growers, manufacturers and retailers comply with the new regulatory regime. “I suspect a lot of people don’t know that.”

The law prohibiting improperly packaged marijuana in vehicles isn’t mentioned on the state’s “need to know” page about adult-use cannabis, nor is it referenced anywhere in the chapter of laws governing recreational cannabis, including the lengthy section detailing limits on cannabis possession and the many things people may not do with it, like use it in a vehicle.

The rules are found in the lengthy chapter of traffic laws, next to the nearly identical section on open alcohol containers.

Violating the cannabis open package law is a misdemeanor, carrying a maximum penalty of $1,000 fine and 90 days in jail, although many people end up paying a few hundred dollars or less, according to the Reformer’s review of convictions.

Keep reading

Ohio Lawmakers Pass Bill To Roll Back Voter-Approved Marijuana Law And Impose Hemp Restrictions, Sending It To Governor

The Ohio Senate has voted to concur with a House-amended bill to scale back the state’s voter-approved marijuana law and ban the sale of hemp products that fall outside of a recently revised federal definition for the crop unless they’re sold at licensed cannabis dispensaries.

The measure from Sen. Stephen Huffman (R) was substantively revised in the House last month, but the originating chamber voted 22-7 on Tuesday to accept those changes and send the legislation to Gov. Mike DeWine’s (R) desk.

The legislation now pending the governor’s signature would recriminalize certain marijuana activity that was legalized under a ballot initiative that passed in 2023  as well as remove anti-discrimination protections for cannabis consumers that were enacted under that law.

After the House revised the initial Senate-passed legislation, removing certain controversial provisions, the Senate quickly rejected those changes in October. That led to the appointment of a bicameral conference committee to resolve outstanding differences between the chambers. That panel then approved a negotiated form of the bill, which passed the House last month and has now cleared the Senate.

To advocates’ disappointment, the final version of the measure now heading to the governor’s desk would eliminate language in current statute providing anti-discrimination protections for people who lawfully use cannabis. That includes protections meant to prevent adverse actions in the context of child custody rights, the ability to qualify for organ transplants and professional licensing.

It would also recriminalize possessing marijuana from any source that isn’t a state-licensed dispensary in Ohio or from a legal homegrow. As such, people could be charged with a crime for carrying cannabis they bought at a legal retailer in neighboring Michigan.

Additionally, it would ban smoking cannabis at outdoor public locations such as bar patios—and it would allow landlords to prohibit vaping marijuana at rented homes. Violating that latter policy, even if it involves vaping in a person’s own backyard at a rental home, would constitute a misdemeanor offense.

The legislation would also replace what had been a proposed regulatory framework for intoxicating hemp that the House had approved with a broad prohibition on sales outside marijuana dispensaries following a recent federal move to recriminalize such products.

“In short, this bill leaves the crux of Issue 2 and marijuana access intact, while providing for several important public safety concerns and also regulations that protect Ohio children,” Huffman argued on the Senate floor ahead of Tuesday’s vote.

Sen. Bill DeMora (D), however, said the legislation undermines the will of voters.

Keep reading

Venezuela and the Most Blatant Coup in History

There was a time, not long ago, when the U.S. had the social etiquette to conduct its coups clandestinely. That is important because it means they recognized that it is wrong. Coups were carried out by the CIA, and we often only found out years later. Now, they are carried out by the navy for the world to watch on television. The change is a reflection of Washington’s hubris and the belief that they can do what they want.

There may never have been a more public and obvious coup than the coup attempt unfolding in Venezuela. Hardly under cover of the dark of night, the largest aircraft carrier in the world, the nuclear powered USS Gerald R. Ford, brought its, at least, 40 F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, its EA-18G Growlers, its two squadrons of helicopters, its five destroyers and it B-52 Stratofortress and much more to St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands, about 560 miles from the coast of Venezuela. Its more than 4,500 troops join the more than 10,000 troops with their Aegis guided-missile destroyers, a nuclear-powered fast attack submarine, F-35B jet fighters, MQ-9 Reaper drones, P-8 Poseidon spy planes, assault ships and a secretive special-operations ship who were already in the waters off the coast of Venezuela.

The U.S. military buildup is too small for a full-scale invasion and too large for stopping small boats carrying drugs. But it is perfect for a coup. The threat and pressure it exerts on Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro is overwhelming and unbearable.

U.S. coups in Venezuela are not new. They were not new in 2002 when the democratically elected Hugo Chávez was briefly removed from office in a coup before the people and the military restored the popular leader to power.

But the script has changed little since they were new in 1908 when the U.S. helped oust the left leaning Cipriano Castro and his objections to American power and influence in Latin America.

From its birth, Venezuela, along with Cuba, has represented an unacceptable challenge to the spread of America’s vision of form of government and leadership in what it perceives as its own backyard. Conceived almost in conversation with the 23 year older American constitution, the first constitution of Venezuela, as Greg Grandin has pointed out in America, América: A New History of the New World, sought to balance America’s preoccupation with individual liberty with the common good. The constitution calls for the “renunciation of the dangerous right to unlimited freedom” and insists that “because governments are constituted for the common good and happiness of men, society must provide aid to the destitute and unfortunate and education to all citizens.”

From Francisco de Miranda and Simón Bolívar, who fought first for Venezuela’s independence and then for a united Latin America, to Hugo Chávez who united and galvanized the Latin American left, Venezuela has been a challenge to the spread of American ideology and hegemony in the western hemisphere.

But the American response has never been so public and bellicose. In late November, Donald Trump spoke to Maduro by phone. The phone call lasted less than 15 minutes. Precisely what transpired on that phone call remains unknown. But one thing is clear. Like a sheriff in a bad western movie, Trump, with guns drawn, Trump told Maduro to get out of town. He told him that he had one week to leave.

What happened next is not clear. It is not entirely clear whether Maduro refused to leave or if Trump refused Maduro’s conditions for leaving. According to reporting by The Miami Herald and Reuters, Trump told Maduro that safe passage would be granted to him, his wife and his son if he agreed to resign right away and flee Venezuela for the destination of his choice.

Keep reading

6 Major Warning Signs That Indicate That Military Strikes On Venezuela Could Be Imminent

They are getting all of their ducks in a row for a war with Venezuela.  Do you think that it is just a coincidence that Southern Command just canceled leave for Thanksgiving and Christmas?  And do you think that it is just a coincidence that the Trump administration just designated “Cartel de los Soles” as a foreign terrorist organization?  This is going to allow the Trump administration to take military action against Venezuela without formally declaring war.  As you will see below, so many of the things that we would expect to see just before a major military operation commences are happening right now.  The following are 6 major warning signs that indicate that military strikes on Venezuela could be imminent…

Keep reading

Michigan Judge Allows Marijuana Tax Increase To Take Effect Despite Industry Lawsuit

A group of cannabis industry advocates were unable to convince a Michigan Court of Claims judge that they would face irreparable harm if a new 24 percent wholesale tax on marijuana went into effect to fund the state’s future road repairs.

In an opinion issued Monday, Court of Claims Judge Sima Patel said she was denying a request for a preliminary injunction from the plaintiffs in Holistic Research Group Inc./Michigan Cannabis Industry v. Michigan Department of Treasury.

The consolidated lawsuits posited that the new tax, passed in October as part of a comprehensive 2025-26 budget deal to raise new revenue for road repairs and rebuilds through 2030, was unconstitutional because it violated the title-object clause of the state’s Constitution.

Patel on Monday, after hearing oral arguments in the matter in November, said the industry advocates didn’t make a supported argument that a real constitutional issue existed, nor did the group succinctly show that the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Act, which legalized the use and sale of cannabis in Michigan, was the only statutory mechanism to enact taxes on pot.

“The [road funding act] is consistent with the [marijuana taxation act]. The plaintiffs contend that the phrase ‘all other taxes’…refers only to generally applicable taxes, like the 6 percent sales tax imposed on all retail sales,” she wrote. “If that were true, however, the initiative could have simply said that. Instead, the initiative stated plainly that the 10 percent retail excise tax was in addition to ‘all other taxes.’ And the phrase ‘all other’ is broad and expansive. According to the plain meaning of these terms, ‘all other taxes’ broadly means all taxes other than the tax imposed by [the marijuana taxation act].”

Patel further noted that the Legislature did not directly amend any of the existing taxes in the regulatory act or replace it with the new tax in the road funding legislation; rather, the Legislature imposed a new separate tax, which is permitted under the regulatory act.

“The two statutes can be read together,” Patel wrote.

The claim regarding the mechanism by which a new tax could be enacted was therefore dismissed, Patel wrote.

Patel did, however, allow the case to move forward to determine if the tax interferes with the intent of the voter-initiated law that allowed marijuana consumption, regulations and sales. Patel said a genuine issue of fact remained on that issue, which required further consideration before the court.

Keep reading