Tag: the war on (some) drugs

New Ohio Senate Bill Would Ban Sale Of Intoxicating Hemp Products To People Under 21

Ohio state Sen. Bill DeMora (D) recently introduced a bill that would ban the sale of intoxicating hemp products to people under 21. Unlike some others that have been introduced, this bill would focus solely on hemp and not on changing voter-passed marijuana law.

Ohio Senate Bill 266 would also ban the sale of intoxicating hemp products that have not been tested under the same rules as marijuana and would prevent selling intoxicating hemp products that are “considered attractive to children,” according to the bill’s language.

This bill would prohibit selling an intoxicating hemp product “that bears the likeness or contains the characteristics of a realistic or fictional human, animal, or fruit, including artistic, caricature, or cartoon renderings,” according to the bill’s language.

“I put this bill in to get rid of the stuff that everybody agrees is bad,” Columbus Democratic state Sen. DeMora said. “Everybody agrees [intoxicating hemp products are] targeted to children to look like Skittles and Oreo cookies and that it’s unregulated… We need to act because this stuff is poisoning kids [and] making kids sick.”

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) has previously asked lawmakers to regulate or ban delta-8 THC products.

“It’s a huge problem,” DeWine said talking to reporters on Monday. “There’s really no regulation at all. We need regulation. We need the legislature to take action on this. We’re also looking, frankly, at some things that I might be able to do without legislative action.”

DeMora thinks marijuana and hemp products should be dealt with separately.

“Hopefully this bill will, if nothing else, we can all agree on one thing—to get the bad stuff out of the hands of kids and stop the marketing toward kids,” he said.

The 2018 Farm Bill says hemp can be grown legally if it contains less than 0.3 percent THC.

Ohio is one of about 20 states that does not have any regulations around intoxicating hemp products, according to an Ohio State University Drug Enforcement and Policy Center study from November 2024.

This is one of a handful of bills in the Ohio legislature that are trying to regulate intoxicating hemp products.

Keep reading

FBI Takes Down Money Laundering Network Tied To Venezuelan Dictator Nicolas Maduro – Two Men Indicted as DOJ Joins Pressure on Socialist Regime

FBI is gunning for Maduro, too.

Besides the major military deployment of assets to the Caribbean, with multiple reports warning of possible ground operations in Venezuela, other areas of the US government are also focused in curtailing the reign of terror of Nicolas Maduro, ‘the butcher of Caracas’.

The Treasury and the Department of Justice are also working against the international arms of the criminal cartels.

Fox News reported:

“The FBI says two men have been indicted in connection with an alleged money-laundering scheme tied to Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro’s children.

The indictments come after a years-long investigation that dates back to 2019 when the FBI’s Miami Field Office launched the probe based on indications that Arick Komarczyk opened U.S. bank accounts for Maduro’s children and their U.S.-based associates. Suspicious Activity Reports allegedly showed that Komarczyk received wire transfers from individuals and businesses in Venezuela, according to the FBI.”

Komarczyk and his associate, Irazmar Carbajal, allegedly moved $100,000 of suspected sanctioned money belonging to members of Venezuela’s regime.

The men are said to have moved about $25,000 into the U.S.

Keep reading

Defending the Summary Execution of Suspected Drug Smugglers, Trump Declares an ‘Armed Conflict’

This week, President Donald Trump sought to justify his new policy of summarily executing suspected drug smugglers by declaring that his targets are “unlawful combatants” in an “armed conflict” with the United States. But that terminology, which Trump deployed in a notice to Congress, does not change the reality that he has authorized the military murder of criminal suspects who pose no immediate threat of violence.

So far, Trump has ordered three attacks on speedboats in the Caribbean Sea that he said were carrying illegal drugs, killing a total of 17 people. The first attack was a September 2 drone strike that killed 11 people on a boat that reportedly “appeared to have turned around before the attack started because the people onboard had apparently spotted a military aircraft stalking it.” On September 15, U.S. forces blew up another speedboat in the Caribbean, killing three people whom Trump described as “confirmed narcoterrorists from Venezuela.” Four days later, Trump announced a third attack that he said killed three people “affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization” who were “conducting narcotrafficking.”

Contrary to Trump’s implication, that designation does not turn murder into self-defense. “The State Department designation merely triggers the government’s ability to implement asset controls and other economic sanctions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and other statutes,” Georgetown law professor Marty Lederman noted after the first attack on a suspected drug boat. “It has nothing to do with authorizing [the Defense Department] to engage in targeted killings…which is why the U.S. military doesn’t go around killing members of all designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations.”

According to White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly, Trump’s literalization of the war on drugs is fully consistent with international law. “The president acted in line with the law of armed conflict to protect our country from those trying to bring deadly poison to our shores,” she told The New York Times this week. “He is delivering on his promise to take on the cartels and eliminate these national security threats from murdering more Americans.”

That framing is logically, morally, and legally nonsensical. The truth is that Americans like to consume psychoactive substances that legislators have deemed intolerable, and criminal organizations are happy to profit from that demand. The fact that Americans who use illegal drugs sometimes die as a result—a hazard magnified by the prohibition policy that Trump is so eager to enforce—does not transform the people who supply those drugs into murderers.

If it did, alcohol producers and distributors, who supply a product implicated in an estimated 178,000 deaths a year in the United States, would likewise be guilty of murder. And by Trump’s logic, they would be subject to the death penalty based on nothing more than the allegation that they were involved in the alcohol trade.

Keep reading

24% Michigan marijuana tax, a key piece of the legislative budget deal, has passed

After much hand wringing and consternation from lawmakers who feared detrimental effects to Michigan’s cannabis industry, the Michigan Senate voted early Friday morning by a thin margin to pass a 24% wholesale tax on marijuana products sold in the state.

The measure is estimated to raise $420 million in new revenue to fund road repairs and construction in the new fiscal year, a key component of the budget deal reached by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township) and Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids).

If the vote had failed, the entire deal would more than likely fall apart, sending the respective chambers and the governor’s office back to the negotiating table. Such a development would have also sent the state into a full government shutdown. House leadership said Thursday that it would not entertain another continuation budget after the one passed Wednesday expired after Oct. 8.

Although many members of the cannabis industry rallied at the Capitol and lobbied lawmakers against passing the legislation, the implications of the entire deal falling through weighed heavily on the Legislature’s mind.

The House and Senate on late Thursday and early Friday morning passed their respective conference budgets to fund the whole of government, K-12 schools and higher education, but all of that hinged on passage of the marijuana tax.

The bill passed by a slim 19-17 vote, which had nearly as much bipartisan dissent as it did support.

Brinks and the following senators voted in favor of the bill: Sarah Anthony (D-Lansing), Rosemary Bayer (D-West Bloomfield), Darrin Camilleri (D-Trenton), Mary Cavanagh (D-Redford Township), Stephanie Chang (D-Detroit), John Cherry (D-Flint), Kevin Daley (R-Lum), Erika Geiss (D-Taylor), Veronica Klinefelt (D-Eastpointe), Dan Lauwers (R-Brockway), Ed McBroom (R-Vulcan), Sean McCann (D-Kalamazoo), Mallory McMorrow (D-Royal Oak), Jeremy Moss (D-Bloomfield Township), Dayna Polehanki (D-Livonia), Sam Singh (D-East Lansing), Roger Victory (R-Georgetown Township) and Paul Wojno (D-Warren).

Sen. Jeff Irwin (D-Ann Arbor) voted no against the bill. He was one of the legislation’s strongest opponents. 

Irwin was joined by Sens. Thomas Albert (R-Lowell), Joseph Bellino (R-Monroe), Jon Bumstead (R-North Muskegon), John Damoose (R-Harbor Springs), Roger Hauck (R-Mount Pleasant), Kevin Hertel (D-Saint Clair Shores), Michele Hoitenga (R-Manton), Mark Huizenga (R-Walker), Ruth Johnson (R-Groveland Township), Jonathan Lindsey (R-Coldwater), Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt (R-Porter Township), Jim Runestad (R-White Lake), Sylvia Santana (D-Detroit), Sue Shink (D-Northfield Township), Lana Theis (R-Brighton) and Michael Webber (R-Rochester Hills).

A large portion of the day was spent debating the measure in caucus meetings and whipping votes to ensure the tax did not go up in smoke.

Keep reading

Unprecedented US Military Build-Up Near Venezuela Is Sign Of Possible War

Venezuela continues to be on high alert given the growing number of US military assets parked off its coast in the southern Caribbean. Venezuelan Defense Minister General Vladimir Padrinohas recently said “We’re watching them, I want you to know. And I want you to know that this doesn’t intimidate us. It doesn’t intimidate the people of Venezuela.”

He noted that American military “planes flying close to our Caribbean Sea is a vulgarity, a provocation, a threat to the security of the nation” – further calling it “military harassment.”

This comes as President Trump updated Congress on the situation in a memo this week. It stated the US was now in “a non-international armed conflict” with the cartels, which his administration earlier designated as terrorist organizations. 

Sufficient Pentagon forces have been assembled which would allow for the capture a strategic infrastructure in Venezuela, such as a port or airport, fresh reports say.

Additionally, there’s this fresh development previewed in Newsweek: “a platoon of U.S. Navy SEALs—typically comprising 16 personnel—will conduct joint drills this month with approximately 40 Argentine tactical divers,” according to a US Southern Command spokesperson.

The same publication lists five signs that possible war with Venezuela could be looming:

  • F-35B Jets in Puerto Rico
  • Pentagon Imagery
  • Cargo and Naval Deployments
  • Special Operations
  • US military units in the Caribbean

All of this also allowed The Washington Examiner to speculate in a major Thursday report, saying it “understands that military planners believe the assembled forces are now sufficient to seize and hold key strategic facilities such as ports and airfields on Venezuelan territory (the Washington Examiner is withholding some details for national security reasons).”

It adds: “US control over such locations would allow for the increased, sustained projection of U.S. military power into Venezuela from defensible positions.”

Washington Examiner further notes that Pentagon maneuvers and potential conflict preparations have been an open secret:

A Defense Department readout from late August notes how a training exercise off the U.S. Virgin Islands saw “six special tactics airmen parachuted into the Caribbean Sea with an inflatable boat, 3 miles off the shore. … Eleven more combat controllers and pararescuemen then jumped directly into [an airport] from the same aircraft, with both forces combining to take control of the airfield.”

While the Trump administration has vowed to to not start new wars – and the president has of late been boasting of solving several conflicts – Washington has been reviving ‘war on drugs’ type imagery and a rationale for the military build-up. Meanwhile Friday saw another attack on an alleged smuggling vessel in regional waters:

US STRIKES ANOTHER VESSEL IN WATERS OFF VENEZUELAN COAST

Keep reading

Hegseth Announces 4th Deadly Strike On ‘Narco-Terrorist’ Boat Off Venezuela

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth announced Friday another military strike on an alleged drug-smuggling boat off Venezuela which killed four people.

This marks at least the fourth such attack, and after President Trump formally notified Congress this week that the US was entering a “non-international armed conflict” with drug cartels. Hegseth made clear on social media, “These strikes will continue until the attacks on the American people are over!!!!”

Hegseth affirmed in a social media post that he had directed the latest strike on Trump’s orders, and released overhead drone video of the attack.

“The strike was conducted in international waters just off the coast of Venezuela while the vessel was transporting substantial amounts of narcotics – headed to America to poison our people,” Hegseth said on X.

“Our intelligence, without a doubt, confirmed that this vessel was trafficking narcotics, the people onboard were narco-terrorists, and they were operating on a known narco-trafficking transit route,” he added.

Trump’s rationale for the attacks in the aforementioned memo states the cartels are “non-state armed groups” whose actions smuggling drugs “constitute an armed attack against the United States”.

Keep reading

California Governor Signs Bill To Integrate Hemp And Marijuana Markets After Banning Intoxicating Cannabinoids Outside Of Dispensaries

The governor of California has signed a bill to integrate intoxicating hemp products into the state’s existing marijuana market—an attempt to consolidate the cannabis industry and prevent youth access to unregulated hemp.

After the legislation from Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D) passed the Senate last month, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed it into law on Thursday.

“We are continuing to place the safety of every Californian first,” Newsom said. “For too long, nefarious hemp manufacturers have been exploiting loopholes to make their intoxicating products easily available to our most vulnerable communities—that stops today.”

This follows the governor’s emergency order last year that outright prohibited hemp products with any trace amounts of THC from being sold, which industry stakeholders warned would devastate the marketplace.

Under the newly signed bill, intoxicating hemp products that meet certain regulatory requirements would be able to be sold at licensed cannabis retailers with age restrictions and testing rules. But it’s unclear how that might ameliorate the hemp industry’s concerns, when adults and patients go to a store with the option to buy a broader array of marijuana products.

“Bad actors have abused state and federal law to sell intoxicating hemp products in our State. As the author of legislation that allowed the legal sale of non-intoxicating hemp CBD products, this is absolutely unacceptable,” Aguiar-Curry said. “AB 8 is a result of years of collaboration with this Administration, and I appreciate the Governor’s signature.”

“Our first job is to protect our kids and our communities,” she said. “With this bill, we’ll have responsible regulation, increase enforcement, and support struggling legal cannabis businesses against criminal competition.”

Nicole Elliott, director of the Department of Cannabis Control (DCC), said the legislation represents “a critical step forward for California’s cannabis industry and for consumer safety.”

“By closing loopholes around intoxicating hemp products and bringing them under the same strict rules as cannabis, this legislation protects consumers, ensures fair competition for licensed businesses, and strengthens the integrity of our regulated marketplace,” she said. “AB 8 makes it clear that all intoxicating products must be held to the same important standards Californians expect.”

The key provisions of the law take effect in January 2028, mandating that consumable hemp products with cannabinoids other that CBD must comply with the state’s current medical and recreational marijuana laws.

A Senate analysis of the bill released last month said the measure would ban the sale of “synthetic cannabis products and inhalable cannabis products containing cannabinoids derived from hemp,” place restrictions on incorporating raw hemp extracts into foods and beverages and expand “the authority for state and local enforcement agencies to inspect, seize, and destroy unlawful cannabis products.”

This all follows Newsom announcing emergency regulations last year to outlaw hemp products with any “detectable amount of total THC.” Under that move, hemp products that don’t have THC are also limited to five servings per package, and sales are restricted to adults 21 and older.

The proposal came less than a month after the state legislature effectively killed a governor-backed bill that would have imposed somewhat similar restrictions on intoxicating hemp-derived cannabinoids.

Keep reading

Oregon Marijuana Business Files New Lawsuit Challenging Ban On Interstate Cannabis And Hemp Commerce

An Oregon marijuana business has filed a new federal lawsuit against the state, challenging the constitutionality of laws prohibiting interstate cannabis commerce.

After filing an initial suit in 2022—and later withdrawing it amid expectations of unspecified “big things” coming—the cannabis wholesaler Jefferson Packing House (JPH) filed a revised complaint on Wednesday with the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon.

The latest suit is lengthier than the original, and it makes additional arguments about the alleged illegality of state laws barring marijuana and hemp businesses from exporting products across state lines.

At issue in the case is the Dormant Commerce Clause (DCC) of the U.S. Constitution, which generally prevents states from imposing restrictions on interstate commerce in order to ensure competitiveness in the open market.

While marijuana remains federally illegal, the plaintiffs assert that the DCC still precludes Oregon from imposing trade restrictions between states.

“Oregon law harms JPH by increasing its operating costs and preventing it from taking advantage of economies of scale,” the filing states, adding that state statute also harms the business with respect to hemp, which was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill.

Barring exports of marijuana and hemp puts JPH “at a competitive disadvantage in the market,” the complaint says, because it can’t source cannabis products from out of state and can’t ship products outside of Oregon, “both of which limit its customer base and ability to offer a complete range of products at the best prices.”

State law “discriminates against interstate commerce by nakedly prohibiting such commerce, without any legitimate, non-protectionist purpose, and is therefore prohibited by the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution,” it says. “There is no constitutionally adequate reason for Oregon, or any other State, to bar the import or export” marijuana or hemp.

Keep reading

Florida Court Blocks Police From Using The Smell Of Marijuana Alone To Search Vehicles

A Florida court has ruled that police cannot search a person’s vehicle based only on the smell of marijuana.

The District Court of Appeal of Florida Second District on Wednesday issued an opinion, authored by Judge Nelly Khouzam, overturning a lower court decision that upheld the “plain smell doctrine” that has long permitted cannabis odor to be used as a pretense for vehicle searches.

The policy was challenged in district court after a man had his probation revoked when police pulled over a car he was in, claimed to smell marijuana, forced the occupants to exit the vehicle to conduct a search and discovered cannabis and pills.

But while it might have made sense in the past to use cannabis odor as a pretext for a search when it was strictly prohibited, the state’s laws have “fundamentally” changed, the appellate court said, referencing the legalization of hemp and medical marijuana in Florida.

“For generations, cannabis was illegal in all forms—thereby rendering its distinct odor immediately indicative of criminal activity. But several legislative amendments over the years have fundamentally changed its definition and regulation,” it said. “The cumulative result is that cannabis is now legal to possess in multiple forms, depending on discrete characteristics such as where it was procured or its chemical concentration by weight.”

“We are obligated under well-established constitutional principles to give meaning and effect to the legislature’s significant amendments to cannabis regulation,” the opinion, first reported by News Service of Florida, said.

Keep reading

Oregon Officials Ask Federal Court To Reverse Ruling That Blocked Marijuana Industry Labor Law Approved By Voters

Oregon officials are asking a federal appeals court to reverse a judge’s ruling that struck down a voter-approved law to require licensed marijuana businesses to enter into labor peace agreements with workers and mandate that employers remain neutral in discussions around unionization.

In a filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit last week, attorneys for Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek (D), Attorney General Dan Rayfield (D) and Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission’s (OLCC) Dennis Doherty and Craig Prins urged a review of the “constitutional challenge” to the state law.

The officials previously provided notice that they’d be contesting the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon decision back in June.

After two marijuana businesses—Bubble’s Hash and Ascend Dispensary—initially filed a lawsuit in the district court challenging the implementation of Measure 119, a federal judge sided with the plaintiffs, finding that the law unconstitutionally restricts free speech and violates the federal National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Under the currently paused law, a marijuana businesses that was unable to provide proof of a labor peace agreement could have been subject a denial or revocation of their license.

Keep reading