We never expected that the DEA would defy the public statements of both the U.S. President and the Attorney General in such an arrogant and brazen way.
And yet on Wednesday, the Drug Enforcement Administration raided a legal, permitted San Francisco medical cannabis dispensing collective against the will of the President and the Department of Justice… and we need you to respond RIGHT NOW!
In early February national media attention exploded around statements from a White House spokesperson and from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, telling the press that DEA raids would no longer continue, and that an end to such raids, according to Holder, was “now U.S. policy.”
And DEA’s response?
They thumbed their noses at the President and immediately raided a legal dispensing collective and, according to the San Francisco Police, did not even inform local cops! DEA claimed that the permit-holding dispensary was “violating state law,” but went on to say that evidence was “under seal” and could not be shared with the public.
The DEA is out of line and out of control, and this raid is nothing if not vindictive. Even if there was a violation of state law:
1. Why where there no arrests? 2. Why were local cops not involved? 3. Why are United States Federal Agents interpreting and enforcing California state law without consulting California officials? 4. Why was the collective not given due process through the proper authorities, but rather ransacked with a “smash and grab” raid?
DEA has twisted the words of the U.S. Attorney General, and thought that by saying publicly “they violated state law” that they could continue raiding whenever they want. Well that doesn’t fly. We DEMAND that the DEA stop immediately, and that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reprimand DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart for her blatant insubordination and violation of the “new American policy.”
Now it’s up to you, and all it takes is two phone calls, one to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, and the other straight to the DEA.
When the Administration announced an end to medical marijuana raids by the DEA, they abruptly took back the statement a few hours later. There was a bit of confusion about the new policy. Eric Holder put an end to that.
Attorney General Eric Holder signaled a change on medical marijuana policy Wednesday, saying federal agents will target marijuana distributors only when they violate both federal and state law.
That would be a departure from the policy of the Bush administration, which targeted medical marijuana dispensaries in California even if they complied with that state's law.
"The policy is to go after those people who violate both federal and state law," Holder said in a question-and-answer session with reporters at the Justice Department.
Good. There is little justification to waste Justice Department resources harassing Californians and Americans in 12 other states engaging in perfectly legal activity. Holder must follow the law but he also has discretion in setting priorities, and it's good to see him recognize that arresting local businessmen and their patients makes no sense. There remain questions about outstanding medical marijuana federal court cases with over two dozen dispensaries, and hopefully the solution will be to drop the charges.
In a related story, Maxine Waters wants to end mandatory minimum sentencing for federal drug offenses, and the bill has 15 co-sponsors. The Bureau of Prisons budget has increased 25-fold since mandatory minimums were introduced. Small drug cases belong in state courts, where offenders could be given treatment instead of jail. Furthermore, these kind of drug cases disproportionately impact minority communities.
H.R. 1466, the Major Drug Trafficking Prosecution Act of 2009, seeks to repeal mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenders and to give courts the ability to determine sentences based on all the facts, not just drug weight. It would also refocus federal resources on major drug traffickers instead of low-level offenders. There is currently no companion bill in the Senate.
Yesterday, the DEA raided a medical marijuana dispensary in Culver City, spending hours on site detaining employees and ultimately leaving the facility in disarray. This is unfortunately not an unusal story. Since 2005, the DEA has raided dozens of state-sanctioned dispensaries in California.
But this time was different. We're used to the DEA calling in help from various federal agencies and local law enforcement. But I guess none of their usual buddies were available yesterday because from the picture below, which appeared in the LA Times today, it looks like they had to resort to calling in Blackwater:
The DEA often likes to say that medical marijuana is not their top priority (though at the height of the raids last year, they were raiding an average of one dispensary per week). They like to argue that medical marijuana raids do not take resources away from other drug interdiction. Yet this photo makes me wonder - if they have sufficient resources to shut down meth labs and to bust medical marijuana providers, why do they need the help of Blackwater, a private agency?
Yet another reason we need Congress to hold oversight hearings on DEA medical marijuana activities. Good to know that House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers is concerned about this issue and has already begun to question the DEA on its actions.
Yesterday, ASA’s chief counsel, Joe Elford, and I traveled to Sacramento to attend the Assembly Labor Committee hearing on AB 2279, ASA’s medical marijuana employment rights bill. AB2279, which protects the rights of hundreds of thousands of medical marijuana patients in California from employment discrimination, was introduced in February by Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and co-authored by Assemblymembers Patty Berg (D-Eureka), Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley) and Lori Saldaña (D-San Diego). The bill reverses a January California Supreme Court decision in Ross v. RagingWire. Joe argued argued the case before the court.
After sitting through discussions of several other labor bills, Chairman Sandre Swanson called for AB 2279 to be heard. Assemblymember Leno stepped down from his committee seat to speak about the merits of the bill. He spoke about the intent of the voters when passing Proposition 215 and the intent of the legislature when passing SB 420 - clearly, they intended for patients to have the right to work. Mr. Leno also clarified that AB 2279 does not cause employers to violate federal law and preserves the rights of employers to take action against employees that come to work impaired or consume medical marijuana at the workplace.
XPosted 4/7/2008 11:46 PM PDT on MyDesert.com by BluePalmSpringsBoyz
Overheard Saturday night at the Democrats of the Desert Awards Banquet at the Las Rancho Palmas Resort, the decision to seek to close the Cathedral City medical marijuana clinic was made by Mayor Kathy DeRosa (R), Mayor Pro Tem Charles England (R), and Councilmember Chuck Vasquez (R-Closet Case) who voted to close the clinic.
Councilmember Greg Pettis (D), Candidate for the CA 80th Assembly District, and Councilmember Paul Marchand (D), Candidate for Mayor of Cathedral City, voted to support the clinic but were overruled by the Republican majority on council. In fact, Pettis was slated to appear at an event to support medical marijuana patients at Copy Kats last night, but the event was postponed.
Yesterday was a historic day for the medical marijuana movement. SJR 20, a resolution that calls for an end to DEA attacks on California’s medical cannabis patients and providers, cleared the California Senate Health Committee.
Unsurprisingly, the votes came down on party lines. One Republican Senator stated that there is a pill that patients could use instead of smoking marijuana. Committee Chairwoman Sheila Kuehl responded that a pill did exist (Marinol), but that it is too strong for many patients. It’s good to know that many of our state representatives are well educated on this issue and willing to stand up for patients and providers.
Californians have good reason to rejoice about this win. The resolution, authored by Senator Carole Migden, not only calls on the DEA to leave patients and providers alone, but further calls on the President and Congress to enact federal legislation to end the raids. If passed, this will be the first time in U.S. history that a state legislature has denounced the DEA’s interference in state laws and tactics used against medical cannabis patients and providers.
After waiting through half a dozen unrelated tax cases to be heard before the board, I testified, explaining how this tax revenue is in danger, due to increased federal interference in the state medical marijuana program. In 2007 alone, the DEA raided more than 50 medical marijuana providers, and they embarked on a new strategy, sending more than 300 letters to landlords of dispensaries, threatening property owners with criminal prosecution and asset forfeiture. I also described reactions from elected officials - ranging from a statement by US House Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers questioning the DEA’s tactics to State Senator Carole Migden’s introduction of SJR 20, which calls for an end to federal interference and urging Congress and the President to establish policy consistent with the compassionate use laws of California.
I concluded my comments with a plea that would be echoed by all of the following advocates, asking the BOE to work with the Governor and state legislature to protect this source of state revenue, which has become increasingly vital to our state’s fiscal health in the face of budget cuts to important state programs.
Wednesday was a difficult day for the medical marijuana movement. In the morning, the DEA raided the longest standing medical cannabis dispensary in Sacramento. I wrote about that raid on the blog of the organization I work for, Americans for Safe Access, so I won't dwell on it here.
Before noon though, I'd gotten word of another raid. The DEA was apparently raiding a facility operated by Tainted, Inc., a medical cannabis edible producer. I asked a coworker of mine to drive down to the site to confirm. As he was on his way, I got another call telling me that the DEA was raiding three Tainted facilities.
My coworker soon called me to confirm that it was a DEA raid (sometimes raids are misreported and we like to confirm by looking for the very noticeable DEA jackets). I told him about the other raids and asked him to talk to the agents to find out if anybody at any of the locations had been detained or arrested. After nudging the agents for a while, they finally told him that there were a dozen people being detained, but the DEA wouldn't reveal whether anybody had or would be arrested. They simply told us to keep calling the Oakland courthouse to check if any arraignments were scheduled for the following day.
(The DCCC announced that they were pleased with McNerney, is this what they have been pushing him to do? - promoted by Julia Rosen)
Back in 2006, when Jerry McNerney was running for Congress in CA-11, he would appear at forums, meetings and fundraisers where he would often be called upon to speak. One of the lines he used often, usually to thundering applause, was "I am a Barbara Boxer Democrat!" Never once did he say, "I am a Dennis Cardoza Democrat!" I suspect his audiences might have reacted a little more coolly if he had.
And yet his stance on the issues to date has more closely mirrored that of Rep. Dennis Cardoza (CA-18), who is well known for his conservative Blue Dog associations. Why is McNerney making this rightward shift?
Well, I've given McNerney the benefit of the doubt over the last seven months, preferring to think that he was getting bad advice from his Chief of Staff, Angela Kouters. I figured that Kouters, who is young, ambitious, inexperienced and thoroughly under the influence of Inside-the-Beltway conventional wisdom, was urging him to take so-called "moderate" positions in an attempt to pander to the DC perception of conservative CA-11 residents.
But it appears that I may have been mistaken. Unfortunately, the news today has brought two separate stories which have led me to the difficult conclusion that Jerry McNerney is not the man he appeared to be. That is to say, it sure seems like he duped many of his strongest supporters.
Yesterday, Rep. Jerry McNerney voted against Rep. Maurice Hinchey's amendment to H.R. 3093. The amendment would have prevented the government from enforcing federal drug laws against the medicinal use of marijuana in the twelve states that have legalized it. McNerney made this vote apparently without regard for the fact that Californians overwhelmingly supported Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.
The SF Chronicle duly noted McNerney's explanation for his vote:
McNerney, who alone among the Bay Area's all-Democratic House delegation voted against the measure, tied marijuana use to other illegal drugs.
"We are facing a drug crisis with meth and other drug use on the rise. Until we get a handle on the crippling drug use in our society, I cannot support the relaxation of current drug policy," McNerney said in a statement.
"I have spoken to many law enforcement officials concerned about the effect of drug use on our communities, particularly in San Joaquin County. The problem is real. Just yesterday, Stockton police announced a successful illegal drug sweep -- in cooperation with other law enforcement agencies -- that led to 51 arrests and the seizure of over 12 pounds of illegal substances," he said.
Today at the Board of Supervisors meeting, the supes debated something that should be fairly noncontroversial -- developing a policy so that sick people who use medical marijuana can be issued ID cards. Really, in a supposedly free society, is it that much to ask that people who can benefit from a little medical pot can use it without getting arrested? I stopped by the meeting for a short time, enough to hear the end of DA Tony Rackauckas' lame-brained argument for ignoring Prop. 215. I also heard members of the public argue forcefully for allowing tragically sick people to get a little relief. [...]
[The OC Board of Supervisors] voted 3-2 against Norby's [original] proposal (Moorlach and Norby were on the losing end), but that Bill Campbell offered a compromise and that measure passed 4-1. Only Janet Nguyen voted "no." [on both measures.] This is not a good sign if one has hopes of Nguyen being a supporter of limited and sensible government.
Steven Greenhut is pissed. The super hardcore libertarian-minded OC Register editorialist lambastes Supervisor Janet Nguyen on Orange Punch for voting against even considering issuing medical marijuana ID cards at yesterday's Board meeting.
So is Janet Nguyen not a "true conservative"? Is she not libertarian-minded? Does she hate sick, dying patients? Or does she just have something else in mind? Follow me after the flip for more on this sordid tale of political posturing, heated controversy, and gravely ill people in the balance...
(Sorry about the technical difficulties yesterday... But here's the final full account of what happened at the OC Board of Supervisors as they decided to take another 90 days to decide how to go forward in issuing medical marijuana ID cards. - promoted by atdleft)
After nearly four hours of heart-wrenching testimony, legal wrangling, political posturing, and attempts at compromise, the Orange County Board of Supervisors voted to direct staff to spend the next 90 days crafting a county policy on issuing ID cards to medical marijuana patients... Along with a study on how this would affect law enforcement AND a legal update on San Diego County's lawsuit seeking to overturn Prop 215.
Follow me after the flip as I (FINALLY!!) fill you in with updates and reactions on today's decision by the OC Board of Supes...
"These people are desperate for help. It does not help everyone, but it should be an alternative... We need your help so these patients can get their needed treatment."
That's Anna Bryce, the Orange County registered nurse who coauthored Proposition 215 in 1996. Andactally, she wasn't the only one to speak up about having the county comply with state law in issuing ID cards to patients using marijuana as medicinal treatment. Already, a dozen folks have spoken before the OC Board of Supervisors...
And only two of them spoke against today's mesaure. And yes, one of them was District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, who described this measure as a "license to smoke marijuana wherever I want and whenever I want in Orange County, issued by the County of Orange".
Stay tuned for more as the OC Board of Supes returns to session. Some pictures over the flip...
(Oh yeah, and check out this OC Register story about someone who's had to suffer because of all this legal confusion over medical marijuana. His recent experiences led him to push the county to make this historic vote tomorrow. - promoted by atdleft)
Dear Supervisors Nguyen, Moorlach, Campbell, Norby and Bates,
Please accept this note as a strong recommendation to approve the
medical marijuana i.d. program that will be presented to you this
coming Tuesday. [...]
Have some people taken advantage of the present medical marijuana
system and abused our trust? Of course. However, any system can be
and is abused. But that is not a reason not to maintain it. In
addition, of course, the People of the State of California passed
Prop. 215 back in 1996, so as a judicial officer it is embarrassing to
me that each county in our state has not long since established a
viable and enforceable medical marijuana program.
California News Roundup for today on the flip. Teasers: Pot, minimum wage, end of life choices, three strikes, State Senate District 35, CA-50, salmon, immigration, stem cells, and the race for lieutenant governor.
