Tag: the war on (some) drugs

GOP Senators Push For Federal And State Response To Indian Tribe’s 4/20 Marijuana Sales Plan In North Carolina

Two Republican senators are asking federal, state and local officials what steps they are taking to enforce marijuana prohibition as an Indian tribe prepares to launch recreational cannabis sales on its lands within North Carolina on April 20.

On Friday, Sens. Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Ted Budd (R-NC) sent a letter with 19 questions about their concerns regarding the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (ECBI) marijuana plan to the U.S. attorney general, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Department of Interior (DOI), Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), National Indian Gaming Commission and various North Carolina state and local law enforcement agencies.

“As our nation is facing an unprecedented drug crisis that is harming our communities, it is vital to learn what measures your departments and agencies are taking to uphold current federal and state laws,” they wrote, adding that the “matter raises multiple questions on how North Carolina communities will be kept safe.”

ECBI members approved a referendum last September to legalize adult-use cannabis, becoming the first jurisdiction within the borders of North Carolina to enact the reform. More recently, last week the tribe announced that it had set a target date to open retail sales: April 20, 2024, also known as 4/20.

This follows ECBI’s 2021 move to legalize medical cannabis and register Qualla Boundary LLC to dispense marijuana to patients. Registration for the program opened to all North Carolina residents this past June, and in October, the tribe issued its first round of medical marijuana cards.

“With unclear guidance, it makes it difficult for state and local officials to uphold  the rule of law in our communities,” the senators wrote in their letter. “In particular, we have the responsibility to ensure our youth are shielded from untested marijuana products being produced and sold by Qualla Enterprise LLC.”

Tillis and Budd then listed 19 questions that they’re asking officials to respond to, depending on their jurisdiction.

That includes queries about whether tribes are considered exempt from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), whether agencies have concerns about the potential cannabis shop will attract transnational criminal enterprises, whether tribes can take land into trust for the purposes of selling cannabis and whether financial institutions can provide loans and credit to tribes seeking to open a marijuana business.

The senators are also pressing for answers on whether federal officials allow gaming profits derived from casinos to be used in support of marijuana ventures.

Ahead of last year’s legalization vote, Qualla Enterprises published an op-ed in the tribal newspaper, Cherokee One Feather, championing the benefits of adult-use sales. It compared the opportunity to when, “thirty years ago, the Cherokee People decided to build a casino.”

“This was highly controversial at the time, in part because nowhere in the surrounding region allowed gaming,” the company said at the time. “But we were not afraid to be different. Harrah’s Cherokee Casino has benefited this Tribe and its members in more ways than we ever imagined.”

The bulk of new jobs created by the policy change, according to the company, would be filled by enrolled ECBI members. In the medical system as of last year, 84 percent of cultivation employees were tribal members, its op-ed said, “which represents the highest of any business owned by the tribe.”

The op-ed also pointed to a statewide poll that found 73 percent of North Carolina residents support legal medical marijuana. And it cited estimates suggesting the state’s illicit cannabis activity amounted to nearly $3.2 billion in 2022.

A more recent survey of North Carolinians, conducted by the Meredith Poll and published last month, found 78 percent support for lawmakers to pass a medical marijuana bill this year.

The tribe’s moves to legalize despite North Carolina’s ongoing prohibition of marijuana drew criticism from other politicians, including Rep. Chuck Edwards (R-NC). Ahead of the election, Edwards, who is not Native, authored an op-ed in Cherokee One Feather warning that legalization on the tribal land “would be irresponsible, and I intend to stop it.”

The congressman also filed a bill in the U.S. House that would slash a portion of federal funding from tribes and states that legalize marijuana.

Then-Principal Chief Richard G. Sneed called the move “a big misstep” at the time. He told Marijuana Moment that he believed pushback from Edwards and others may have emboldened tribal members to support the measure.

“The worst thing that a non-Indian elected official can do is tell a sovereign, federally-recognized Indian tribe how they ought to handle their business,” Sneed said in an interview.

Keep reading

Oregon Legislators Overwhelmingly Vote To Recriminalize Low-Level Drug Possession

Oregon legislators last week overwhelmingly approved recriminalization of low-level drug possession, reversing a landmark reform that voters endorsed when they passed Measure 110 in 2020. Gov. Tina Kotek has indicated that she is inclined to sign the bill, ratifying a regression driven by unrealistic expectations and unproven assertions.

“With this bill,” Senate Majority Leader Kate Lieber (D–Portland) claims, “we are doubling down on our commitment to make sure Oregonians have access to the treatment and care that they need.” But Oregon is not merely making sure that people “have access” to treatment; it is foisting “help” on people who do not want it by threatening them with incarceration.

H.B. 4002 makes drug possession a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail. A defendant can avoid that outcome by enrolling in a treatment program.

Under Measure 110, by contrast, drug possession became a Class E violation punishable by a $100 fine. Drug users could avoid the fine by completing a “health assessment” at an “addiction recovery center.” The initiative said the assessment should “prioritize the self-identified needs of the client” and refer him to appropriate services. But Measure 110 did not make agreement to those services mandatory.

The initiative’s supporters argued that coercive treatment is both less effective and more ethically problematic than voluntary treatment. “Research suggests that, except in certain circumstances where drug users are uniquely self‐​motivated (such as doctors and commercial airline pilots who fear losing their licenses), coercive treatment is futile at best and may increase the likelihood of overdose in people who relapse after release from treatment,” Jeffrey Singer notes in a Cato Institute blog post.

The policy embodied by H.B. 4002 is notably different from the legal approach to alcohol abusers, who generally cannot be forced into treatment unless they commit crimes such as driving while intoxicated. Measure 110’s supporters argued that abuse of those substances likewise should be treated as a health issue rather than a criminal matter.

Over 58 percent of voters agreed. But a continuing increase in opioid-related deaths, coupled with nuisances related to public drug use, soured Oregonians on Measure 110. By last August, at which point the initiative had been in effect for only a year and a half, an Emerson College poll found that 64 percent of Oregon voters favored reinstating criminal penalties for possession.

Keep reading

Vermont Lawmakers Consider Removing Psilocybin Legalization Provision From Psychedelic Study Group Bill

A Vermont legislative panel continued its consideration on Thursday of a bill that would legalize psilocybin in the state and establish a work group on how to further regulate psychedelics for therapeutic use.

Though members of the Senate Health and Welfare Committee took no formal action on the measure, S. 114, they heard invited testimony and signaled their openness to making a number of changes to the underlying proposal—including removing the legalization portion and instead making that an issue for the work group to study.

“It could be that decriminalization is going to get in the way of therapeutic use,” said Sen. Ginny Lyons (D), the committee chair. “What we’re looking for is the value of therapeutic use.”

Other possible changes to the bill raised by lawmakers during the hearing included adjusting the membership of the work group, for example to remove members of the legislature and add a representative from the University of Vermont Medical School—something Lyons suggested during the committee’s initial consideration of the bill last month.

Additional members of the panel would include representatives from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, the state Office of Professional Regulation and the advocacy group Decriminalize Nature.

Keep reading

Iowa vaping bill draws opponents from retailers, health care groups

An Iowa bill that would add requirements to manufacturers of vaping and e-cigarette products has two surprising allies standing together in opposition: vape shops and health care organizations.

House Bill 682 and its companion legislation, Senate File 2402, would require vaping manufacturers who sell products in the state to include them on a new registry. The registration fee is $100 per product. Retailers could only sell products listed on the registry.

David Scott of Altria, a manufacturer of tobacco and related products, said the bill does not prohibit the sale of any legal product. What the bill does is prevent illegal products from overseas.

“China have over 50% of the (products) that are illegal,” Scott told a House Ways and Means subcommittee this week. “Three out of the five youth brands are illicit but they are still being brought in.”

The Food and Drug Administration created a similar registry on the federal level. In January, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the FDA’s decisions were made arbitrarily and capriciously and that the agency should reconsider its guidelines. Scott said the FDA admits it doesn’t have the resources to monitor the products.

“If you are not on the directory, the FDA has no idea what the ingredients are in your vape,” Scott said. “They have no control of your marketing and we have no idea of the manufacturing process.

Iowa is one of 23 states considering bills that would require a vaping product registry, according to Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association, an organization opposing the bills.

Sarah Linden, owner of Generation V in Council Bluffs and Davenport, told the subcommittee that the bill would put a strain on her business.

“It would eliminate 99% of the vapor products on the market,” Linden said. Retailers said vape users will find other ways to get their product if it is unavailable in their stores.

Retailers have an unlikely ally in health care organizations. The American Cancer Society is listed as “against the bill” in lobbyist declarations. The American Heart Association is undecided. CAFE Iowa Citizens Action Network, an organization that advocates for tobacco control policies to reduce its use, is also against the bill.

Keep reading

New Jersey Bill Would Force Drivers Suspected Of Being High On Marijuana To Provide A Blood Sample To Police

Cannabis experts are concerned about a lawmaker’s attempt to require motorists suspected of driving under the influence of marijuana to provide a blood sample to police.

Critics of the recently introduced bill say it would not only give police more power that would likely be wielded disproportionately against people of color, but they also argue the testing methods called for in the bill don’t even work.

Joshua Bachner, a cannabis attorney at law firm Mandelbaum Barrett, criticized the move as an example of government overreach.

“The state should develop—and there’s many of us in the state happy to coordinate with them—a comprehensive, reliable method for determining impairment,” he said. “But these piecemeal approaches are only going to cause a lot of victimization, frankly, for those who are falsely accused.”

Under current law, anyone in New Jersey who drives is consenting to provide a breath sample if police believe they are driving drunk—it’s called “implied consent.” The new bill would expand that to include a blood test and apply to any narcotic, hallucinogenic or other drug. Someone would be deemed under the influence of marijuana if they test positive for 3 nanograms or more of THC—the chemical that gets cannabis users high.

The push to expand implied consent laws to apply to drivers suspected of marijuana use comes two years after New Jersey’s recreational marijuana market launched, and as legal cannabis becomes more prevalent nationwide.

Keep reading

Oregon House Passes Bill To Reverse Voter-Approved Drug Decriminalization Law

The Oregon House on Thursday passed a proposal to reshape the state’s response to the fentanyl addiction and overdose crisis and put more power in the hands of police and prosecutors to rein in drug users.

The bipartisan vote of 51-7 kicks House Bill 4002 to the Senate, the last step in a long legislative process that started last fall. The bill would unwind voter-passed Measure 110 by putting in place a new misdemeanor charge for drug possession, a move intended to encourage people to enter treatment programs rather than face charges and go to jail. Potential jail time for misdemeanor drug possession would only kick in if a defendant violates their probation.

The bill represents a bipartisan compromise between Democrats and Republicans that was hashed out over hours-long meetings dating to September, with dozens of witnesses from advocacy groups, law enforcement, family members of overdose victims and behavioral health providers giving testimony. Oregon’s district attorneys, police and sheriffs support it, as do cities and business groups like the Portland Metro Chamber of Commerce and Washington County Chamber of Commerce.

“We are in the midst of a profound public health crisis and we must meet it with compassion and courage,” said Rep. Maxine Dexter, D-Portland. “These are humans.”

The bill would undo a key provision of the voter-passed Measure 110, which decriminalized possession of small amounts of hard drugs and enacted a system of $100 citations that a person could avoid if they obtained a health assessment. Police have said the citation system lacked the teeth necessary to encourage people to enter treatment, and a majority of Oregonians in surveys have voiced support for repealing Measure 110 or parts of it.

Keep reading

Marijuana Consumers Have ‘Significantly Decreased Odds’ Of Cognitive Decline, Study Finds

Marijuana use is associated with lower odds of subjective cognitive decline (SCD), according to a new study, with people who consume cannabis for recreational or medical purposes reporting less confusion and memory loss compared to non-users.

The study—which showed that recreational cannabis use is “significantly” linked to lower SCD—is especially notable given that past research has connected subjective decline to the development of dementia later in life.

The results, which were published in the journal Current Alzheimer Research this month, indicate that THC’s impacts on cognitive function may be more complicated than popularly assumed.

“Compared to non-users,” the study says, “non-medical cannabis use was significantly associated with 96% decreased odds of SCD.”

People who reported using marijuana for medical purposes, or for both medical and recreational purposes, also showed “decreased odds of SCD, although not significant,” the study found.

To be sure, a number of earlier studies have indicated negative associations between heavy cannabis use and mental performance. Authors of the new study, out of SUNY Upstate Medical University in Syracuse, pointed to past results linking long-term or frequent cannabis use to compromised verbal recall performance, worsened cognitive function and subjective memory complaints, for example.

“However, the cognitive implications of cannabis are not only determined by the frequency of cannabis consumption,” they wrote, noting that other factors—including product formulation, method of administration and reason for use—may also “impact the cognitive effects associated with cannabis use.”

“Our study addresses these knowledge gaps by comprehensively examining how reason, frequency, and method of cannabis use are associated with SCD among U.S. middle-aged and older adults,” their report says.

Keep reading

Indian Tribe Plans To Open North Carolina’s First Marijuana Dispensary On 4/20

Following last year’s decision by members of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (ECBI) to legalize cannabis for adult use, the tribe has set a target date to open retail sales: April 20, 2024. If all goes as planned, the launch will mark the first-ever legal marijuana sales within the borders of North Carolina.

“It’s the national cannabis holiday, right?” Lee Griffin, human resources director for the tribe’s marijuana business, Qualla Enterprises, said of the 4/20 start date during a ECBI tribal council work session on Wednesday. “Across the country, it’s the biggest revenue date annually” for cannabis.

“It’s like New Year’s Eve at the casino,” he said.

The retail store—located on the tribe’s 57,000-acre Qualla Boundary—will be open to any adult 21 and older, regardless of tribal membership.

Members of the tribe voted last September to legalize and regulate adult-use sales, approving a ballot measure with a strong 70 percent–30 percent margin.

Two years earlier, in 2021, ECBI’s Qualla Boundary became the first place in North Carolina where medical marijuana was legal after the tribal council adopted a regulated system. Registration for the program opened to all North Carolina residents this past June, and in October, the tribe issued its first round of medical marijuana cards.

At this week’s tribal council meeting, which was first reported by The Charlotte Observer, Griffin said that about 1,400 people have already applied for cannabis-related jobs, though Qualla Enterprises aims to hire just over 350. Currently the business employs 69 employees, he said.

Keep reading

Another Senator Signs Onto Marijuana Banking Bill, Saying It Will ‘Take The Target Off The Backs’ Of Dispensaries Facing Robberies

A Democratic senator has announced that she’s joined the list of bipartisan cosponsors of a marijuana banking bill, stressing the need for the reform amid a spate of robberies targeting state-licensed cannabis businesses in her state.

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) signed on as a cosponsor of the Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation (SAFER) Banking Act on Tuesday, becoming the 35th member of the chamber to add their name to the legislation in addition to its lead sponsor.

“Last year there were more than 50 robbery attempts at marijuana dispensaries in the State of Washington,” the senator said.

A report from StoptheDrugWar.org further found that nearly 100 Washington cannabis shops were impacted over a period of less than five months in 2021.

“This bill will take the target off the backs of our state’s dispensaries by updating federal banking laws so they don’t have to do all their business in cash,” Cantwell said.

The senator has also previously pushed for marijuana industry access to federal Small Business Administration (SBA) loans and services, as well as the elimination of an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) code known as 280E that prevents cannabis businesses from taking standard federal tax deductions.

Congressional researchers also recently Congressional acknowledged in a report that the lack of banking access for state-legal marijuana businesses leads them to be “heavily reliant on cash transactions, making them a target for theft.”

The Senate Banking Committee passed the SAFER Banking Act to address the issue last September, but the measure is pending action on the floor. Earlier versions have cleared the House in some form at least seven times in recent sessions.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in late December that lawmakers will “hit the ground running” in 2024, aiming to build on bipartisan progress on several key issues, including marijuana banking reform—though he noted it “won’t be easy.”

Keep reading

Pennsylvania Police Settle Lawsuit With Woman Forced to Undergo ‘Humiliating’ Strip-Search

Pennsylvania police officers have reached a settlement with a woman who says she underwent an unnecessary and humiliating strip-search after she was pulled over for a minor traffic violation. 

According to a lawsuit filed in 2021, Holly Elish was traveling through Bentlyville, Pennsylvania, on her way home from work when she was pulled over by local police officer Brian Rousseau.

When Rousseau pulled Elish over, he quickly asked for consent to search her vehicle, which Elish denied. According to the lawsuit, Rousseau responded that “he had the right to search her vehicle.” Soon after, a second police officer arrived on the scene. The two men again asked to search Elish’s vehicle, telling her that even more officers would soon arrive.

“Fearing for her safety and knowing that the police did not have justification to search her vehicle yet were insistent and intimidating in attempting to do so, Ms. Elish allowed the vehicle search to occur under duress and coercion,” the complaint states.

The officers searched Elish’s car but found no sign of drugs, illegal weapons, or other contraband. However, that wasn’t enough for the officers to let Elish go. A female police officer—unnamed in the suit—had arrived on the scene, and after having a brief conversation with the other officers began to strip-search Elish.

The officer “began the strip search by physically and visually inspecting Ms. Elish’s breasts,” according to the complaint. Elish then had “to remove her pants and underwear to her ankles and ‘squat’ to the ground, during which she bent down to the ground with one knee and performed a visual cavity inspection.”

Keep reading