Monday, August 6th 2007
Stop the pot shops!
Even though the action against the marijuana dispensaries happened last week, there is a legal side I have not seen covered enough. (I also want to know if Mickey is around and will comment on this.)
The use of pot is popular in Berkeley. It is accepted, encouraged, and practiced by many people. Then there are those pesky federal laws. From The Oakland Tribune:
The Berkeley Patient Group was notified Monday that its bank account was frozen by the Los Angeles Police Department during a joint operation with the Drug Enforcement Agency. The operation targeted about 10 dispensaries in Los Angeles, including the California Patients Group, a sister organization to the Berkeley-based business.
The assets of the drug dealers were frozen. They are crying foul because they were in compliance with local and state laws. The federal law was not on their side. More from the Tribune:
The Berkeley Patients Group serves more than 5,000 medical marijuana clients in Berkeley and Oakland. It is one of three legalized dispensaries in the city and also provides community services such as a hospice and free delivery of organic fruit and vegetables to hospice clients.
City Council member Kriss Worthington said the city should do all it can to protect the group and the two other dispensaries now operating in the city.
Since there are conflicting authorities claiming the same power, which entity of the government (or no part of it at all) has the authority to set policy on drugs? When the federal government and the City of Berkeley are in conflict, my policy is to favor the federal government until compelled otherwise. However, I missed the part in the Constitution about Congress making drug laws.
If the laws are important enough to be on the books at the federal level, they are important enough to be enforced. If they are enforced, they can be challenged legally. If they are struck down, maybe similar unconstitutional bills can be stopped before they become law.
Medicine or Mischief?
I don’t know anyone who uses marijuana for medical reasons. All the people I know who use it do so for recreational purposes. There are also people who claim a medical reason for marijuana without the need. Lets not forget this report from the Patriot and the accompanying flyer.
As a matter of physics, when conflicting authorities claim the same authority, the entity which has the most power gets it.
As a matter of law, the City of Berkeley has no constitutional power, but the State of California does. The federal government claims authority on the matter through the magical commerce clause, which allows it to regulate interstate commerce, and also anything that affects interstate commerce, like intrastate commerce, stuff that isn’t commerce but done by people who engage in commerce, and anything else it feels like. (Remember, supporting states rights means you support racism.) The court system has upheld this approach, so technically this kind of behavior is constitutional.
Comment by Beetle — 8/6/2007 @ 6:33 pm
check out this article:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-outcasts7aug07,1,4793716.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack=2&cset=true
yay james. =)
Comment by amaris — 8/7/2007 @ 7:26 am
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-outcasts7aug07,1,4793716.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
actually click this one instead. then you don’t have to register.
Comment by amaris — 8/7/2007 @ 7:27 am
Frozen assets doesn’t mean they stop operations right? Because there is a dispensary on my street and I see people in front of it every day. What exactly were the federal laws that were in contraditcion with the state ones? (just curious)
Comment by megans — 8/7/2007 @ 1:58 pm
From what I have read, the organization had its bank accounts frozen and its LA branches shut down. Since the Berkeley branch of the organization uses the same bank accounts, it lost access to the money. The Berkeley part would still have its inventory and can negotiate deals with its supplier(s) until it can become solvent again. I think the shop on Telegraph you are thinking of is different from the one mentioned in the article with the frozen assets.
Here is a Los Angeles Times article about the LA busts in question.
I have not followed the individual laws closely, but this is how I understand it:
The use of marijuana for medical purposes is outlawed on the federal level. Some states including California have passed laws that allow its use for medical reasons.
People who use pot for medical reasons in California get a doctor’s recommendation and go to a dispensary that will only sell to people with this doctor verified paperwork.
The result is local and state law enforcement will often leave the dispensaries alone unless they cause a disturbance to the community. Since marijuana use of any kind is outlawed by federal law, federal law enforcement can come in at any time and bust the shops by enforcing federal law.
Any other relevant information or corrections from people would be appreciated.
Comment by Christopher Page — 8/7/2007 @ 7:13 pm
If you’re in favor of the federal government’s involvement…I work for an organization MAPS, which recently won a landmark lawsuit against the DEA regarding medical marijuana. The lawsuit seeks to get a license granted to Lyle Craker, a professor in the Department of Plant, Soil & Insect Sciences at U Mass Amherst, to grow marijuana for FDA IND (Investigational New Drug) trials to determine whether or not it has medicinal value. There is one more step in the approval process – we need the DEA to accept the recommendation by their own Administrative Law Judge to grant the license. To put pressure on the DEA, Reps. John Olver (D-MA) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) are co-sponsoring a Congressional Sign-On Letter urging the DEA to accept the Recommended Ruling. Please visit http://www.maps.org to see how you can help.
Comment by terri — 8/8/2007 @ 9:53 am