Calif. pot dispensaries told by feds to shut down

[kmk420kali]

It appears the above posted arrests were charged with money laundering and shipping Cannabis out of State. Those are not in compliance with the Compassionat Use Act.

Does anyone have any links to an arrest where they were in compliance? I also read an article earlier where the State Courts in Cali were the ones that determined Dispensories violated the Law.

What I'm concerned about is we have 67 pages of hateful comments without so much as one Federal arrest posted that was in compliance.......

They are charging them...but as of yet, no convictions-- That is because they are trumped up charges, to make the DOJ appear to be "Righteous" in what they are doing--
But in reality, it is mostly just the same old shit...smash and grabs--

The Obama administration is once again cracking down on medical marijuana dispensaries in California despite the fact the the benefits of medical marijuana are indisputable, they are well within California law and support for medical marijuana legalization — as well as legalization of marijuana for person use is growing exponentially across the U.S.

Federal prosecutors have sent letters to landlords and owners of dispensaries across California warning them to halt sales of marijuana within 45 days or face property seizures and other legal backlash, though some raids have already commenced.

The Justice Department asserts, as it did during the Bush administration and earlier in the Obama administration that federal drug laws trump state drug laws. While may be true in some cases, the assertion is constitutionally dubious in the case of marijuana that’s grown, sold and used within the state of California.

This is because of a qualifier clause known as the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution that states only laws made “in pursuance” (that is, the following or carrying out) of the Constitution take precedence over state laws. A federal law that is not made “in pursuance” of the Constitution is unconstitutional.

The Supremacy Clause states: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

Meanwhile, some anti-medical marijuana supporters argue that the federal government has unlimited power in this area, but that assertion doesn’t pass muster because the entire Constitution is an exercise in prohibiting federal government from exercising unlimited power.

All of this makes the Justice Department crackdown all the more puzzling.

It’s not like the feds don’t have anything better to do with their time and money, and as priorities go shutting down a bunch of dispensaries that provide a modicum of relief for cancer, HIV/AIDS and glaucoma sufferers should be very low on the list.

“How can the Obama administration say that it’s fine for sick people to use this proven medicine, and yet tell them they can’t have any legal place to get it?” asked Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project. “Medical marijuana isn’t going away. Over 70 percent of Americans support making medical marijuana legal, and 16 states allow it.”

Oh, and by the way, Mr. President, more people support the legalization of marijuana than support you.

They are simply doing the same thing they have been doing all along...flexing their (Federal) muscle...because they can--
Hundreds of D's here have closed in fear of this "Crackdown"...and the local LEO are only too glad about it!!

 

[JJScorpio]

Thx for the info KMK. What do you know about the State Courts determining that dispensories are illegal? And did that have anything to do with the Feds threats?

I also found this statement from Kris Hermes, a spokesman for the medical marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access.

"It did have an impact. However, the federal government never acted on its threats, never prosecuted anybody, never even went to court to begin prosecutions," Hermes said. "By and large they were empty threats, but they relied on them and the cost of postage to shut down as many facilities as they could without having to engage in criminal enforcement activity."


I'm wondering if this entire mess was anything more than a scare tactic for those dispensories they felt were operating outside of the law.

 

[Hydrosun]

Thx for the info KMK. What do you know about the State Courts determining that dispensories are illegal? And did that have anything to do with the Feds threats?

I also found this statement from Kris Hermes, a spokesman for the medical marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access.

"It did have an impact. However, the federal government never acted on its threats, never prosecuted anybody, never even went to court to begin prosecutions," Hermes said. "By and large they were empty threats, but they relied on them and the cost of postage to shut down as many facilities as they could without having to engage in criminal enforcement activity."


I'm wondering if this entire mess was anything more than a scare tactic for those dispensories they felt were operating outside of the law.

1) ASA is a very conflicted group.

2) "They felt were operating outside of the (state) law" is a matter for STATE court.

3) Here is the criminal enforcement on video, so I guess they did it and those being held at gun point think it is more than a scare tatic. https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=229514&highlight=diego+raid+video

 

[kmk420kali]

Thx for the info KMK. What do you know about the State Courts determining that dispensories are illegal? And did that have anything to do with the Feds threats?

Actually I am unclear on which one caused the other, or if they are working in unison-- The 4th District Court of Appeals upheld Riversides Ban, but until it has gone all the way to SCOTUS, they can't really force them to close-- So it is a little suspicious that the Feds have started this scare tactic...altho it is more than that, since they have raided quite a few already...using accusations, but no formal Charges-- Here is an Article explaining it somewhat--

The decision by a panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal upholds Riverside's ban. It could embolden more cities and counties to enact their own bans.
November 11, 2011|By John Hoeffel, Los Angeles Times
In a decision that could have immediate fallout for medical marijuana dispensaries, a state appeals court has ruled that California law allows cities and counties to ban the stores.

The contentious issue has bounced through the state courts for years, but the opinion issued Wednesday is the first published one that directly tackles it and does so in unambiguous language. The decision, which upholds Riverside's ban, could embolden more cities and counties to enact their own. It also could spur those that have bans to be more aggressive about seeking court orders to close defiant dispensaries.
"I think its impact will be significant throughout the state," said Jeffrey Dunn, an attorney who argued the case for Riverside. "It's not wishy-washy. It squarely addresses it. And it makes it very clear."

In the case, a three-judge panel in the 4th District Court of Appeal in Riverside rejected an appeal from Inland Empire Patient's Health and Wellness Center and concluded that the state's medical marijuana laws do not prevent cities and counties from passing regulations on dispensaries, including bans. The judges also issued a nearly identical unpublished opinion Wednesday, upholding Upland's ban.

The decisions closely follow another appellate court ruling that said Long Beach could not adopt any regulations that amount to authorizing dispensaries because marijuana remains illegal under federal law. That decision has left officials throughout the state puzzled about what rules they can impose. Together, the two decisions could lead more cities and counties to put bans in place.

Joe Elford, chief counsel for Americans for Safe Access, said he fears that could happen, but added, "I would hope that they would do the responsible thing and continue to regulate dispensaries."

Long Beach, which had used a lottery to select the dispensaries it would allow, will now consider a ban.

Paul Chabot, founder of the Coalition for a Drug Free California, said he hoped that the decision would spell the end for pot shops.

"This really puts the green light out to all city attorneys that they can take action immediately to shut them down," he said. "The tide is turning against so-called medical marijuana in California."

Americans for Safe Access says 168 cities and 17 counties ban dispensaries, while Chabot's group puts it at 225 and 15. Both organizations say that more than 80 cities and about 10 counties have moratoriums, while a few more than 40 cities and about 10 counties have ordinances that allow dispensaries.

The recent decisions could give the state Supreme Court an opportunity to address critical issues that remain unsettled 15 years after voters made California the first state to allow medical use of marijuana. Despite the state's groundbreaking status, its medical marijuana program is the most tumultuous. The state's four federal prosecutors have ramped up enforcement to shut down dispensaries and growers.

Long Beach City Atty. Robert Shannon said the city filed its appeal to the Supreme Court on Thursday. "The law is in total disarray," he said. "There is no clarity and consistency."

And the founder of the Riverside dispensary, Lanny Swerdlow, said he expects the collective will also appeal.

"We think that it's wrong that a city can ban a state-permitted activity by zoning it out of existence," he said. "By allowing cities to ban, it just makes a crazy-quilt pattern across the state."
Riverside now plans to take action against an estimated 15 dispensaries violating its ban. "We will be immediately moving to shut them down," City Atty. Gregory Priamos said. "We're extremely pleased that the court recognized and respected local land use and zoning authority."

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/11/local/la-me-pot-ban-20111111

I also found this statement from Kris Hermes, a spokesman for the medical marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access.

"It did have an impact. However, the federal government never acted on its threats, never prosecuted anybody, never even went to court to begin prosecutions," Hermes said. "By and large they were empty threats, but they relied on them and the cost of postage to shut down as many facilities as they could without having to engage in criminal enforcement activity."


I'm wondering if this entire mess was anything more than a scare tactic for those dispensories they felt were operating outside of the law.

They have raided quite a few tho...no formal Charges that I have seen so far-- Smash and grabs-- I will look for links to those in a while...but lunch is calling me right now!!

 

[BushyOldGrower]

The system has failed. Capitalism is the evil not Obama. He has little power to change things and people reviled Bush as well. The system has been corrupted by money and money has always been the root of all evil.

People can't even imagine what real change would mean.

This long thread makes many good points and there is no need for any division among us. I tend to side with liberals and democrats in general because of the conservative alternative we see. My dad was a good republican and I loved him and respected his views as well.

I shouldnt have said its easy to see good from evil because that more often than not is a delusion in itself. The idea of evil.

So we should be reasonable and really look at this issue in context of our world not just the feds or obama or medical mari laws. This is bizarro earth to me now because I am old.

I am probably wanting real change more than most but I am a dreamer who sees a world radically changed. Perhaps I am insane but I have always been a dreamer.

I dont think we need money, borders, wars, armies and such. To make such radical changes would mean something. We would need help and indeed perhaps this world is beyond saving.

Maybe you can fix it young eager people. I wish I could but eventually I will just abandon ship and leave this world to you. The aliens told me that they were here to help us and I believe them so let me dream on... BOG

 

[Hydrosun]

The system has failed...... The system has been corrupted....

People can't even imagine what real change would mean.

This long thread makes many good points and there is no need for any division among us. .....

I loved him and respected his views as well.

I shouldnt have said its easy to see good from evil because that more often than not is a delusion in itself. The idea of evil.

So we should be reasonable and really look at this issue in context of our world ..... This is bizarro earth to me now because I am old.

I am probably wanting real change more than most but I am a dreamer who sees a world radically changed. Perhaps I am insane but I have always been a dreamer.

I dont think we need money, borders, wars, armies and such. To make such radical changes would mean something. We would need help and indeed perhaps this world is beyond saving.

Maybe you can fix it young eager people. I wish I could but eventually I will just abandon ship and leave this world to you. The aliens told me that they were here to help us and I believe them so let me dream on... BOG

Edited a little for broader appeal. Mentioning specific topics or specific sides hasn't seem to help. The system has had a fun time dividing us up and watching us squawk at each other. I am more guilty than any at participating in the knit picky bull shit of specifics. I am going to try and follow your more mellow lead.

There is so much that unites us and nothing "Real" that divides us.

Trying to get over the delusion of evil, that is what causes the clamoring for move government.

Thank you for your wise words.

 

[dagnabit]

Here is the full text of a February 2011 memo, obtained by Michael Montgomery, outlining US Attorneys' guidelines for federal marijuana prosecution in California.

To: DEA, HIDTA, Federal task force partners in California for internal law enforcement use only. Not for public use or circulation

From: California United States Attorneys

This memorandum outlines factors that all four California U.S. Attorneys Offices (the USAOs) agree may render a particular marijuana case suitable for federal prosecution. Indefication of these factors is intended to assist federal, state and local law enforcement agencies in determining whether a particular marijuana case has significant potential for federal prosecution and conducting investigations in a manner that develops the best evidence to support federal prosecution (footnote 1). The USAOS will consider for federal prosecution cases investigated by federal, state or local law enforcement agencies that implicate federal interests as reflected in the factors. Cases investigated by federal agencies will generally be given priority over cases adopted from state or local investigations. The factors listed below are relevant to the USAOs consideration of whether a marijuana case should be prosecuted federally but the presence or absence of one or more of the factors will not guarantee or preclude federal prosecution in any case. In general the federal interest will be greater in prosecuting leaders and organizers of the criminal activity as opposed to lower level workers.

The memorandum is intended as prospective guidance only, is not intended to have the force of law and is not intended to, does not, and may not be relied on to create any right, privilege or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any person or entity against any type of the USAOs, DOJ or the United States.

(page 2)

1. Domestic distribution cases.

Federal prosecution of a case of domestic distribution of marijuana should generally involve at least 200 or more kilograms of marijuana and also include additional factors that reflect a clear federal interest in prosecution (Footnote 2—This guidance for domestic distribution cases does not apply to cases involving distribution within smuggling into a federal prison. 18 USC 1791). Typically the more marijuana above 200 kilograms the better the potential for federal prosecution. Domestic distribution cases involving quantities of marijuana below 200 kilograms should demonstrate an especially strong federal interest or should not be prosecuted with marijuana distribution as the sole federal charge. Set forth below is a non-exhaustive list of factors that USAOs believe indicate a federal interest in a domestic distribution case.

*Distribution by an individual or organization with provable ties to an international drug cartel or a poly-drug trafficking organization.

*Distribution of significant quantities to persons or organizations outside California.

*Distribution by individuals with significant prior criminal histories.

*Distribution by individuals with provable ties to a street gang that engages in drug trafficking involving violent conduct.

*Distribution for the purpose of funding other criminal activities.

*Distribution near protected locations or involving underage or vulnerable people (e.g. in violation of 21 USC 859 persons under 21, 860 near schools, playground and colleges, 861 employment of persons under 18).

*Distribution involving the use or presence of firearms or other dangerous weapons including cases that would support charges under 18 USC 924c.

*Distribution generating significant profits that are used or concealed in ways that would support charges of federal financial crimes such as tax evasion, money laundering or structuring. Note: Generation of significant profits alone generally will not be viewed as a factor weighing in favor of federal prosecution.

*Distribution in conjunction with other federal crimes involving violence or intimidation.

(Page 3)

2. Cultivation cases.

Federal prosecution of a marijuana case involving cultivation on non-federal or non-tribal land, indoor or outdoor, should generally involve at least 1,000 marijuana plants so that they quantity necessary to trigger the ten-year mandatory minimum sentence can be clearly proven and also include additional factors that reflect a clear federal interest in prosecution. Typically, the more marijuana above 1,000 plants, the better the potential for federal prosecution. Non-federal or non-tribal land cases involving quantities below 1,000 plants should demonstrate an especially strong federal interest or should not be prosecuted with marijuana cultivation as the sole federal charge. Federal prosecution of a marijuana case involving cultivation on federal or tribal land should generally involve at least 500 marijuana plants and also include additional factors that reflect a clear federal interest in prosecution. Cases on federal or tribal land involving quantities below 500 plants will be considered if they demonstrate a strong federal interest, if the cultivation has caused significant damage to federal or tribal lands or has occurred in an area of exclusive federal jurisdiction (Footnote 3-- The USAOs will consider the totality of circumstances with respect to all marijuana plant quantities in these guidelines. For example, the presence of especially mature, large or robust plants will generally weigh in favor of prosecution while the presence of seedlings or immature plants will generally weigh against prosecution). Set forth below is a non-exhaustive list of factors that the USAOs believe indicate a federal interest that may justify federal prosecution of a marijuana case involving cultivation whether on federal, tribal or other lands.

*Cultivation causing significant environmental damage, risk to human health or interference with particularly sensitive land or significant recreational interests, ie damage to wilderness area or wildlife, danger to innocent families using a 8recreation area or use of toxic or dangerous chemicals.

Cultivation by an individual or organization with provable ties to an international drug cartel or poly-drug trafficking organization.

*Cultivation of significant quantities on behalf or persons or organizations outside California.

*Cultivation by individuals with significant prior criminal histories.

*Cultivation by individuals with provable ties to a street gang that engages in drug trafficking involving violent conduct.

*Cultivation for the purpose of funding other criminal activities.

(Page 4)

*Cultivation near protected locations or involving under-age or vulnerable people (eg in violation…

*Cultivation involving the use or presence of fire-arms, booby traps or other dangerous weapons including cases that would support charges under 18 USC 924c.

*Cultivation generating significant profits that are used or concealed in ways that would support charges for federal financial crimes such as tax evasion, money laundering or structuring. Note—g eneration of significant profits alone will not be viewed as a factor weighing in favor of federal prosecution.

*Cultivation in conjunction with other federal crimes involving violence or intimidation.

3. Dispensary cases.

Given California state law, prosecution of marijuana stores or “dispensaries” purporting to comply with state law face additional challenges. Federal prosecution of a case involving a marijuana store should generally involve a) provable sales through seizures or records of over 200 kilograms or 1000 plants per year. b)sales clearly in violation of state law, eg sales to persons without legitimate doctors’ recommendations, side-sales occurring outside of the store or shipping to persons outside of California (Note—selling for profit, though a violation of state law, typically alone will not alone satisfy this requirement), and c) additional factors that reflect a federal interest in prosecution. Set forth below is a non-exhaustive list of such additional factors. Nothing herein should be taken as a limitation on investigation by federal law enforcement to determine the existence of these factors. However, search warrants or other more intrusive investigative techniques directed as marijuana stores should be closely coordinated with the USAOs.

*Marijuana “inventory” obtained from cultivation on federal or tribal land>

*Targets involved in cultivation involved in cultivation or distribution outside of dispensary that merits federal prosecution based on consideration of factors set forth in sections 1 and 2 above.

*Targets using profits from dispensary to support other criminal activity.

*Store linked to physician providing marijuana recommendations without plausible legitimate justification, eg doctor on site providing recommendation with no on-site examinations or legitimate medical procedures.

*Targets have significant prior criminal histories.

*Targets have provable ties to a street gang that engages in drug trafficking involving violent conduct.

*Store operations involve the use or presence or firearms or other dangerous weapons including cases that would support charges under 18 USC 924.

(Page 5)

*Store generates significant profits that are used/concealed in ways that would support charges for federal financial crimes such as tax evasion, money laundering or structuring. Note--generation of significant profits alone generally will not be viewed as a factor weighing in favor of federal prosecution.

*Store operations in conjunction with other federal crimes involving violence or intimidation.

*Store employs minors under 18 and/or sells a significant portion of marijuana to minors under the age of 21 especially where evidence that minors aren’t using for medical purposes.

4. Civil forfeiture.

The USAOs general preference is to pursue forfeiture through criminal forfeiture or civil forfeiture filed in parallel with a criminal case. Nevertheless circumstances may arise in which civil forfeiture alone is the best option. Those cases will generally involve one or more of the following:

*Significant forfeitable assets clearly traceable to marijuana trafficking in violation of federal criminal law that would merit federal prosecution based on consideration of factors set forth in sections 1-3 above.

*Significant forfeitable assets clearly traceable to non-marijuana related violations of federal law such as structuring or money-laundering. Large scale “medical marijuana” cultivation operations that 1) are operating in violation of state law 2)involve real property that has been the subject of a warning letter or similar prior notice or 3) involve real property that has been the subject of a prior forfeiture proceeding arising from marijuana cultivation or a property owner who has been a claimant in such proceedings or individual targets not subject to criminal prosecution eg fugitives or persons whose involvement in marijuana trafficking is too marginal to justify criminal prosecution including off-site land lords and non-resident owners falsely claiming ignorance of tenant’s marijuana trafficking.

there is the text of the letter..

northstone organics was in full compliance and raided by the feds...
http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2011/...one-organics-causes-fear-that-no-one-is-safe/

i like everyone's ideas about the POTUS having no influence over DOJ it's cute..
i still realize it's idiotic to think the president does nothing but it's cute.

remember all you same guys who say the president is a powerless figurehead railing against the potus during pipe dream?
remember "bush sent tommy chong to jail" i do cuz it was true. it's true O could stop the raids but chooses not to.
most likely because he was sent a clear message from cali concerning MJ with 19.

 

[JJScorpio]

I may be wrong, but haven't the State Courts done more damage than the Feds have? I understand the scare tactics are bullshit in themselves, but who's to say this order came from the President? For some reason they never followed through with their threats to shut down and prosecute.

I just don't see this thread as completely fair. Obama said he was staying out of State business when it came to MM and for the most part hasn't he? Although it seems like all these Fed prosecutors would like to raise hell, for some reason they haven't. And I haven't really seen any concrete proof that the State wasn't involved in the harrassment of these dispensories that have been messed with.

I'm sure old Obama is under a lot of pressure from a lot of people to go after these Dispensories. Hell, look at the way people in this thread have beat him down with comments. And basically these comments are based nothing more than speculation about an alleged letter that was never acted upon.....

And I think BOG's correct in his comments regarding money being the evil factor. It doesn't help when you have television show after show discussing the billions of dollars changing hands. You can bet it's the main reason the State Courts have ruled against the Dispensories.

In another year you guys may get your wish and Obama may be voted out. But you might not like what you get in his place. We may get a Pres that sends the Feds in to prosecute and close down the entire program. Then again, we may not. But I'm pretty sure that either the State or the Feds are eventually going to decide to capitalize on all that money...... One way or another......

 

[kmk420kali]

Indeed, the man who once pledged on the campaign trail that he was “not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue,” has – since taking the Presidential oaths of office – done virtually everything in his administration’s power to do precisely that. Yet he's taken these steps at the very time that a record number of Americans, including 57 percent of democrats and a whopping 69 percent of self-described liberals, endorse doing just the opposite. Nonetheless, in recent months, the Obama administration – via a virtual alphabet soup of federal agencies – has launched an unprecedented series of attacks against medical cannabis patients, providers, and in some cases even their advocates.

To review:

-- Deputy Attorney General James Cole, along with the four US Attorneys from California, has ramped up federal efforts to close or displace several hundreds of medical cannabis providers in California. Their tactics have included: raiding specific dispensaries and prosecuting their owners; filing civil forfeiture proceedings against landlords who rent their property to medical marijuana providers; threatening to federally prosecute newspapers and radio stations who accept ad revenue from medical cannabis operations; and, most recently, intimidating local lawmakers who have either enacted or are publicly supportive of cannabis oversight regulations. Speaking with radio station KQED San Francisco last month, Tommy LaNier – Director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy's National Marijuana Initiative – boasted about the administration’s efforts to strong-arm local officials, stating "[We] have ... advised those places where they're trying to regulate marijuana -- which is illegal under the Control Substances Act -- (that) they cannot do that.”

-- In Colorado, United States Attorney John Walsh has sent letters to owners of dozens of the Centennial State’s medical cannabis facilities stating, "Action will be taken to seize and forfeit their property" if they do not cease their operations. Unlike similarly targeted dispensaries in California, the operations on Walsh’s hit list are explicitly licensed by the state and thus fully compliant with state law – a fact that Walsh’s letters readily acknowledge but appear content to ignore. "This ... constitutes formal notice that action will be taken to seize and forfeit (your) property if you do not cause the sale and/or distribution of marijuana and marijuana-infused substances at (this) location to be discontinued,” they state. “[T]he Department of Justice has the authority to enforce federal law even when such activities may be permitted under state law.” Ironically, the Justice Department’s letters arrived just weeks after US Attorney General Eric Holder publicly told (read: lied to) Colorado Congressman Jared Polis, an ardent supporter of the medicinal cannabis industry, that that the federal government would only target medical cannabis operators that "use marijuana in a way that's not consistent with the state statute."

-- But the Obama Justice Department isn’t only sending letters to cannabis dispensaries owners and their landlords. Last year, the DOJ also mailed letters to numerous state lawmakers, including the Governors of Delaware, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, as they were debating legislation to allow for the licensed distribution of medical cannabis. The letters threatened federal prosecution for those involved with said efforts – including, in some cases, state civil servants – if the measures went forward. As a result, most didn’t.

The Justice Department isn’t the only agency directly involved in the administration’s medical pot crackdown. Also over the past six months:

-- The IRS has assessed crippling penalties on tax-paying medical cannabis facilities in California by denying these operations from filing standard expense deductions;

-- The Department of Treasury has strong-armed local banks and other financial institutions into closing their accounts with medicinal marijuana operators. In Colorado, where the state’s estimated 700 licensed cannabis dispensaries are routinely subjected to state audits, there no longer remains even a single bank willing to openly do business with med-pot operators.

-- The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms has sternly warned firearms dealers not to sell guns to medical cannabis consumers, and stated that patients who otherwise legally possess firearms are in violation of federal law and may face criminal prosecution;

-- In July, the Drug Enforcement Administration rejected a nine-year-old administrative petition that called for hearings regarding the federal rescheduling of marijuana for medical use, ignoring extensive scientific evidence of its medical efficacy. “[T]here are no adequate and well-controlled studies proving (marijuana's) efficacy; the drug is not accepted by qualified experts,” the agency alleged. “At this time, the known risks of marijuana use have not been shown to be outweighed by specific benefits in well-controlled clinical trials that scientifically evaluate safety and efficacy.”

-- This fall, the National Institute on Drug Abuse rejected an FDA-approved protocol to allow for clinical research assessing the use of cannabis to treat post-traumatic stress disorder; a spokesperson for the agency conceded, “We generally do not fund research focused on the potential beneficial medical effects of marijuana.”

-- The DEA has reduced the total number of federally qualified investigators licensed to study plant marijuana in humans to 14 nationwide.

Most recently, and perhaps most egregiously, the DEA acknowledged that it was investigating a Montana state lawmaker for potentially conspiring to violate federal anti-marijuana laws. The lawmaker, Rep. Diane Sands – a Democrat from Billings, Montana – served as the chairwoman of a 2011 interim legislative committee that sought to enact statewide regulations governing the production and distribution of medical pot, which has been legal in the state since 2004. "Can you say McCarthy?” she told The Missoulian newspaper. “This sounds like stuff from the House Un-American Activities Committee and Joe McCarthy. So once you talk about medical marijuana in reasonable terms, you're on some sort of list of possible conspirators. … It's ridiculous, of course, but it's also threatening to think that the federal government is willing to use its influence and try to chill discussion about this subject."

* * *

So has the Obama administration collectively lost its mind when it comes to the subject of medical cannabis? That certainly seems to be the case. But the bigger question still remains: Why now?

Speculation among reformers and the general public is widespread. Many activists believe that the administration’s about face is due to pressure from the pharmaceutical industry, which may be hoping to eliminate competition in the marketplace for forthcoming cannabis-based drugs like Sativex and other, soon-to-be-marketed organic cannabinoid formulations. Others believe that Obama’s crackdown is a Machiavellian attempt on the part of the President and his advisors to appeal to independent, conservative-leaning swing voters during an election year. Still others argue that the recent attacks have little to do with President Obama at all. Instead, they believe the efforts of the DEA, DOJ, and other federal agencies are being coordinated primarily by drug war hawks within the administration, many of which are holdovers from the George W. Bush regime, such as DEA administrator Michele Leonhart. Adding weight to this claim are recent statements from US Attorney Andre Birotte, who acknowledged that the DOJ’s recent activities were led by the federal prosecutors themselves and were not instigated by either President Obama or Attorney General Eric Holder – both of which are engaged in their own personal battles for political survival and, as a result, are unlikely to expend even a shred of political capital to halt the efforts of the administration’s more ardent drug warriors.

There’s likely a grain of truth in all of the above theories. But perhaps the greatest underlying motivator for the administration’s sudden and severe crackdown on medical marijuana providers and patients is its desire to preserve America’s longstanding criminalization of cannabis for everyone else. There is little doubt that the rapid rise of the medical marijuana industry and the legal commerce inherent to it is arguably the single biggest threat to federal cannabis prohibition. Just look at the poll numbers. According to Gallup, in 1996 – when California became the first state to allow for the legally sanctioned use of cannabis therapy – only 25 percent of Americans backed legalizing marijuana for all adults. (Seventy-three percent of respondents at that time said they opposed the idea.) Fast forward to 2011. Today, a record high 50 percent of Americans support legalizing the plant outright and only 46 percent of respondents oppose doing so. It’s this rapid rise in the public’s support for overall legalization that no doubt has the Obama administration, and the majority of America’s elected officials, running scared.

While the passage and enactment of statewide medical marijuana laws – 16 states and the District of Columbia now have laws recognizing marijuana’s therapeutic use on the books – is not solely driving the public’s shift in support for broader legalization, it is arguably a major factor. Why? The answer is simple. Tens of millions of Americans residing in these states are learning, first hand, that they can coexist with marijuana being legal! And that is the lesson the federal government fears most.

In states like California and Colorado, voters have largely become accustomed to the reality that there can be safe, secure, well-run businesses that deliver consistent, reliable, tested cannabis products. They have come to understand that well-regulated cannabis dispensaries can revitalize sagging economies, provide jobs, and contribute taxes to budget-starved localities. Most importantly, the public in these states and others are finally realizing that all the years of scaremongering by the government about what would happen if marijuana were legal, even for sick people, was nothing but hysterical propaganda. As a result, a majority of American voters are now for the first time asking their federal officials: ‘Why we don’t just legalize marijuana for everyone in a similarly responsible manner?’

That is a question the President remains unable and unwilling to answer. And the administration appears willing to go to any lengths to avoid it.

http://www.alternet.org/story/154070/why_is_the_obama_administration_suddenly_fixated_on_stomping_out_medical_pot?page=entire

 

[Hydrosun]

I may be wrong, but haven't the State Courts done more damage than the Feds have?

Obama said he was staying out of State business when it came to MM and for the most part hasn't he?

I'll answer your questions, despite your unwillingness to answer mine.

1) No the state courts have done nothing to SMASH store fronts, The state courts have ordered NO RAIDS of store fronts....... Now what damage do you claim state courts have done????????

2) No the Fed has not stayed out of state business. There has been huge and highly organized ANTI cannabis operations by the Feds in CA and MT. In fact the front page of ICmag carries a story about DEA harassment of a MT state legislator............. I don't want to play the D / R game, but the feds have not stayed out of state business.

 

[dagnabit]

I may be wrong, but haven't the State Courts done more damage than the Feds have? I understand the scare tactics are bullshit in themselves, but who's to say this order came from the President? For some reason they never followed through with their threats to shut down and prosecute.

there is a shutdown thread 'round here somewhere where people report in as they close...
dispensaries have shut down that remained open during the entire bush admin. some were evicted by landlords threatened with seizure. some shut down because they received threats from DOJ. some shut down because they watched the DOJ albino,anorexic devil whore on TV threaten to put them in federal pound me in the ass prison.

I just don't see this thread as completely fair. Obama said he was staying out of State business when it came to MM and for the most part hasn't he?

only if you believe the DOJ reports to chief justice roberts

Although it seems like all these Fed prosecutors would like to raise hell, for some reason they haven't. And I haven't really seen any concrete proof that the State wasn't involved in the harrassment of these dispensories that have been messed with.

find Mr Cohen from northstone he won't be hard to find. probably at the graves of his dogs the feds gunned down when they came in his fully compliant disp. with guns blazing...

I'm sure old Obama is under a lot of pressure from a lot of people to go after these Dispensories. Hell, look at the way people in this thread have beat him down with comments. And basically these comments are based nothing more than speculation about an alleged letter that was never acted upon.....

multiple people have posted the letter and stories to the actions....

In another year you guys may get your wish and Obama may be voted out. But you might not like what you get in his place. We may get a Pres that sends the Feds in to prosecute and close down the entire program. Then again, we may not. But I'm pretty sure that either the State or the Feds are eventually going to decide to capitalize on all that money...... One way or another......

what does it matter?
elect anslinger for all it matters right?
the president has no control over DOJ's stance on MJ right?

 

[kmk420kali]

it's true O could stop the raids but chooses not to.
most likely because he was sent a clear message from cali concerning MJ with 19.

We predicted this in the Prop 19 Thread here...we knew it would happen, but the Anti 19 crowd was blind and deaf to it!!
I'm not saying that is the whole reason behind what is going on now...but you can bet yo ass it would have been a different scenario if 19 had passed--

 

[dagnabit]

amen

 

[BushyOldGrower]

Ya gotta love Ron Paul. I have supported Libertarian views for many years now. I wonder what would happen if he were elected but he is the only republican I like.

We need to try and remember that before an election moved are often made to make it look like the incumbent president is hard on drugs, gangs and all the things so many people seem to fear so much.

Fear is the mind killer and with authoritian groups always trying to divide and conquer the public interest. People want security and jobs, not a drug war or any war.

When young I was sure pot would be legalized soon but it is taking a bit longer. Try and stay high through these hard times and be hopeful because you never know what will happen tomorrow. BOG

 

[JJScorpio]

These Federal Prosecutors that wanted to shut down and prosecute the Dispensories and the owners didn't need the Presidents permission to do it. They have the right to prosecute any crime that violates Federal Law. And this is in violation of Federal law. The law is still on the books. The President can ask them not to prosecute, but they have done nothing wrong if they choose to. Except maybe to commit political suicide by pissing off the President.

Again.... They don't need the Presidents permission to uphold Federal Law.....

remember all you same guys who say the president is a powerless figurehead railing against the potus during pipe dream?
remember "bush sent tommy chong to jail" i do cuz it was true. it's true O could stop the raids but chooses not to.
most likely because he was sent a clear message from cali concerning MJ with 19.

 

[stickey fingers]

It appears the above posted arrests were charged with money laundering and shipping Cannabis out of State. Those are not in compliance with the Compassionat Use Act.

Does anyone have any links to an arrest where they were in compliance? I also read an article earlier where the State Courts in Cali were the ones that determined Dispensories violated the Law.

What I'm concerned about is we have 67 pages of hateful comments without so much as one Federal arrest posted that was in compliance.......

here in NORCAL chico all the dispenserys were closed .....
i had never been to any of them,
a friend of mine was there "buyer" manger, at the last remaining one and said everything
was buy the books, while every dispensery in chico closed,
when 2011 the fed letters went out they got a letter
and had to close, mean while i seen the crying patients
on tv meawhile most of the dispensery in SAC are now
closed and to me the vibe and culture of Medical Marijuna
is dead !!! until its all legal and avaiable for everybody....

 

[41hope]

Thanks Monkey, I'm also a supporter of Ron Paul! It's not a Dem vs Rep thing. Its an individual rights vs Gov. Dems don't understand that bigger Gov = supression. Repubs wanna act like they are shrinking Gov when they arn't!

 

[Hydrosun]

These Federal Prosecutors that wanted to shut down and prosecute the Dispensories and the owners didn't need the Presidents permission to do it. They have the right to prosecute any crime that violates Federal Law. And this is in violation of Federal law. The law is still on the books. The President can ask them not to prosecute, but they have done nothing wrong if they choose to. Except maybe to commit political suicide by pissing off the President.

Again.... They don't need the Presidents permission to uphold Federal Law.....

Exactly. They are allowed to say one thing "We'll leave State MMJ programs alone." And then do another "We'll smash any windows and lock up anyone we want" all under the guise of federal law and pre existing power.

At least you cheer lead for the winning Fed team and have the glee of winning because the Fed team wrote the rules. Even better still you gave up the pretense that the game is fair or the Fed team even has to honer its word.

 

[vta]

JJ...the thread title is the same as the original news story that was published. However, this is not only happening in CA...the same thing is going on in CO, MT,WA and MI.

This has nothing to do with State law. As you pointed out, Obama said he wouldn't use fed funds to go after people following state rules. HE connected himself to all of this with that statement. He is the boss, the man in-charge of the justice dept. There is no doubt in my mind he calls the shots with his cabinet.

This is from the OP

"Under United States law, a dispensary's operations involving sales and distribution of marijuana are illegal and subject to criminal prosecution and civil enforcement actions," letters signed by U.S. Attorney Laura Duffy in San Diego read. "Real and personal property involved in such operations are subject to seizure by and forfeiture to the United States ... regardless of the purported purpose of the dispensary."

They don't give 2 shits about State law. For example: they sent letters to every club in the San Diego area...every club. Now I'm pretty sure not all of them were breaking State law. That to me shows the intent of the feds. There have been dozens of raids all over the state since the letters went out...a stepped up effort is under way.

I'll be back with a list about Obama. Then you may see why most of us feel he is no friend of the cannabis user.

 

[Mia]

These Federal Prosecutors that wanted to shut down and prosecute the Dispensories and the owners didn't need the Presidents permission to do it. They have the right to prosecute any crime that violates Federal Law. And this is in violation of Federal law. The law is still on the books. The President can ask them not to prosecute, but they have done nothing wrong if they choose to. Except maybe to commit political suicide by pissing off the President.

Again.... They don't need the Presidents permission to uphold Federal Law.....

Wow what a huge cop out.
So let me get this straight, federal prosecutors are going to go directly against the Deputy attorney general, Eric Holder's statement, blessed by the anointed one, that they were going to leave law abiding dispensaries alone as long as they were in compliance with state law?
You're quite naive if you think all these AGs went rogue against the pres. and head of the justice department, whom they answer to. No offense, but that's the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while. I don't think you really understand the hierarchy of the justice system.
It just doesn't work that way. Their actions were most certainly blessed.
Obama talks out both sides of his mouth, like every other politician.....
Whatever happened to closing gitmo...........?