Courtwatch
October 19, 2009 4:19 PM

New Pot Policy Is Not Yet a Turning Point

(CBS/iStockphoto)
It is easy both to overstate and understate the meaning of the Justice Department's decision Monday to alter its policy toward medical marijuana.

The Obama Administration's ballyhooed shift away from federal prosecution for state-sanctioned pot sales and use does not necessarily signal a turning point in the effort to legalize (and tax) marijuana. We are probably still a generation or two away from that. But the new White House policy is no small matter, either, for it means that tens of thousands of Americans now are free from federal persecution and prosecution for conduct that is completely legal in their own states.

Federal prosecutors now will get little internal blame for failing to bring criminal charges against people who are lawfully selling or using medical marijuana. Nor will federal lawyers necessarily get kudos within the department if they aggressively pursue medical marijuana cases. Forget all the nonsense about federal funding and national endorsements of drug use. The official government position now reverts simply to something akin to legal neutrality: if you smoke it, we won't come, because we have more important things to do with our time.

Medical Marijuana Arrest Guidelines Eased
L.A. Prosecutor Vows to Target Pot Shops

Apart from its cultural significant, the shift tells us a lot about where the White House prioritizes its anti-crime efforts. Every minute not spent going after California's pot smokers, for example, is a minute that federal lawyers and investigators now may spend ferreting out terror cells or looking into allegations of white-collar fraud. Every lawful dispensary in Colorado that goes un-raided by the ATF or the FBI or leaves the feds assets and energy to pursue violent crimes, which are on the upswing in many areas of the country, or upon more severe drugs like meth and heroine and crack cocaine.

The shift also has its roots in the economic reality of the times in which it's been invoked. In California and many other states where medical marijuana is legal, officials are trying to reduce massive budget deficits by releasing from prisons inmates who have been convicted of low-level, non-violent marijuana crimes. Even the most ardent law-and-order state executives have had to swallow hard and permit this to occur. The new national policy achieves the same practical effect before indictment, trial and conviction for the simple reason that our federal prisons (especially those in California) are terribly overcrowded, too.

It will be interesting to see, one administration from now, whether Monday's policy shift sticks where it is or floats back in the opposite direction. That's the way it is with these "policy" announcements; they are only as good as the writ of the officials who draft them. Like so many other half-measures performed by the Obama White House since it took office, this tweaking of Justice Department policy sounds more permanent and pervasive than it really is. It is not a sea-change as much as it is a sea-breeze.

For both sides, really, the only way to settle the matter is to lobby the Congress to make meaningful changes to the federal statutory scheme that currently criminalizes the drug. That would be a more permanent and less malleable course—and far less politically convenient. If and when that day comes, we can talk about how the country has moved one step closer to the legalization of marijuana. Until then, you legitimate medical marijuana users out there can take solace in the fact that even though your president evidently won't expend political capital pushing to reform pot laws he also won't be pushing his lawyers to put you in jail, either.

More CBSNews.com Coverage on Marijuana Legalization Efforts:

Does the Pot Pill Work
America's Love-Hate History with Pot
Inside Holland's "Half Baked" Pot Policy
Pot No Longer Focus of Anti-Drug Campaigns
CBSNews.com Special Report: Marijuana Nation



(CBS)
Andrew Cohen is CBS News' Chief Legal Analyst and Legal Editor. CourtWatch is his blog with analysis and commentary on breaking legal news and events. For columns on legal issues before the beginning of this blog, click here. You can also follow him on Twitter.

Tags:
Pot ,
Marijuana ,
Marijuana Nation
Topics:
In The News
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 16 Comments
by legacyABQ2 November 7, 2009 12:43 PM EST
Ask why the government has made it ILLEGAL to grow industrial hemp,

WHICH DOES NOT CONTAIN THC!!!!
Reply to this comment
by OldGeezer43 November 2, 2009 5:05 PM EST
Sounds like don't ask, don't tell. The government will want to tax and control it. The illegal growers won't want to lose their income. The Mexican Mafia doesn't it legal because it would jeopardize their base income from drugs and make them concentrate of the harder drugs. The price, which is sky high, would plummet if anyone could grow their own. Thus the government would start losing tax revenue and have to establish an enforce arm of the IRS to make sure the tax is collected on anyone who grows and that's just the beginning.
Reply to this comment
by cidaia October 22, 2009 8:18 AM EDT
What I find most interesting about this argument is how easily people switch positions on the question of whether the federal law can, should, or ought to override local self-determination.

The same people who whack themselves into a snit over the question of states' rights, will suddenly reverse their positions: suddenly it's the left that wants the states to have the right to determine local laws, and it's the right that wants the federal govt to have the right to set laws governing the whole nation (like it or not).

I don't care if we legalize pot or don't, but I'd sure like to see something resembling consistency in how we reason through what we believe to be right or wrong. The process matters as much as the end result.
Reply to this comment
by legacyABQ2 November 7, 2009 12:40 PM EST
LOL SO TRUE
by dragon8me October 20, 2009 12:54 PM EDT
"Prohibition... goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." -- Abraham Lincoln December, 1840
Reply to this comment
by earthling76 October 23, 2009 6:48 PM EDT
A real republican. Honest Abe.
by OregonJames October 20, 2009 7:23 AM EDT
It is a step in the right direction, but legalization is the goal. There is no reason for pot to be illegal, and the laws against weed have been a terrific failure from the beginning. Weed is as easy to find as cigarrettes or beer and certainly it is much safer. I think I'll go smoke some now....
Reply to this comment
by jimbo7776 October 19, 2009 11:11 PM EDT
As a Colorado physician with many patients who benefit from medical marijuana I applaud the Obama administration for this move. Given the lack of good science on the long term use of marijuana (particularly the very potent strains available to patients now 25% to upwards of 65% THC) I am not in favor if it's wholesale legalization. Rather a uniform federal standard for medical use, including the extent of physician oversight required and some science driven guidance as to appropriate qualifying conditions would be most helpful. Given the constraint on good research by he legal climate surrounding this medication, that science is years in the future unfortunately.

Having said that, I am happy literally thousands of Coloradans with illnesses ranging from cancer to carpal tunnel syndrome who will be able to focus on dealing with their very debilitating conditions as opposed to the heretofore constant specter of prosecution for merely seeking relief from constant pain. I hope we mow move forward to solidify this gain into law.

James Boland, M.D. Denver
Reply to this comment
by earthling76 October 20, 2009 10:25 PM EDT
Exactly where the heck is this potent (25% - 65%) pot? What about the pill? They are 100% and don't work for everyone. I think this potency thing is blown out of proportion. And besides wouldn't people just use less. You can buy Bacardi 151 but people don't drink the same amounts as they do beer. They drink less because it is stronger. And I don't need a prescription to purchase any of that super booze either. No long term use data? It has been used for 5000 years in a variety of forms. One of which is hashish which is also more potent (well over 65% THC) since it is essentially concentrated. We don't know the long term use data on all these new pharmaceutical drugs either so I don't see the point in raising that issue as a prerequisite only for legalizing cannabis. I am just saying that the 'this is not your parents pot' or 'marijuana 2.0' propaganda is just fear mongering and we should consider the source of the information since there are a lot of beneficiaries to maintaining the status quo.
by legacyABQ2 November 7, 2009 12:41 PM EST
Yep.. The good stuff, at 100$ a quarter ounce, requires only a toke or two
by earthling76 October 19, 2009 7:09 PM EDT
Not good enough. Try again.
Reply to this comment
by us_1776 October 19, 2009 11:02 PM EDT
If the issue of legalizing and taxing marijuana was put to a public referendum today, it would pass hands-down. We finally understand how detrimental the prohibition has been. Violent criminals early-released because we have stuffed our prisons full of harmless marijuana users who got sentenced under unjustly stiff mandatory sentencing guidelines. So while those harmless marijuana users sit in prison. Violent child sex offenders are released to prey upon our children. Murderers are released to kill once again. And countless BILLIONS of dollars went into the hands of the drug cartel kingpins instead of into our treasury in the form of taxes. Could we have been any more stupid?
by ObamaYoMama October 19, 2009 6:31 PM EDT
It's about time!! Where do I get my fatty?? Just kiding.... Funny that the ones that wanted to enforce this were more interested in regulating our citizens than the big business that almost brought this country to it's knees....
Reply to this comment
by sugar_maple October 19, 2009 5:16 PM EDT
I don't know exactly what rock you're hiding under, but a generation or two away from ending marijuana prohibition?

You seemingly are out of touch with society and the generational shifts of power that occurred during the last election... a BLACK president... one who "inhaled" because "that was the point" of smoking marijuana.

We are past the tipping point for how society views marijuana. It is the special interests that have lots to lose once marijuana prohibition is lifted (those groups are law enforcement organizations, prosecuting district attorneys, lawyers, pharmaceutical companies, and alternatives to paper and building industries).

Our DEA still has laws that do not allow American farmers the opportunity to grow industrial hemp (how out dated and neolithic are our laws). We are the ONLY industrialized nation that prohibits its citizens/farmers the ability to grow cannabis (industrial hemp) as a rotational crop.

The public is seeing past the racism and ignorant propaganda that was spewed to the American public about "marihuana". Oh, and it is SAFER than alcohol... so how can we seriously be that ignorant as a society?
Reply to this comment
by AttentionDeficit October 20, 2009 6:46 AM EDT
sugar_maple: let's not forget the alcohol pushers who will face major losses in sales if they have to compete with pot. one makes people passive, the other aggressive. one is identified with violent behavior, the other not. which is the greater danger on our roads, the passive or the aggressive?
by sarcasticfrog October 20, 2009 10:20 PM EDT
Kudos... well said.
See all 16 Comments

About Courtwatch

Lively analysis and commentary on breaking legal news and events from CBS News Chief Legal Analyst and Legal Editor Andrew Cohen.

E-Mail CourtWatch
Andrew Cohen's Bio
Follow Andrew Cohen On Twitter

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn
  • MOST POPULAR
COURTWATCH ON TWITTER