Tag: the war on (some) drugs

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

ATF Agent Stops Gun Sale Over Marijuana Odor And DOJ Argues Cannabis Consumers Don’t Have 2nd Amendment Rights 

Second Amendment advocates are criticizing a pair of recent developments around marijuana and firearms—issues they say underscore the need for further reform.

Last month during a routine audit of a gun dealer, a federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) investigator reportedly ordered the store to stop the sale of a pistol because the investigator claimed the would-be buyer smelled of marijuana.

“I wasn’t high,” the prospective buyer told the Second Amendment Foundation, according to the outlet Ammoland, which referred to the individual only as Daniel. “None of this makes any sense to me.”

Daniel had already filed federal paperwork saying he was eligible to own a firearm and had passed a background check for the handgun, according to the report. When he went to pick it up at a Plant City, Florida store, however, the ATF industry operations investigator reportedly halted the sale.

ATF spokesman Jason Medina acknowledged that the smell of marijuana could have been from exposure to second-hand smoke and not an indication that the gun buyer himself had consumed cannabis.

“That’s true,” Medina told Ammoland.

Meanwhile in a federal appeals court case, the Department of Justice argued in a filing earlier this month that marijuana users “are more likely than ordinary citizens to misuse firearms,” likening them to “the mentally ill” as well as “infants, idiots, lunatics, and felons.”

Keep reading

Morocco celebrates huge cannabis harvest – legally for the first time

Morocco’s first legal cannabis harvest was 294 metric tons in 2023, after the country approved its cultivation and export for medicine and industrial uses, the cannabis regulator has said said.

The harvest was made by 32 cooperatives that brought together 430 farmers covering 277 hectares in the northern Rif mountain areas of Al Houceima, Taounat and Chefchaouen, ANRAC claimed.

The United Nations drugs agency says about 47,000 hectares of the Rif are devoted to cannabis output, roughly a third of the amount in 2003 after government crackdowns.

This year, the regulator is examining applications by 1,500 farmers who organised themselves into 130 cooperatives, ANRAC said.

Cultivation of the local drought-enduring landrace, known as Beldia, began this month, it said.

Although Morocco is a major cannabis producer, officially cannabis use for recreational purposes is illegal. In practice, it is tolerated.

Nearly a million people live in areas of northern Morocco where cannabis is the main economic activity. It has been publicly grown and smoked there for generations, mixed with tobacco in traditional long-stemmed pipes with clay bowls.

The legalisation was intended to improve farmers’ incomes and protect them from drug traffickers who dominate the cannabis trade and export it illegally.

So far, two legal cannabis transformation units have been operating and two others are waiting for equipment, while 15 cannabis products are in the process of being authorised for medicinal use, ANRAC said.

Morocco is also seeking to tap into a growing global market for legal cannabis, and awarded 54 export permits last year.

Keep reading

Kentucky prison officers accused of forcing inmates to drink urine or be tased upon failed drug test

A lawsuit filed on behalf of seven inmates at the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex claims they were forced to either drink their own urine or be tased after failing a drug test while in custody.

And Department of Corrections spokeswoman Lisa Lamb acknowledged in a statement that some employees have been fired and disciplined in other ways.

“This incident was thoroughly investigated and multiple disciplinary actions were taken including employee terminations,” she said. “As of now, the Department of Corrections has not been served with the lawsuit and cannot provide further comment.”

She would not discuss details of the disciplinary action or terminations, including the results of the investigation. 

WDRB News has requested the investigation and disciplinary action taken through the Kentucky open records law. 

In a June 6th memo to Randy White, deputy commissioner of the Department of Corrections, an investigator said the findings substantiated that staffers were tasing inmates who failed drug test. 

“This determination is based on the preponderance of evidence,” according to an investigative memo obtained by WDRB. “This evidence includes video footage, staff and inmate witness statements , electronic Taser evidence log … and inconsistencies in suspect interviews.” 

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court’s Eastern District in Ashland, claims four correctional officers told the inmates who failed drug tests “they would be able to ‘throw away’ their urine sample if they chose to be subjected to electrocution by taser or to drink their own urine.”

However, the suit also claims the seven inmates were “forced” to either be tased or drink their urine.

Keep reading

As White House Hosts Marijuana Pardon Recipients, It’s Time For Bolder Action From Biden

As President Biden listed off his first-term accomplishments during his State of the Union address, Richeda Ashmeade sat studying for midterms in her last year of law school. Listening to the president tout his executive actions on cannabis, she was acutely aware of those whom his reforms have left behind. Despite all the rhetoric and applause breaks, her father, Ricardo Ashmeade, is still serving a 22-year sentence and is one of the thousands of people still in federal prison for cannabis.

The specific actions Biden highlighted during his address were related to his October 2022 proclamation, in which he pardoned all prior federal offenses of simple marijuana possession, a move that was expanded on late last year to bring relief to an estimated 13,000 Americans. His executive action also initiated a review process that could result in cannabis being reclassified under the Controlled Substances Act at the federal level and moved out of Schedule I, the most dangerous drug classification. Yet neither of these actions would affect those who have suffered the most devastating consequences of prohibition, families like the Ashmeades.

Biden’s actions are being hailed as historic, but in reality, they represent peripheral changes that signal the reevaluation of cannabis but not the release of cannabis prisoners or relief for those who continue to be burdened by the lasting consequences of the carceral system. In short, these announcements represent progress but not justice. But that hasn’t stopped the administration from leveraging these actions with voters.

On Friday, Vice President Harris gathered several of the cannabis pardon recipients, along with rapper Fat Joe, for a public discussion about criminal justice reform at the White House. Clearly, the administration sees the political power of undoing the harms caused by the criminalization of cannabis—a sentiment that is backed up by polling data that shows the vast majority of Americans feel cannabis should no longer be criminalized.

Of course, the timing and context here matter, with these moves coming as the highly contentious presidential race ramps up. When he made his remarks, Biden became the first president in over 35 years to mention marijuana during a State of the Union address. The last president to mention cannabis during the address was Reagan, who listed marijuana among the prime enemies of the people and as a reason for the necessity of the war on drugs.

Keep reading

Smart Approaches to Marijuana Exec Attacks ‘Fake’ Cannabis Research on Fox

Anti-cannabis political organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) was represented on Fox News primetime to expose what they believe to be fake research promoted in greed by the cannabis industry. SAM is a political organization opposed to cannabis legalization and commercialization, specifically pushing for penalties for cannabis use.

Executive Vice President of SAM Luke Niforatos joined Laura Ingraham on The Ingraham Angle to discuss how “Big Cannabis” is funding UCLA, Harvard, and MIT studies on the efficacy of cannabis for medical purposes.

“The mainstreaming of pot has come at the same time the drug has increased exponentially in its potency, its THC levels,” warned Ingraham, linking it to “violent behavior.” Ingraham frequently explores the dangers of pot and blamed “pot psychosis” due to widespread legalization for the rise in mass shooting incidents. 

Niforatos then delivered a new mixed bag of reefer madness and hysteria: “Big marijuana is terrified right now, because there are now volumes of research telling us that this new super-charged marijuana that the industry is pumping out is causing psychosis, schizophrenia,” Niforatos said. “We’re seeing addiction rates go up. They’re targeting our kids. All kinds of car crashes on the roads! So all of this is coming out of the research.”

Keep reading

Expanding the Drug War To Include Tobacco Would Be a Big Mistake

Last month, New Zealand scrapped a law that would have gradually prohibited tobacco products by banning sales to anyone born after 2008. But Brookline, a wealthy Boston suburb, will implement a similar scheme now that the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts (SJC) has cleared the way.

Brookline’s bylaw, which bans sales of “tobacco or e-cigarette products” to anyone born after 1999, is unlikely to have much practical impact, since the town is surrounded by municipalities where such sales remain legal. But it reflects a broader transition from regulation to prohibition among progressives who seem to have forgotten the lessons of the war on drugs.

The local merchants who challenged Brookline’s ban argued that it was preempted by a state law that sets 21 as the minimum purchase age for tobacco products. They also claimed the bylaw violates the Massachusetts Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection by arbitrarily discriminating against adults based on their birthdates.

The SJC rejected both arguments in a decision published on Friday. The court concluded that state legislators had left local officials free to impose additional sales restrictions. And since birthdate-based distinctions do not involve “a suspect classification,” it said, Brookline’s bylaw is constitutional because it is “rationally related to the town’s legitimate interest in mitigating tobacco use overall and in particular by minors.”

The striking aspect of Brookline’s law, of course, is that it applies to adults as well as minors. It currently covers residents in their 20s and eventually will apply to middle-aged and elderly consumers as well.

Since anyone 21 or older who wants to buy tobacco or vaping products can still legally do so across the border in Boston, Cambridge, or Newton, Brookline’s ban looks more like an exercise in virtue signaling than a serious attempt to reduce consumption. The same could be said of the outright bans on tobacco sales that two other wealthy and supposedly enlightened enclaves, Beverly Hills and Manhattan Beach, enacted in 2019 and 2020, respectively.

The Beverly Hills ban makes exceptions for hotels and cigar lounges, and both cities border jurisdictions where tobacco sales are still allowed. But even as moral statements, these edicts are flagrantly illiberal, standing for the proposition that adults cannot be trusted to decide for themselves which psychoactive substances they want to consume.

Keep reading

Arizona Convenience Stores And Smoke Shops Must Stop Selling Delta-8 THC Products, Attorney General Says

Arizona law bars the sale of “diet weed” products like delta-8 THC in smoke shops and convenience stores, Attorney General Kris Mayes said.

But proponents of the hemp industry say the effect of a formal legal opinion that Mayes issued Monday goes far beyond the hemp-based intoxicants and will likely also sweep up the entirety of the CBD marketplace in Arizona, barring sales of products used to improve sleep and reduce body aches and pains.

And it may prompt litigation aimed at having the courts determine exactly how Arizona’s hemp and marijuana laws ought to be enforced.

Mayes, a Democrat, concluded in her opinion that, while federal law may allow for intoxicating substances to be made from hemp derivatives, Arizona law expressly regulates how such products are sold.

And that means they must be regulated by the Arizona Department of Health Services and only sold in dispensaries that are licensed to sell medical and recreational cannabis products.

Delta-8 is an intoxicating cannabinoid with a chemical profile and psychoactive effect materially similar to that of marijuana, but that is synthesized from the hemp plant. It is a chemical analog of delta-9, the primary psychoactive element that occurs naturally in marijuana.

Products made with delta-8 THC, including vape cartridges and gummies, are currently on sale in smoke shops across Arizona.

They have largely existed in a legal gray area in Arizona, with the hemp industry relying on congressional action in 2018, when that year’s annual Farm Bill expanded the definition of hemp to include “all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, [and] isomers” of the hemp plant. That paved the way for making delta-8, which is chemically synthesized from the naturally occurring cannabidiol into an intoxicating concentration.

Arizona voters have approved both medical and recreational marijuana in the state, but the industries are highly regulated, and licenses to operate are expensive. Arizona lawmakers this year are considering legislation backed by the hemp industry that would add more regulations to the sales of delta-8 THC products.

After the 2018 Farm Bill, production and sales of delta-8 THC products proliferated in Arizona, as they were seen as outside the scope of the state’s cannabis laws.

Keep reading