Tag: the war on (some) drugs

Supreme Court to Take Up Ban on Gun Ownership for Marijuana Users

The Supreme Court will consider hearing a gun control case related to a federal ban on firearm possession by marijuana users.

The high court is reportedly expected to have a private discussion on whether it will take up the case of US v. Cooper on September 29. The law has been roundly criticized by gun rights advocates who argue that it is a violation of the Second Amendment.

The case centers on LaVance LeMarr Cooper, who was prosecuted for owning a firearm as a marijuana user, which made him a “prohibited person” under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), a federal criminal statute that bars certain people from owning firearms or ammunition.

This subsection targets those who unlawfully use controlled substances.

A police officer pulled Cooper over in Iowa during a traffic stop. They found a loaded Glock 20 in his vehicle. He did not have any felony convictions, but did have a misdemeanor conviction in 1996 for driving with a suspended license and marijuana possession.

Cooper later admitted to smoking marijuana on a regular basis — about three to four times per week. Prosecutors charged him with violating the federal statute. He waived his right to a jury trial and consented to a bench trial. This means he did not dispute that he owned a firearm while being a marijuana user.

The district court found him guilty on both counts and sentences him to over three years in prison  for the offenses — even though he was not intoxicated at the time of the traffic stop.

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in February vacated Cooper’s convicted and remanded the case. The panel rules that the lower court failed to properly apply the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen in Cooper’s case.

Keep reading

GOP Senator Threatens To Block Spending Bill If Hemp THC Product Ban Stays In, Sources Say

A GOP senator is threatening to hold up a major spending bill unless changes are made to provisions that would currently ban most consumable hemp products, which stakeholders say would decimate the industry.

Multiple sources familiar with discussions around the legislation tell Marijuana Moment that Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is intent on preventing the outright ban that was included in the Senate’s agriculture appropriations bill that advanced out of committee and now awaits floor action.

The prohibitionist organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) Action sent out an alert to its supporters on Friday, urging them to contact their representatives to push back against Paul’s efforts.

“The United States Senate is poised to overwhelmingly pass legislation banning hemp intoxicants, but Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is holding the bill hostage until he kills the hemp language,” it said. “Senator Paul wants to create a carve out for THC products like hemp beverages, in effect legalizing marijuana federally.”

While one source indicated that the senator was primarily focused on creating a carveout for hemp-derived THC beverages, two others who are aware of the conversations told Marijuana Moment that wasn’t the case. The exact scope of what Paul is aiming to achieve is unclear, but they say the senator is seeking a more holistic change to the controversial hemp language in the bill.

Keep reading

The Push Toward Legal DMT: Is The World Ready?

The Rise of legal DMT in the Psychedelic Conversation: As discussions around psychedelic legalization continue to evolve, one substance has gained notable traction: DMT (N,N-Dimethyltryptamine). Known for its intense, short-acting hallucinogenic experience, DMT has historically remained in the shadows compared to psilocybin or LSD. But now, thanks to changing perceptions and renewed research, the movement toward legalizing DMT is growing louder.

Legal DMT? A Patchwork of Global Policies

While DMT remains a Schedule I substance in the U.S. under the Controlled Substances Act, exceptions exist. Religious groups, such as the União do Vegetal (UDV), have received legal protection for ceremonial use of ayahuasca, a DMT-containing brew. Meanwhile, countries like Brazil and Peru tolerate traditional and spiritual use. In Canada, Section 56 exemptions are being considered for DMT therapy, and several psychedelic startups are lobbying for rescheduling.

Why DMT Is Different

Unlike other psychedelics, DMT offers a rapid and immersive experience — often lasting just 10–20 minutes when inhaled or vaped. This brevity makes it attractive for potential clinical applications, such as fast-acting trauma interventions or consciousness research. Companies like Small Pharma in the UK are developing DMT-based treatments for depression, and early-stage results are promising.

The Ethical and Medical Questions

However, the intensity and unpredictability of the DMT experience raises ethical concerns. Critics argue that even in supervised settings, the sheer strangeness of the DMT “breakthrough” could be destabilizing for vulnerable patients. Others emphasize that more controlled studies are needed to determine optimal dosing and preparation methods.

Cultural Roots vs. Commercial Interests

There’s also a growing dialogue about cultural appropriation, particularly regarding 5-MeO-DMT from toads and DMT-containing plants used in Amazonian traditions. Legalization efforts must balance respect for indigenous knowledge with the interests of Western medical and commercial frameworks.

Market Implications and Public Reception

If legalized, DMT could create a new niche within the psychedelic therapeutics market, projected to reach $10 billion by 2027. Yet public perception still lags behind psilocybin. Many associate DMT with “trip reports” and underground chemists rather than structured medical environments — a barrier advocates must overcome.

Keep reading

Marijuana Prohibition Is And Always Has Been A Sham

Since its inception, efforts to criminalize the marijuana plant and stigmatize those who consume it have been predicated almost entirely upon gross exaggerations, racial stereotypes, and outright lies.

The initial push for cannabis criminalization, which began in earnest more than a century ago, had little to do with promoting public health or safety. Instead, the decision to target and prosecute cannabis users was fueled by xenophobia and media sensationalism.

For instance, a July 6, 1927 story in the New York Times, headlined “Mexican Family Goes Insane,” farcically claimed: “A widow and her four children have been driven insane by eating the marihuana plant, according to doctors, who say there is no hope of saving the children’s lives and that the mother will be insane for the rest of her life.”

An academic paper titled “Marijuana,” published in 1933 in The Journal of Law and Criminology, similarly made over-the-top allegations about the plant’s supposed dangers. The authors wrote, “The inevitable result [of consuming cannabis] is insanity, which those familiar with it describe as absolutely incurable, and, without exception, ending in death.”

In 1937, Harry J. Anslinger — America’s first ‘Drug Czar’ — successfully lobbied Congress to ban cannabis nationwide. He did so through the continuous use of racist rhetoric. “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use,” he asserted. “This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

Fast-forward to 1971. That’s when the Nixon administration declared drug abuse to be “public enemy number one.” The lynchpin of this campaign was stamping out the use of marijuana, which Congress had just classified as a Schedule I controlled substance — the strictest federal category available. Yet, privately, Nixon acknowledged that he did not think cannabis was “particularly dangerous,” and he lamented the “ridiculous” penalties faced by those arrested for possessing it.

Keep reading

Marijuana Legalization Doesn’t Increase Youth Use, Top Researcher Says At Federal Meeting

At a webinar hosted by the federal Substances and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) last week, a leading cannabis researcher threw cold water on the notion that legalizing marijuana leads to increases in youth use of the drug. He also touched on problems with roadside assessments of cannabis impairment, the risk of testing positive for THC after using CBD products and the need for more nuanced regulation around cannabinoids themselves.

The public talk, from Ryan Vandry, an experimental psychologist and professor at Johns Hopkins University’s Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, was aimed at providing continuing education on marijuana for healthcare professionals. Titled “Behavioral Pharmacology of Cannabis – Trends in Use, Novel Products, and Impact,” it focused primarily on how variables like dosage, product formulation, mode of administration and chemical components such as terpenes can influence the drug’s effects.

Vandry began by noting that marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug in the United States. While self-reported consumption by adults has risen as more states have legalized in recent years, he noted, use by youth has generally remained flat or fallen.

“Use among youth is one of the biggest areas of concern related to the legalization and increased accessibility of cannabis,” he said, “but surprisingly, that cohort has actually maintained relatively stable [for] both past-year and daily use.”

Pointing to data from California going back to 1996, when the state ended prohibition for medical patients, Vandry said there has “really been no change in the rates of cannabis use among eighth, 10th or 12th graders. And in fact, in very recent years, we’ve seen a decrease in rates of consumption.”

Keep reading

New Congressional Bill Would Allow Interstate Marijuana Shipping By USPS To Help Small Growers Compete Against Large Corporations

A pair of Democratic congressional lawmakers have introduced a bill intended to help small marijuana growers compete against large corporations when cannabis is federally legalized—proposing to give them the ability to ship and sell products directly to consumers within and across state lines via the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) and commercial carriers.

The legislation—titled the “Small and Homestead Independent Producers (SHIP) Act—is being sponsored by Reps. Jared Huffman (D-CA) and Val Hoyle (D-OR). It represents a slightly revised version of a measure filed two sessions ago that was not ultimately enacted.

As Congress continues to work toward ending cannabis prohibition, there have been concerns that smaller businesses will struggle to compete against the handful of multi-state operators that have the resources and infrastructure to quickly expand, threatening to further consolidate the market when the federal floodgates finally open.

The SHIP Act is designed to minimize that risk and maximize opportunities for those smaller farmers and producers.

“Larger, commercialized cannabis operators are infiltrating the market and squeezing out our local farmers in the process,” Huffman said in a press release on Tuesday. “So when the antiquated federal prohibition on cannabis finally gets repealed, we need to have substantial legislation ready to help these small businesses survive.”

“My legislation would ensure that folks can ship their products straight to consumers, which would both help expand small businesses and ensure farmers stay afloat,” he said. “When full legalization is guaranteed, we must commit to not leaving our smallest family-farmers behind.”

The proposal has been amended in certain ways compared to the original version, including a new requirement that the Postal Service or “any private or commercial interstate carrier” transporting cannabis must verify that recipients of cannabis products are at least 21 years old.

It also clarifies provisions related to federal preemption of state marijuana laws as it concerns interstate commerce, making it clear that states that prohibit cannabis can continue to do so, except that they can’t prevent the transportation of marijuana across their borders. On the flip side, states with legal marijuana programs would be preempted by federal law “to the extent that such laws restrict the interstate or intrastate shipment of cannabis or a cannabis product directly to an individual with respect to whom the possession of cannabis or a cannabis product is lawful under the laws of the State.”

Finally, the latest version includes a new section that would amend U.S. postal laws by stipulating that the “Postal Service is authorized and directed to permit the transmission in the mails, under regulations to be prescribed by it, of cannabis.”

Keep reading

Pew Poll: Few Americans Support Feds’ Blanket Prohibition of Marijuana

Eight-seven percent of Americans say that marijuana ought to be legal for either medical or adult use, according to nationwide polling compiled by the Pew Research Center.

The results are consistent with those of prior Pew polls finding that only about ten percent of US adults support a blanket policy of cannabis criminalization.

“The federal government’s ‘Flat Earth’ position on marijuana policy is remarkably out of step with both scientific and public consensus,” NORML’s Deputy Director Paul Armentano said. “Federally elected officials who refuse to take action to end cannabis criminalization do so at their own political peril.”

Fifty-four percent of respondents said that cannabis should be legal for both medical and adult use, while 33 percent of those surveyed supported medical marijuana legalization only. Consistent with prior polls, support for legalizing cannabis is strongest among liberal-leaning and younger voters (those ages 18 to 29), and it is weakest among more politically conservative-leaning voters and those over the age of 75.

Keep reading

Why Do Republican Lawmakers Keep Trying To Overturn Marijuana Laws Approved By Voters?

Elections have consequences. Or so we’re told. But when it comes to respecting the outcomes of marijuana-related votes, Republican lawmakers are increasingly saying, “Not so fast.”

A case in point: Following Nebraskans’ decision to legalize medical cannabis access this past fall, Republican state Attorney General Mike Hilgers urged lawmakers to ignore the voter-approved law. Months later, a regulatory commission appointed by Republican Gov. Jim Pillen enacted “emergency rules” largely gutting the nascent program, despite over two-thirds of Nebraskans having voted for it.

Nebraska’s situation is hardly unique. In Texas, Republican AG Ken Paxton single-handedly pushed litigation striking down voter-approved marijuana depenalization ordinances in Austin, Dallas, San Marcos and other cities. All of the ordinances, which sought to limit local police from making low-level marijuana possession arrests, had been overwhelmingly approved by municipal voters.

In Florida, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation this spring that makes it harder for advocates to place policy questions on the ballot. He did so after last year’s marijuana legalization initiative gained 56 percent of the vote, just shy of the state’s mandatory 60 percent threshold.

Lawmakers in the Republican-dominated legislature further turned their backs on voters by rejecting numerous pieces of cannabis reform legislation this spring. In fact, the only marijuana-related bill approved by Florida lawmakers this year was legislation denying medical cannabis access to those with certain marijuana or other drug-related convictions on their record.

In Ohio, GOP leaders have spent the better part of the past two years seeking to repeal elements of the state’s 2023 voter-approved adult-use legalization law. These efforts include bills to recriminalize marijuana possession, rescind adults’ home cultivation rights and arbitrarily cap the total number of cannabis retail outlets permitted statewide. Thus far, none of this legislation has been successful, but at least two separate roll-back bills remain pending and are anticipated to be revisited by lawmakers this fall. (Separately, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine sought to double the special sales tax on cannabis products. While that effort also failed, lawmakers did approve a budget bill restructuring the way cannabis-related taxes are spent.)

Keep reading

Anti-Marijuana Physician Who Criticized Rescheduling Proposal Joins Trump White House’s Drug Office

The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) is adding to its team a medical professional who has linked marijuana use to suicide, advocated against a Florida legalization measure and criticized health agencies’ move to reschedule cannabis.

She has also said it is an “insult” to refer to cannabis as “medical.”

Roneet Lev—an emergency medicine and addition physician who previously served as chief medical officer at ONDCP under the first Trump administration—announced on Monday that she’ll be rejoining the office for the chance to “save lives on a much bigger scale.”

While she didn’t mention marijuana in the announcement on her podcast “High Truths on Drugs and Addiction,” Lev has previously spoken extensively about her issues with cannabis—describing it as an understated public health risk and arguing that commercial interests are the driving force behind the legalization movement.

In one episode of her podcast from June 2024, she dedicated over an hour to a discussion with prohibitionist advocates about the marijuana rescheduling process that was initiated under the Biden administration, making clear she strongly disagrees with the top federal health agency’s recommendation to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

She said that people who are accepting the scientific findings that led to the recommendation,”including some in the medical community,” are “drinking that same Kool Aid again” with marijuana as they did with prescription opioids. And she claimed that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) produced a flawed report on cannabis, with mistakes in “like every single sentence.”

“When it comes to marijuana, the harms are right in front of our eyes—but we ignore the data and follow the industry talking points just like we did in the oxycontin days,” Lev said during the segment, which featured prominent prohibitionists such as Bertha Madras, who also previously served as an ONDCP official.

The revised review process that HHS relied on to reach its Schedule III determination for marijuana posts a “threat to the entire way of approving medications and to the medical community at large,” Lev said, adding that her primary contention is the idea that cannabis possesses medical value.

Keep reading

RFK Jr. and other Trump admin officials back psychedelics for mental health relief

For decades, advocates of psychedelic substances have brought a bold message to Washington, D.C., that currently illicit, mind-altering drugs, such as LSD and MDMA, should warrant approval for therapeutic use in treating severe depression, PTSD, and other treatment-resistant conditions.

Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and clinical depression are distinct conditions, even though they often share overlapping symptoms like persistent sadness, hopelessness, and suicidal ideation. However, the underlying causes and mechanisms differ, which is why antidepressants tend to be less effective (or non-effective) for BPD-related emotional distress. Antidepressants target mood-related neurochemistry, not the deep-seated behavioral, relational, and emotional regulation issues seen in BPD.

In addition to the conditions mentioned above, a wide range of other mental disorders, including Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), have also been shown to respond less effectively to pharmaceutical treatments as well.

But now, for the first time, a presidential administration appears poised to give them a try — in the name of mental health.

Trump officials (and nominees) that have expressed an interest in utilizing psychedelics for mental health issues:

  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – Secretary of Health and Human Services
  • Doug Collins – Secretary of Veterans Affairs
  • Dr. Casey Means – Trump Nominee for U.S. Surgeon General
  • Marty Makary – FDA Commissioner

“This line of therapeutics has tremendous advantage if given in a clinical setting and we are working very hard to make sure that happens within 12 months,” Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr.) told members of Congress.

The announcement coincides with a growing embrace of psychedelics in traditionally conservative strongholds like Texas, where former Trump cabinet member and former Texas Governor Rick Perry has emerged as a vocal advocate.

Keep reading