What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Sessions rescinds Obama era cannabis policy

therevverend

Well-known member
Veteran
(CNN)Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Thursday rescinded a trio of memos from the Obama administration that had adopted a policy of non-interference with marijuana-friendly state laws.

The move essentially shifts federal policy from the hands-off approach adopted under the previous administration to unleashing federal prosecutors across the country to decide individually how to prioritize resources to crack down on pot possession, distribution and cultivation of the drug in states where it is legal.
While many states have decriminalized or legalized marijuana use, the drug is still illegal under federal law, creating a conflict between federal and state law. Thursday's announcement is a major decision for an attorney general who has regularly decried marijuana use as dangerous.
In a written statement Thursday, Sessions called the shift a "return to the rule of law" but he did not go as far as some advocates had feared he might, stopping short of explicitly directing more prosecutions, resources or other efforts to take down the industry as a whole.
"In deciding which marijuana activities to prosecute under these laws with the department's finite resources, prosecutors should follow the well-established principles that govern all federal prosecutions," Sessions said in a memo to all federal prosecutors. "These principles require federal prosecutors deciding which cases to prosecute to weigh all relevant considerations of the crime, the deterrent effect of criminal prosecution, and the cumulative impact of particular crimes on the community."

Not surprised he waited until after California legalized to do this. I'm sure it's been planned from the start. Wait until the largest number of people have invested the money and energy in the cannabis industry to inflict the greatest harm. He can pick and choose who he wants to bust, who to take bribes from. The Feds are going to make a lot of money and of course the small businesses will take the biggest falls. The big corporate connected groups will be able to hire the lawyers and pay to get a monopoly on the industry.
 

rolandomota

Well-known member
Meanwhile vermont is on its way to legalization the house just passed the bill and the senate and governor are expected to be on board also...what a shitfest mr j sessions is getting himself in to what the fuck is trump doing? He has some blame here also he better fucking tweet something about this hes 100 % for medical and states rights
 

ridnovir

New member
Another blow to states rights. Like I needed another reason to dislike AG Sessions with his huge stakes in pharma and correction industries
 

Douglas.Curtis

Autistic Diplomat in Training
DEA is a cloakroom. Without the assistance of local law enforcement (of which there do happen to be pockets of extreme ignorance), the DEA has little to no power.

They're going to get strong resistance in MANY areas of MANY states. People who know the truth have little patience for people who are ignorant, regardless of their "position of power."
 

therevverend

Well-known member
Veteran
Douglas.Curtis is right, without local law enforcement and state prosecutors the federal prosecutors and DEA don't have the funds or manpower to accomplish much. They can still waste the public's time and money, make a few peoples' lives miserable but I don't think there will be much change in the Rec/Med states.
One area it will affect is reforming the Rec/Med laws that have already passed. In Washington for instance the medical community got screwed by the Recreational law passing. There was talk of changing the law to help medical users get better access. This probably won't happen now because the state senate will be frightened of running afoul of the Feds. The other legal states will probably follow a similar policy of treading lightly.
 

PDX Dopesmoker

Active member
Douglas.Curtis is right, without local law enforcement and state prosecutors the federal prosecutors and DEA don't have the funds or manpower to accomplish much. They can still waste the public's time and money, make a few peoples' lives miserable but I don't think there will be much change in the Rec/Med states.
One area it will affect is reforming the Rec/Med laws that have already passed. In Washington for instance the medical community got screwed by the Recreational law passing. There was talk of changing the law to help medical users get better access. This probably won't happen now because the state senate will be frightened of running afoul of the Feds. The other legal states will probably follow a similar policy of treading lightly.

Yeah there was a Cole memo kinda thing from 2009 which was there just to protect MMJ and he reminded that one too. Its like the guy doesn't want to live forever with infinite free cancer cures or something, seems dumb to me.
 

Itsmychoice

Well-known member
ICMag Donor
I think it might be a good thing

I think it might be a good thing

That it is this jackass becoming the face of the anti cannabis argument. The more he talks the more motivated and moved public opinion will shift. If we can get through this next year without much damage to our progress the midterm elections will go in the favor of cannabis freedom as states legalize and the house and senate will act to spite this jackass. Progress takes decades and we are are at the crest about to head down the hill. Just in case I will stay hidden in the hills growing the best that I can. Cheers to the soldiers of this change.
 

OldPhart

Member
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2...om-attorney/ESFSOneZK2FKF2WtBWyQkL/story.html

These ass hats that choose to go directly against the will of the people should be strung up by their balls.



U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced Thursday that he would rescind Obama-era guidelines that essentially let states legalize recreational marijuana.

Instead, Sessions will leave it to local U.S. attorneys to decide whether to prosecute marijuana cases in states where marijuana was legalized, like Massachusetts.

U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling of Massachusetts issued a statement indicating that he is likely to focus on "bulk cultivation and trafficking cases, and those who use the federal banking system illegally."

It remains unclear how this will impact Massachusetts, which legalized marijuana in 2016.


Read Lelling's full statement below:


In accordance with the Attorney General's statement today, this office will pursue federal marijuana crimes as part of its overall approach to reducing violent crime, stemming the tide of the drug crisis, and dismantling criminal gangs, and in particular the threat posed by bulk trafficking of marijuana, which has had a devastating impact on local communities. This does not impact our ongoing, aggressive efforts in other areas, like the opioid crisis.

As with all of our decisions, we will continue to use our prosecutorial discretion and work with our law enforcement partners to determine resource availability, weigh the seriousness of the crime and determine the impact on the community. In the spirit of the Attorney General's memo, I intend to meet with our federal partners to discuss enforcement efforts and priorities. In the coming weeks I also plan to meet with our local and state counterparts to reinforce our commitment to assisting local communities in this effort.

As the Justice Department has highlighted, medical studies confirm that marijuana is in fact a dangerous drug, and it is illegal under federal law. As a result, our office will aggressively investigate and prosecute bulk cultivation and trafficking cases, and those who use the federal banking system illegally.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2...om-attorney/ESFSOneZK2FKF2WtBWyQkL/story.html

These ass hats that choose to go directly against the will of the people should be strung up by their balls.

That sounds like he intends to do it the same way as the CO US Attorney said he's gonna keep on keepin' on like ol' Jeff never said a word.

Here in CO, the Feds let the locals handle cannabis unless either one identifies large-ish growers shipping out of State. Then they all work together to break balls.
 

OldPhart

Member
That sounds like he intends to do it the same way as the CO US Attorney said he's gonna keep on keepin' on like ol' Jeff never said a word.

Here in CO, the Feds let the locals handle cannabis unless either one identifies large-ish growers shipping out of State. Then they all work together to break balls.

The way I understood this, was that he plans on going after (state) legal grows/sales. It is just more of the same, the people get together and change the laws, then the politicians ignore that and just continue doing what ever they want, because they think they know better or can make (or take) a buck off of it.
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
The way I understood this, was that he plans on going after (state) legal grows/sales. It is just more of the same, the people get together and change the laws, then the politicians ignore that and just continue doing what ever they want, because they think they know better or can make (or take) a buck off of it.

I didn't read it that way at all. Time will tell.
 

PDX Dopesmoker

Active member
That sounds like he intends to do it the same way as the CO US Attorney said he's gonna keep on keepin' on like lo' Jeff never said a word.

Here in CO, the Feds let the locals handle cannabis unless either one identifies large-ish growers shipping out of State. Then they all work together to break balls.

Given that the feds have rescinded their end of the bargain, has your local government expressed any interest in defending you from the federal government our is your local government going to continue to cooperate with the feds (on your dime) against the local interests?
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
Given that the feds have rescinded their end of the bargain, has your local government expressed any interest in defending you from the federal government our is your local government going to continue to cooperate with the feds (on your dime) against the local interests?

What's this "continue" routine? The Feds have taken a hands off position when it comes to State legal operations from the beginning. The US Attorney for CO indicated he didn't intend to change a thing.
 

PDX Dopesmoker

Active member
What's this "continue" routine? The Feds have taken a hands off position when it comes to State legal operations from the beginning. The US Attorney for CO indicated he didn't intend to change a thing.

Under the Cole memo the states agreed to make an effort to restrict trafficking in exchange for a hands-off approach from the federal government. The fed's side of the bargain allowed the states to set up a framework for legalization that restricted the flow of product out of state, thats why we all have seed-to-sale "total marijunana information" bullshit where they want to track the last mg of THC and get fingerprints and DNA samples and background checks on everyone who handles the stuff. With the fed's side of the bargain ended the justification for costly and oppressive state government tracking is also ended. Everyone has to pay through the nose for a pointless tracking system which might prevent some out of state trafficking, but will no longer prevent federal prosecution.
Its like the government went to us and said "hey we'll legalize weed if you let us track every last trich" and we said "OK" but then a little while later the government came back and said "we ain't really legalizing it, but we still want to track every last trich". Seems like a raw deal.
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
Under the Cole memo the states agreed to make an effort to restrict trafficking in exchange for a hands-off approach from the federal government. The fed's side of the bargain allowed the states to set up a framework for legalization that restricted the flow of product out of state, thats why we all have seed-to-sale "total marijunana information" bullshit where they want to track the last mg of THC and get fingerprints and DNA samples and background checks on everyone who handles the stuff. With the fed's side of the bargain ended the justification for costly and oppressive state government tracking is also ended. Everyone has to pay through the nose for a pointless tracking system which might prevent some out of state trafficking, but will no longer prevent federal prosecution.
Its like the government went to us and said "hey we'll legalize weed if you let us track every last trich" and we said "OK" but then a little while later the government came back and said "we ain't really legalizing it, but we still want to track every last trich". Seems like a raw deal.

If the US Attorney for CO continues to hold up their end of the deal then CO will do the same, I suspect.
 

PDX Dopesmoker

Active member
The US government has already canceled it's end of the bargain. They published a document announcing that a few days ago.
I feel that it's now the states' turn to fire back and take the initiative by legalizing internet marijuana sales via post and larger home grows. Imagine how hard the state governments could cash in by loosening up regulations (cutting costs for themselves) while pulling in monster export taxes. The first state to go that route will be a big winner. I hope its Oregon, but good luck to you too.
 

Jhhnn

Active member
Veteran
The US government has already canceled it's end of the bargain. They published a document announcing that a few days ago.
I feel that it's now the states' turn to fire back and take the initiative by legalizing internet marijuana sales via post and larger home grows. Imagine how hard the state governments could cash in by loosening up regulations (cutting costs for themselves) while pulling in monster export taxes. The first state to go that route will be a big winner. I hope its Oregon, but good luck to you too.

Cool story, bro. None of the legalized states will invite the Feds to fuck with us like that. The proposition is absurd.
 
Top