[yortbogey]

Now that pot's legal in state, will D.C. delegation defend law?
Washington's new marijuana law takes effect Thursday, amid a muted reaction from the state's congressional delegation and questions about whether the federal government will seek to block it.


U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan
The law changes Thursday
Possession: State criminal penalties for possession of 1 ounce of marijuana (or 1 pound in cannabis-infused food, or 72 ounces of cannabis-infused drink) are eliminated. Public consumption of marijuana, like alcohol, can mean a $50 fine.
Employment: The new law does not change the right of employers to drug-test employees.
DUI: A level of 5 nanograms of THC, marijuana's active ingredient, in a driver's blood becomes equivalent to a 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level for driving under the influence.
Source: Initiative 502


WASHINGTON — Washington state's new marijuana-legalization law, which takes effect Thursday, is a direct affront to federal drug policy. So does Dave Reichert — the King County sheriff-turned-congressman — think users still should be subject to arrest by federal agents?
He isn't saying. Neither is Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Spokane, the highest-ranking Republican woman in Congress.
And Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, both of whom personally opposed making recreational pot legal, haven't exactly been at the forefront of trying to resolve the legal limbo.
The Washington congressional delegation's muted reaction likely will do little to help clarify the state's unprecedented conflict with the federal ban on marijuana. It also leaves unclear whether voters — who approved legalization 56 to 44 percent — can expect their elected representatives to vigorously stand up for the state law.
On Wednesday, the U.S. attorney for Seattle, Jenny Durkan, said in a statement that the Department of Justice (DOJ) still was reviewing legalization measures approved last month by voters in Washington and Colorado: "The Department's responsibility to enforce the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged. Neither States nor the Executive branch can nullify a statute passed by Congress."
But, as some legal experts expected, the DOJ has not acted.
Other legal experts, as well as marijuana advocates, expect the federal government will quietly let the state laws go forward. As Richard Epstein, a professor at New York University School of Law, put it, the Drug Enforcement Agency is "going to play its version of 'don't ask, don't tell.' "
Colorado's law, which mirrors Washington's new tolerance for personal possession of marijuana, is expected to take effect within 30 days.
Unlike Washington's delegation, Colorado lawmakers have taken more decisive action to defend their state's law. Three House members from Colorado have backed a bill to prevent the federal Controlled Substances Act from pre-empting state laws. Of the 10 co-sponsors of the bill, which was introduced by Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., none is from Washington.
U.S. Rep. Adam Smith, D-Tacoma, has been the delegation's most prominent voice on the right of the state to implement the law. He was one of 18 House Democrats, and the only member from Washington, to sign a post-election letter to Attorney General Eric Holder asking the DOJ to refrain from making arrests.
"I don't want to leave my constituents in a limbo not knowing whether a given activity is legal or not," said Smith, a former prosecutor for the city of Seattle, who said he voted for the law.
Smith has not signed onto DeGette's bill but said he supports it in principle.
Smith noted the DOJ has taken a largely hands-off attitude toward medical marijuana, paving the way for its legalization in 18 states and the District of Columbia. But federal authorities still sporadically assert their power, Smith said.
Since January 2010, federal agents have raided more than 200 medical-marijuana dispensaries, labs and cultivation sites in eight states, including Washington, according to Kris Hermes, spokesman for Americans for Safe Access, an advocacy group for medical marijuana.
Washington's new law has left Democrats and Republicans in the state delegation personally at odds with voters' will.
McMorris Rodgers opposes legalizing marijuana. Reichert's office has repeatedly refused to say whether he thinks the new state law should trump the federal ban. Reichert, whose mother took cannabis in a pill form before she died of cancer in 2011, softened his stance on medical marijuana but not to the point of supporting legalization.
Meanwhile, activists in Seattle plan a public celebration at 7 p.m. Thursday at the Seattle Center fountain, despite the new law's ban on public consumption of marijuana. Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes said he hoped there would not be "unfortunate flaunting" of public marijuana use, which is subject to a fine of about $50.
"I think (Seattle police) will see how well people comply," said Holmes. If they issue tickets, "we will enforce the law."

[yortbogey]

Feds still reviewing new marijuana law, plan no action on eve of legalization


U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan

A strange gap year in Washington’s grand experiment with marijuana legalization begins Thursday, when personal possession of pot becomes legal, but criminal laws banning marijuana growing and sales remain in effect.

That year gives the state Liquor Control Board time to create first-in-the-nation licenses for marijuana growers, processors and retailers. Until then, the only clearly legal way — at least, under state law — is for a medical marijuana patient to get medicine from a collective garden.

Jenny Durkan, the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington, sent out a statement Wednesday that regardless of legalization measures in Washington and Colorado, the federal ban on marijuana remains unchanged. But the statement did not come with any legal action by the U.S. Department of Justice to block the new law from taking effect on Thursday.

The statement:

The Department of Justice is reviewing the legalization initiatives recently passed in Colorado and Washington state. The Department’s responsibility to enforce the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged. Neither States nor the Executive branch can nullify a statute passed by Congress. In enacting the Controlled Substances Act, Congress determined that marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance.

Regardless of any changes in state law, including the change that will go into effect on December 6th in Washington state, growing, selling or possessing any amount of marijuana remains illegal under federal law. Members of the public are also advised to remember that it remains against federal law to bring any amount of marijuana onto federal property, including all federal buildings, national parks and forests, military installations, and courthouses.

At a morning news conference, Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes acknowledged that Washington is in uncharted waters.

“We are trying to substitute a legal, licensed system for what is nearly a wholly illegal system. That is going to take time. What we’re doing under I-502, beginning at midnight, we’re at least not doing any more harm. We’re not enforcing an extremely unpopular law against adults who choose to consume marijuana. But unless they are an authorized medical marijuana patient, they are already obtaining marijuana from illegal sources. Washington state is awash, as are most states, in marijuana, which is one of the points about what prohibition has failed in its purpose.”

A public celebration of the new law is planned at Seattle Center, beginning at 7 p.m. on Thursday. Holmes reminded party-goers that public consumption of marijuana is now treated like alcohol, equivalent to about a $50 fine.

Holmes stopped enforcing marijuana possession cases when he took office, but he said Thursday he would enforce public consumption fines, should Seattle police issue them.

“I think the SPD will see how well people comply. If there’s unfortunate flaunting, and (people) want to test and see if the law will be enforced, well, I have better things to do with my time than to test the limits of the law. But we will enforce the law.”

The state's federal representatives should be supporting their constituents, irrespective of what the other bodies thing (DEA, et alia). If they do not support their constituents, said constituents should vote them out of office.