Pubdate: Fri, 30 Aug 2013
Source: New York Times (NY)
Copyright: 2013 The New York Times Company
Contact: http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/lettertoeditor.html
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/298
Authors: Ashley Southall and Jack Healy

U.S. WON'T SUE TO REVERSE STATES' LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA

WASHINGTON - The Justice Department on Thursday said it would not sue 
to block laws legalizing marijuana in 20 states and the District of 
Columbia, a move that proponents hailed as an important step toward 
ending the prohibition of the drug.

In a memo to federal prosecutors nationwide on Thursday, James M. 
Cole, the deputy attorney general, erased some uncertainty about how 
the government would respond to state laws making it legal to use 
marijuana for medical or recreational purposes.

Citing "limited prosecutorial resources," Mr. Cole explained the 
change in economic terms. But the memo also made clear that the 
Justice Department expects states to put in place regulations aimed 
at preventing marijuana sales to minors, illegal cartel and gang 
activity, interstate trafficking of marijuana, and violence and 
accidents involving the drug.

"A system adequate to that task must not only contain robust controls 
and procedures on paper; it must also be effective in practice," he wrote.

Voters in Washington and Colorado recently approved measures 
decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of recreational 
marijuana, while 18 other states and the District of Columbia permit 
the use of marijuana for medical purposes.

In a phone call on Thursday afternoon, Attorney General Eric H. 
Holder Jr. explained the government's "trust but verify" approach to 
Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington and Gov. John W. Hickenlooper of 
Colorado, a Justice Department official said.

Marijuana advocates praised the decision as a potentially historic 
shift in the federal government's attitude toward a drug it once 
viewed as a menace to public health. By allowing states to legalize 
and regulate marijuana, advocates said, the federal government could 
reduce jail populations and legal backlogs, create thousands of jobs, 
and replenish state coffers with marijuana taxes.

"This is a historic day," said Ean Seeb, a co-owner of a marijuana 
dispensary called Denver Relief. "This is the beginning of the end of 
marijuana prohibition."

But the prospect that marijuana could be legalized after a ban of 
decades drew criticism from law enforcement and drug policy 
officials. They warned that the Justice Department's decision would 
have unintended consequences, like more impaired driving and more 
criminal marijuana operations.

"This sends the wrong message," said former Representative Patrick J. 
Kennedy, who is a recovering prescription drug addict and a founder 
of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, a policy group. "Are we going to 
send up the white flag altogether and surrender and say 'have at it'? 
Or are we going to try to reduce the availability and accessibility 
of drugs and alcohol? That should be our mission."

Under the new guidance, a large scale and a for-profit status would 
no longer make dispensaries and cultivation centers a potential 
target for criminal prosecution.

However, prosecutors have broad discretion in determining, for 
instance, whether drug laws exacerbate "adverse public health 
consequences associated with marijuana use."

If federal prosecutors believe that a state's controls are 
inadequate, "the federal government may seek to challenge the 
regulatory structure itself in addition to continuing to bring 
individual enforcement actions, including criminal prosecutions," Mr. 
Cole wrote.

The Justice Department official said the guidance was mandatory and 
did not apply retroactively.

In Colorado and Washington, the passage of ballot measures left the 
states' drug laws in sharp opposition to federal drug policy, and 
raised questions about how federal law enforcement agents would 
respond to new retail marijuana stores. Some members of Congress 
sought to have the administration clarify whether state officials 
risked federal criminal prosecution while carrying out their duties 
under the state laws.

"It's a relief," said Representative Jared Polis, a Colorado 
Democrat. "It'll get the criminal element out of the marijuana trade. 
It'll provide legitimate business opportunities for everything from 
farmers to processors to retail store owners."

Mr. Cole is scheduled to testify on Sept. 10 at a Senate Judiciary 
Committee hearing focused on clarifying the administration's stance.

The White House said last week that President Obama did not support 
changing federal laws regulating marijuana, which treat the drug as a 
dangerous substance with no medical purpose.

Josh Earnest, a White House spokesman, said the president believed it 
was best to focus on high-level offenders like kingpins and traffickers.

The decision on Thursday followed Mr. Holder's announcement this 
month that federal prosecutors would no longer seek federal mandatory 
minimum sentences for certain low-level nonviolent drug offenders.

The announcement did not address the financial hurdles facing 
marijuana dispensaries and growing operations, like their access to 
loans and other banking services. Many banks are reluctant to do 
business with marijuana growers and sellers, for fear of violating 
federal laws.

Ashley Southall reported from Washington, and Jack Healy from Denver.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom