Trump's DOJ gears up for crackdown on marijuana - Cannabis Laws & Cannabis Legislation - International Cannagraphic Magazine Forums

Crazy Chester · 07-23-2017, 07:17 PM

Like a toddler that repeatedly does what he's been told by his parents not to do, the US DOJ continues its temper tantrum on state cannabis laws, despite the overwhelming wishes of the people on whose behalf it supposedly works:

https://thehill.com/regulation/admin...n-on-marijuana

I believe we are going to see increased federal raids on state cannabis enterprises (legal under state law or not).

The national media will cherry pick some of the raids and publicize them with the goal of putting maximum fear into anyone involved in the state cannabis industry.

With that, the next move will be on the states.

What does everyone believe that next move will be? If I knew how to post a poll here, I would; failing that, please feel free to post your opinions on this issue within this thread.

While US DOJ money has been prohibited from being used to prosecute those operating legally under state cannabis laws, the DEA has been using its own money (mostly seized from state growers) to cowboy into the state, steal everyone's goods and cash and cowboy out. Hey, just because they are prohibited from making a case for the US Attorney, that doesn't mean they can't just steal from people, right?

Therefore, I believe the only choice for the states that will be effective is for their executive branch to comply with their oath to ensure the laws are faithfully executed, including calling up the militia, if need be. That is the governor's obligation under the various state constitutions. See (for California) article V, sec. 1 ("The Governor shall see that the law is faithfully executed.") and sec. 7 ("The Governor is commander in chief of a militia that shall be provided by statute. The Governor may call it forth to execute the law.").

When Jerry Brown was Attorney General for the state of California, he issued an Opinion in August of 2008 in which he contended (rightfully so, IMO), that California's cannabis laws did not conflict with and was not pre-empted by the federal Controlled Substances Act, because California's right to legislate on that subject matter was reserved to the states by the US Constitution.

https://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/pr...guidelines.pdf

If that is the case, California's cannabis laws cannot be legally interfered with by the feds. However, over the years, that's exactly what the feds have done.

As Governor, Jerry Brown has failed to faithfully execute the laws with regard to cannabis because he has failed to call up the militia to protect those who are legally operating cannabis businesses in California from the feds. If he were doing his job correctly, his militia would meet the DEA choppers at the border and escort them out of the state - or, if they are not so persuaded - to shoot them out of the sky.

When their little gangster gravy train is met by force and they realize they won't just be able to easily steal millions of dollars from state growers and dispensaries anymore and realize their blood will be shed if they do so - the feds may actually back off and finally start respecting the state's rights.

Crazy Chester · 07-30-2017, 11:56 PM

163 views and only 3 votes - guess people are just too scared to deal with reality.

armedoldhippy · 07-31-2017, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crazy Chester

163 views and only 3 votes - guess people are just too scared to deal with reality.

nope. all of your options for the poll are unrealistic. who would choose any of them? when i say "who", i mean sane rational adults...

stewart169 · 07-31-2017, 07:09 PM

THE SKY IS FALLING !!!!!

aridbud · 07-31-2017, 08:41 PM

all of your options for the poll are unrealistic. who would choose any of them?
Right-o armed.

Trump will set the anti-cannabis agenda or has made attempts before our elected officials refused his measure. If Sessions stays in (likely), we'll be seeing a lot of turmoil.

States can only do so much. And lesser power if more power given at federal level and it's capitalized upon. Pretty simple.

brown_thumb · 07-31-2017, 11:05 PM

I didn't vote because I disagree with every option. The first step is a lawsuit and stay of any actions until the lawsuit is settled. Then, if necessary, go through appeals processes. After that, the states should each defend the health, lives and possessions of it's peoples. How the states defend their peoples is up to them, though IMO, firepower should be the very last option... one state has no chance anyway. Several states standing together would definitely have an impact. Several states physically fighting against the federal government is called a Civil War. If that occurs, it won't be cannabis that caused the bloodshed... rather the never-ending overreach of the Feds causing extreme harm to her good citizens.

Crazy Chester · 08-01-2017, 03:49 AM

brown_thumb, the US Attorney hasn't been starting any actions due to a funding block, but the DEA still takes down grows, busts dispensaries and takes all the medicine and cash.

So, there are no prosecutions to stay.

Perhaps you mean a lawsuit to determine whether the regulation of cannabis is a right reserved to the states?

Crazy Chester · 08-01-2017, 03:54 AM

brown_thumb - as you know civil wars are not unprecedented - even in a young country like the US.

I do agree that it would be more effective if more than one state stood up to the federal government on this issue.

I don't think there's any doubt that states have been reserved the right under the US Constitution to pass laws regulating the health and welfare of their people - commerce clause notwithstanding.

I know the federal courts disagree - but they're wrong.

If litigating in federal court will be futile, which I believe it would, what other choice do the states have but civil war?

Crazy Chester · 08-01-2017, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stewart169

THE SKY IS FALLING !!!!!

Yup - pretty much.

Most people won't even know it though - they'll be dead before they even know it crushed them!

brown_thumb · 08-01-2017, 04:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crazy Chester

brown_thumb, the US Attorney hasn't been starting any actions due to a funding block, but the DEA still takes down grows, busts dispensaries and takes all the medicine and cash.

So, there are no prosecutions to stay.

Perhaps you mean a lawsuit to determine whether the regulation of cannabis is a right reserved to the states?

Precisely that... the states telling Big Brother to GTFO.

View Poll Results: How should states react to increased federal violence over their cannabis laws?
Call up the militia, meet them at the border and turn them away or shoot them down	5	50.00%
Continue to allow them to randomly cowboy into the state to steal from others	1	10.00%
Pay them to keep them out ("give them a piece of the action")	2	20.00%
Do nothing	2	20.00%
Voters: 10. You may not vote on this poll

07-23-2017, 07:17 PM	#1
Crazy Chester Member Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: SF Bay California Posts: 182	Trump's DOJ gears up for crackdown on marijuana Like a toddler that repeatedly does what he's been told by his parents not to do, the US DOJ continues its temper tantrum on state cannabis laws, despite the overwhelming wishes of the people on whose behalf it supposedly works: https://thehill.com/regulation/admin...n-on-marijuana I believe we are going to see increased federal raids on state cannabis enterprises (legal under state law or not). The national media will cherry pick some of the raids and publicize them with the goal of putting maximum fear into anyone involved in the state cannabis industry. With that, the next move will be on the states. What does everyone believe that next move will be? If I knew how to post a poll here, I would; failing that, please feel free to post your opinions on this issue within this thread. While US DOJ money has been prohibited from being used to prosecute those operating legally under state cannabis laws, the DEA has been using its own money (mostly seized from state growers) to cowboy into the state, steal everyone's goods and cash and cowboy out. Hey, just because they are prohibited from making a case for the US Attorney, that doesn't mean they can't just steal from people, right? Therefore, I believe the only choice for the states that will be effective is for their executive branch to comply with their oath to ensure the laws are faithfully executed, including calling up the militia, if need be. That is the governor's obligation under the various state constitutions. See (for California) article V, sec. 1 ("The Governor shall see that the law is faithfully executed.") and sec. 7 ("The Governor is commander in chief of a militia that shall be provided by statute. The Governor may call it forth to execute the law."). When Jerry Brown was Attorney General for the state of California, he issued an Opinion in August of 2008 in which he contended (rightfully so, IMO), that California's cannabis laws did not conflict with and was not pre-empted by the federal Controlled Substances Act, because California's right to legislate on that subject matter was reserved to the states by the US Constitution. https://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/pr...guidelines.pdf If that is the case, California's cannabis laws cannot be legally interfered with by the feds. However, over the years, that's exactly what the feds have done. As Governor, Jerry Brown has failed to faithfully execute the laws with regard to cannabis because he has failed to call up the militia to protect those who are legally operating cannabis businesses in California from the feds. If he were doing his job correctly, his militia would meet the DEA choppers at the border and escort them out of the state - or, if they are not so persuaded - to shoot them out of the sky. When their little gangster gravy train is met by force and they realize they won't just be able to easily steal millions of dollars from state growers and dispensaries anymore and realize their blood will be shed if they do so - the feds may actually back off and finally start respecting the state's rights.
	1 members found this post helpful.

07-31-2017, 07:09 PM	#4
stewart169 IC Mag Supporter Join Date: Oct 2016 Posts: 397	THE SKY IS FALLING !!!!! __________________ Middle aged new grower aspiring to organic success

07-31-2017, 08:41 PM	#5
aridbud automeister Join Date: May 2013 Location: the best place on earth Posts: 5,589	all of your options for the poll are unrealistic. who would choose any of them? Right-o armed. Trump will set the anti-cannabis agenda or has made attempts before our elected officials refused his measure. If Sessions stays in (likely), we'll be seeing a lot of turmoil. States can only do so much. And lesser power if more power given at federal level and it's capitalized upon. Pretty simple. __________________ Seeds have the power to preserve species, to enhance cultural as well as genetic diversity, to counter economic monopoly and to check the advance of conformity on all its many fronts. Michael Pollan Happiness held is the seed; Happiness shared is the flower. John Harrigan Instant gratification takes too long. Carrie Fisher - RIP. *afterthought autos* We are passionate breeders of unique quality cannabis autoflower hybrid seeds at down to earth prices; now 11 years running! https://www.icmag.com/ic/forumdisplay.php?f=65770
	1 members found this post helpful.

07-31-2017, 11:05 PM	#6
brown_thumb Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2016 Posts: 2,094	I didn't vote because I disagree with every option. The first step is a lawsuit and stay of any actions until the lawsuit is settled. Then, if necessary, go through appeals processes. After that, the states should each defend the health, lives and possessions of it's peoples. How the states defend their peoples is up to them, though IMO, firepower should be the very last option... one state has no chance anyway. Several states standing together would definitely have an impact. Several states physically fighting against the federal government is called a Civil War. If that occurs, it won't be cannabis that caused the bloodshed... rather the never-ending overreach of the Feds causing extreme harm to her good citizens.
	1 members found this post helpful.

07-30-2017, 11:56 PM	#2
Crazy Chester Member Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: SF Bay California Posts: 182	163 views and only 3 votes - guess people are just too scared to deal with reality.

08-01-2017, 03:49 AM	#7
Crazy Chester Member Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: SF Bay California Posts: 182	brown_thumb, the US Attorney hasn't been starting any actions due to a funding block, but the DEA still takes down grows, busts dispensaries and takes all the medicine and cash. So, there are no prosecutions to stay. Perhaps you mean a lawsuit to determine whether the regulation of cannabis is a right reserved to the states?

08-01-2017, 03:54 AM	#8
Crazy Chester Member Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: SF Bay California Posts: 182	brown_thumb - as you know civil wars are not unprecedented - even in a young country like the US. I do agree that it would be more effective if more than one state stood up to the federal government on this issue. I don't think there's any doubt that states have been reserved the right under the US Constitution to pass laws regulating the health and welfare of their people - commerce clause notwithstanding. I know the federal courts disagree - but they're wrong. If litigating in federal court will be futile, which I believe it would, what other choice do the states have but civil war?