Holder Says U.S. Would Enforce Ban on Pot in California

[alp227]

Source: The New York Times

LOS ANGELES — The Department of Justice announced on Friday that it would aggressively prosecute marijuana laws in California even if state voters approve an initiative legalizing the drug. The announcement by Eric H. Holder Jr., the attorney general, was the latest reminder of how much of the establishment has lined up against a popular initiative: Dozens of editorial boards, public officials, candidates for office, and the governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Still, despite this opposition — or perhaps, to some extent, because of it — Proposition 19 appears to have at least a decent chance of winning, so far drawing considerable support in polls from a coalition of Democrats, independents, younger voters and men as Election Day nears. Should that happen, it could cement a cultural shift in this state, where medical marijuana has been legal since 1996 and where the drug has been celebrated in popular culture, here as much as any place else in the country, going back at least to the 1960s.

But it could also plunge California into a murky and unsettling conflict with the federal government that opponents of the proposition said Friday should make California voters wary of supporting it. Washington has generally looked the other way as a burgeoning medical marijuana industry has prospered here and in 14 other states, as well as the District of Columbia, but Mr. Holder’s statement made clear that legalizing marijuana for recreational use would bring a whole new level of scrutiny from Washington.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/16/us/16pot.html

[David Zephyr]

1. Well, that is what he says now.

Prop 19 will win and win big.

It will be like Krakatoa, the blast heard 'round the world.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

63. If it looks like Krakatoa, you have too many seeds in the bong

dude

:hi:

[WheelWalker]

2. Well, good luck with that, Eric....

[Ozymanithrax]

3. It is a federal law that must be changed by the U.S. Congress... n/t

[gateley]

6. Yeah, he's gotta say that, but I hope they really don't expend too much energy on it. nt

[speppin]

59. Seems to me Holder will flex his muscle...........

...........Washington has generally looked the other way as a growing medical marijuana industry has prospered here and in 14 other states and the District of Columbia, but Mr. Holder’s position — revealed in a letter this week to nine former chiefs of the Drug Enforcement Administration that was made public on Friday — made explicit that legalizing marijuana for recreational use would bring a whole new level of scrutiny from Washington.

Mr. Holder did not fully spell out the reasons for the decision, but he did allude to the reluctance of the federal government to enforce drug laws differently in different states. “If passed, this legislation will greatly complicate federal drug enforcement efforts to the detriment of our citizens,” he wrote. ..................

[Occulus]

10. Is it?

I thought the scheduling was set by the Department of Health and Human Services...

[jaxx]

24. That's what I think....they have to support federal law.

[no limit]

64. Holder already said they wouldn't go after medical marijuana. So thats not it

[Lance_Boyle]

79. Actually, no. It's a controlled substance scheduling issue for the Feds.

That does not require an act of Congress - rescheduling cannabis would be an Executive act.

[mike_c]

4. from my cold, dead hands, copper....

:smoke:

[David Zephyr]

27. That's funny!

:)

[Bluenorthwest]

5. That ban has been a roaring success so far Eric!

Holder is a bit of the crazy I think.

[FirstLight]

7. fuck him....

I look forward to that fight...even though most of us stoners are peaceniks...

Good luck feds, especially when the economic benefits become obvious and other states follow suit

meanwhile... we shall overcome, man :smoke:

[jerseyjack]

8. Learn about jury nullification

If enough people learn about this principle of law, Holder could prosecute all he wants. It would be futile.

[defendandprotect]

15. Cheers for "Jury Nullification" --- !!!

[AtheistCrusader]

16. Good luck getting through voir dire with that idea.

I was the first thrown out.

[defendandprotect]

37. Was there an official question ... or did you volunteer the info ... ????

Some suggest you just don't announce it -- unless you want to be excused

from jury duty!!

[AtheistCrusader]

46. Prosecutor danced around it for like 8 minutes.

It was aggravating. I wanted to yell at him JUST ASK IF ANYONE BELIEVES IN JURY NULLIFICATION YOU JACK<unprintable>.

The defense asked a direct question that I think he regretted, and unfortunately I had to raise my number. Drew attention to me, and I had to answer that I did not believe the charge against the defendent should even be a crime.

I also may have mentioned that I couldn't help but notice there wasn't a single black person in the room (except the defendant), or the jury holding area, and that I was concerned that the punishment for intent to distribute crack was disproportionally higher than that for cocaine.


I don't feel bad about getting kicked. I feel I cheered up the defendant somewhat, he looked like he could use it, and gave the rest of the jury something to think about.

[defendandprotect]

57. Thanks -- good job --

Think I need to search the internet for more info on jury nullification and specifics.

But others here have suggested you just get on the jury and then make those arguments --

which is fine with me, either way.

I've just recently served so won't be up soon, again --

[clixtox]

72. I served on a jury that deadlocked 11 to 1 for convictions...

You can imagine who was the lone believer in justice on that jury. I definitely believed the prosecutor didn't prove the defendant's guilt beyond a doubt, by a long ways. The public defender was just out of an unaccredited local law school and was pretty pathetic, It must have been her first jury trial because she didn't have a clue and neither the judge(an ex-prosecutor) or the prosecutor was inclined to be interested in having a fair trial.

I dressed very conservatively in a suit and tie and appear outwardly to be a true Kool-Aid imbiber. I was hardly questioned and skated right onto the jury.

It was a fabulous experience and I was glad I served.

The public defender was overjoyed... I phoned her afterwards and had a long conversation about what she missed and how she screwed up handling the prosecution's witnesses.

It was pretty amazing how it worked out since I am living in Saigon most of the time, returning to my Sonoma County farm just a couple of times a year for about 6 to 8 weeks. I got the notice the day I returned and was able to serve, no problem.

[bemildred]

74. Yep, that's how you do it. Never apologize, never explain, just vote your conscience.

Hang on to that "reasonable doubt".

[defendandprotect]

77. Congratulations ..... Think "12 Angry Men" should be a constant reminder to

have less faith in all we might hear while on juries!!

:)

[Iowa]

9. Of course they will. We wouldn't expect anything else from the Obama administration.

[BlueCollar]

11. Secession....? n/t

[defendandprotect]

14. Wouldn't mind seeing CA and DC sending a case this one to Supreme Court ... !!!

[Blasphemer]

33. It would be very interesting indeed... nt

[Ter]

30. We can only dream

But will the next Gov. of CA have the balls to do it?

[defendandprotect]

12. Holder will make the administration look like idiots if he does that ....

but, on the plus side, maybe something like that would help to wake the

public up even more!!???



The attorney general said the ballot measure's passage would "significantly undermine" efforts to keep California cites and towns safe.

What garbag ... !!!

Officials in Los Angeles County, where authorities have aggressively moved to tamp down on an explosion of medical marijuana dispensaries, vowed that they would still assist the federal government in drug investigations.

Yeah ... keep knocking over those sick people trying to gain some relief from pain with

marijuana!!!

Sickening -- !!!

[bloomington-lib]

13. What else can he say?

It's technically still illegal federally. If he likes having a job and paying for his house, he'll keep keep up those some old b.s. If he had said he would support the decision, that would have brought him a whole lot of trouble for something that may not come up in the future.

If he said this in response to the "what ifs" he's probably getting, it's understandable. If he's coming out on his own making this some kind of mission (which I don't think he is), well then fuck him. Having a majority of a state pass a law and having the Feds say it doesn't matter will bring up a fight no one wants to have coming up for the 2012 election.

[defendandprotect]

19. How do you defend attacking people who need medical marijuana....???

Which they are still doing --

THAT's certainly where the line should be drawn!!


Boo ... Boo ... Boo ...

[bloomington-lib]

31. WTF are you talking about? Who am I defending and why does it seem you are always attacking?

[defendandprotect]

36. HOLDER is attacking medical marijuana users .... !!! What's wrong with you?

[bloomington-lib]

40. Man you need to calm down

I'm saying don't worry about what he's saying. No matter who is in that position, they're going to say the same thing. It doesn't mean anything. If you think that there's some guy out there that would answer a reporters question by saying "if it passes, then fuck the law, fuck my job, fuck everything, because that's what they want" then you're living in fantasy land. He can't say anything different until it goes to the Supreme Court and it gets overturned, which is what I'm hoping for. He can't say anything opposing that unless he wants to step down from his job. Thats the way it is. I'm not defending him or the fucked up law against pot.

If you want to make it out that way so you have someone to argue with, continue with what you're doing. How about instead of what's wrong with me, you actually tell me what's incorrect about what I just said. Not what you think I'm saying, but what I just said.

[defendandprotect]

41. Read your post ... beginning with "WTF" and this one ... then take a Valium ....

Meanwhile, I AGREED with you as to what Holder HAD to say --

What I questioned was, how does HOLDER defend to anyone -- including himself --

attacking Medical Marijuana users -- ???

[No Elephants]

68. LOL. Follow the link in the OP and read the article.

[AtheistCrusader]

17. Dear Eric Holder: Kiss my ass.

[krabigirl]

49. 2nd

[elocs]

18. Discussed here this afternoon with 35 Recs:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9325404&mesg_id=9325404

[Scuba]

20. Eric, the criminals are found on Wall Street and in the....

...Chamber of Commerce, not in gardens.

[defendandprotect]

22. K&R -- and Gold Stars!!

[swilton]

23. Not to mention in the Bush Administration

Why doesn't he chase some real criminals?! Hello!!??

[defendandprotect]

21. We also have the "War-Profit" syndrome at play here, a la "War on Cancer" .....

Where the structures around the issue become so profitable that those interests

finally don't want to see any "cure" or any sign of parents no longer sending their

kids to high profit clinics and drying out holes -- same with adults!!

PLUS, many indicate that they get pain relief which they don't get from prescription

drugs -- which also suggests that could impact Big Pharma and the health care industry --

every surgeries for joint replacement -- and back problems????



AND HOW COULD WE FORGET OUR SHINY NEW PRISON INDUSTRY WHICH IS SO DEPENDENT UPON

LOOKING UP DRUG USERS!!!

[grahamhgreen]

25. But he pardoned convicted criminal Ted "bridge to nowhere" Stevens, and the Bush crime family!!!

Done with these guys.

[In Truth We Trust]

26. Democracy?

[Owl]

28. Idiot. Is this a priority?

[mvd]

29. Even if it has to be defended, I don't believe it has to be as..

vigorously enforced as stated. BTW, how many of those Bush lawyers have been fired?

[Ter]

32. Oh, so now everybody here all of a sudden supports States Rights?

Oh, the irony!

[bloomington-lib]

34. I think in this case it's supporting giving rights to people as opposed to taking them away in cases

like AZs immigration or Nebraska's abortion laws.

[Ter]

35. I was just joking

Should have used the sarcasm tag. :)

[krabigirl]

51. I've always supported state's rights.

[martymar64]

38. The Feds are on the wrong side of history with this issue

They will try, but they will not be able to stop the legalization movement from spreading to other states and eventually they will be forced to assent to the will of the people of the various states.

[Blacksheep214]

52. The will of the people

toppled the Berlin Wall and communism.

Do you feel lucky punk? Well, do ya?

[martymar64]

55. Great analogy! And exactly what I was thinking!

Thanks!

:hi:

[Blacksheep214]

39. Hey Holder!

I get my weed from my prostitute!

That makes two fucked up laws which you can't enforce!

Always and forever!

How;s that battle against dandelions going? Everyone is against those, yet look what's winning!

Quit wasting our tax money and our citizens lives over what little joy we may get from living in these fucked up times!

As Freewheelin' Franklin said, "Dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope!"

(Google it, children!)

[Hawkeye-X]

42. Hey Holder, you asshole - remember Obama's directive on MMJ

Stay the fuck out of California, or Colorado for that matter. I'm legal, and my dispensary has had no problems with the fed law.

Holder, may I suggest that you hand Obama your resignation and get the fuck out of here since you're not interested in the people's interest.

Hawkeye-X

[earcandle]

43. And why would that be when there is violence in Mexico and husband's bodies to recover over drugs?

Mr. Big Shot.  Get the real stuff done, please.  

Let the little stuff go.  It isn't going to hurt you at all.

Unless you are a faux? 

[Blacksheep214]

44. Try explaining this simple thing Holder!

Where in the hell are you getting the money to step up enforcement? Where is the money to build new prisons? Do you really want to go to WAR with your fellow Americans? I doubt you even understand what the fallout is on that! How about a war on something which affects all of us in a negative manner. Grafitti! Gang violence! Shitty schools!

Our infrastructure is going to hell and you want to dump even more money down the rathole?

Are you fucking stupid?

[saigon68]

67. Yes Holder is fucking stoopid

His grip on reality needs serious intervention

[mr_liberal]

45. I dont know why he would announce this now

just weeks before the election.

But I would judge by actions, not words. The DOJ has to say theyll enforce the law, but whats important is how vigorously they do.

This could just be hot air to cover up the fact that they're planning to NOT vigorously enforce it. We'll see.

[Poll_Blind]

47. +1 DING-DING-DING. What the fuck is he thinking? Also, I have one comment for you:

If such a thing passes in California, we should hope that it comes to a head one way or another. If it becomes "Actually, the Federal government says they can put you behind bars and take away everything you own if they bust you...but they just haven't bothered, yet." kind of things, then feel real chills in your bones a Republican president comes to power.

Because they would happily rip 10% of California out of their homes, sell their assets and put them in private jails.

I do not want this to be one of those "unenforced" laws. Might seem like a good deal but really it's an axe that can, at any time, be dropped. And probably retroactively.

PB

[Blacksheep214]

48. This could be interesting

Having China lambast America for human rights violations before the United Nations.

Does any other country have a higher per capita of their population under arrest?

O'er the land of the FREE! I guess we need to edit that also!

[Oldenuff]

66. What a joke.

Just weeks before the election is right!

We've got Obama telling us to not get discouraged,while Holder does his best to pull the carpet out from under us.Can you imagine the outrage from the younger pro-cannabis voters in Calif? (and across the country as well for that matter). We should be trying to "cultivate" their vote,instead of pissing them off.

What a stupid stupid thing to do...almost a "braindead stupid" thing to do actually.

[Le Taz Hot]

73. There's enough outrage

among the boomer pot smokers here and we're ACTIVE and don't get distracted by I-shiny-stuff. :hippie:

[Imagevision]

76. When's the last time you heard of someone OD'ing on weed? or Killing someone with a car under

the influence of marijuana?

[No Elephants]

69. LOL

[No Elephants]

70. LOL

[krabigirl]

50. Typical. and disgusting.

[ProudDad]

53. This from the asshole who's defending DADT?

The government should be protecting rights not pissing on them!

[Warren Stupidity]

54. This Week In New Security State News.

1) administration claiming to support repeal of DADT appeals the repeal of DADT.
2) fearing an outbreak of freedom, the administration puts California on notice that drug war fascism will continue unabated.

Where is the party that champions Freedom and Equality?

[lunatica]

56. Meanwhile Schwarzenegger signs marijuana decriminalization bill

Schwarzenegger signs marijuana decriminalization bill

By Peter Hecht | Sacramento Bee

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed legislation that will reduce the crime of possession of an ounce of marijuana from a misdemeanor to an infraction, handing a victory to marijuana advocates one month before November's state vote to legalize pot for recreational use.

The governor's signature of Senate Bill 1449 by Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, will not reduce actual penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana. Under California law, misdemeanor possession of less than an ounce was already punishable as infraction - with offenders facing fines of $100.

Marijuana advocates say the governor's decision to sign the bill will significantly reduce the number of cases clogging California courts by removing the misdemeanor tag.

The law will take effect Jan. 1, meaning it may be superseded - at least for Californians over 21 - by the November legalization measure.

Schwarzenegger said he signed Leno's bill because "possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is infraction in everything but name."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/10/01/101498/schwarzenegger-signs-marijuana.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[and-justice-for-all]

58. sad.

[KansDem]

60. Have we heard anything from the ueber-right about states' rights?

*crickets*

...just as I thought, kind of like the 2000 election.

Wingnuts care about states' rights only when it benefits them...

[tomhayes]

61. On the other hand

Do we want to make this a states right precedent?

I can see "Medicinal Segregation" coming from the south if this isn't at least fought in court.

[KansDem]

62. I agree with your point...

I was just making an observation about wing-nut hypocrisy. Kind of like how the "Pro-Lifers"<sic> and the Tea Baggers remained silent when W lied us into a multi-trillion dollar "war" that has taken hundreds of thousands of lives.

"Pro Life" and "Fiscally Conservative" my ass...

[Uncle Joe]

65. How can you see this precedent as setting the stage for that?

We already have medicinal or recreational segregation by boasting the world's largest prison population at 2.3 million with hundreds of thousands of non-violent drug users; possession of cannabis, behind bars.

I see nothing wrong with "state rights" so long as the States are being consistent with the Constitution.

If Cheney/Bush and the Republicans were in charge passing their laws raping the Bill of Rights, who would argue with states bucking that trend?

The insane "War on Drugs" has gone on for far too long and the federal govt; either too timid or too corrupted to change, so it has to come from the bottom up, the grass/net roots.

[No Elephants]

71. Got priorities? Got timing?

[Imagevision]

75. prosecute marijuana laws in California even if state legalizes? sounds like Obama's crew!

[ProudDad]

78. Ya got that right!

The new "Gang who can't shoot straight"...

[dmosh42]

80. The "Fake" AG! n/t

[pipoman]

81. It is time for us to DEMAND

our Congress and Senate pass Commerce Clause reform. The commerce clause was never meant to limit state's rights..it has been bastardized to the point of need for complete repeal.