While the United States remains locked in an impasse between state and federal law, Canada looks to pass nationwide marijuana legalization this year and begin recreational sales in 2018. How did Canada get to this point? The path to legalization in Canada has been a haphazard one, driven largely by legal decisions. To make the recent Canadian cannabis developments easier to understand, below are eight key court cases and regulations that shaped the current landscape:

1996: Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (“CDSA”)

Provided for limited exemptions for the medical use of cannabis in Section 56, but legal access to dried marijuana for medical purposes was not provided until 1999.

2000: R. v. Parker (Ontario Court of Appeals)

Section 4 of the CDSA was found to be unconstitutional because prohibiting cannabis possession forced people to choose between liberty and health. The medical marijuana exemption in place was found to be unconstitutional because of the Minister of Health’s discretionary power.

2001: Marihuana for Medical Access Regulations (“MMAR”)

R. v. Parker led to the MMAR, which enabled individuals with the practitioner authorization to access dried marijuana for medical purposes by producing their own marijuana plants, designating someone to produce for them, or purchasing Health Canada supply.

April 1, 2014: Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (“MMPR”)

The MMPR replaced the MMAR, which was officially repealed on March 31, 2014. For the first time in Canada, the new system allowed for the production and distribution of cannabis for medical purposes, but still contained restrictions on certain types of marijuana.

June 2015: R. v. Smith (Supreme Court of Canada)

The Court decided the MMPR’s restrictions were unconstitutional and that individuals with a medical need have the right to use and make other cannabis products. To eliminate uncertainty, in July 2015 the Minister of Health issued section 56 class exemptions under the CDSA to allow licensed producers to produce and sell cannabis oil and fresh marijuana buds and leaves in addition to dried marijuana, and to allow authorized users to possess and alter different forms of cannabis.

February 2016: Allard v. Canada

A Canadian federal court found that restricting an individual’s right to home grow and requiring individuals to get their marijuana only from licensed producers violated liberty and security rights protected by section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Court found that individuals who require marijuana for medical purposes did not have “reasonable access” under the MMPR’s restrictions. Instead of striking certain portions of the MMPR or reinstating the MMAR, the court called for a new legislative framework for accessing medical marijuana.

August 24, 2016: Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations (“ACMPR”)

The ACMPR, similar to the MMPR, provided for commercial production and distribution of quality-controlled fresh or dried marijuana or cannabis oil or starting materials (i.e., marijuana seeds and plants) and allowed for limited production by individuals. The two types of licenses to be aware of are: (1) Dealers License, issued under the Narcotic Control Regulations and permits activities with cannabis, including analytic testing and (2) Licensed Producers who are authorized to produce and sell cannabis under the ACMPR.

April 13, 2017: The Cannabis Act, Bill C-45 (the “Cannabis Act”)

On April 13, 2017, the Cannabis Act was introduced. If passed, it will provide Canadians with legal access to recreational cannabis nationwide. On June 8, 2017, after the second reading of the bill, the Act passed the House at a vote of 200 for and 76 against. The bill has now been referred to the Standing Committee on Health. The bill is widely expected to pass Parliament and take effect in the summer of 2018.

Canada is already a worldwide leader in the growing cannabis industry, with last year’s sales reaching over one billion Canadian dollars. With the passage of the Cannabis Act, annual sales are expected to increase to between five and eight billion in the first-year post-recreational legalization. And the total estimated annual economic impact could be as high as $23 billion. Given the size of the new market, anyone with an interest in cannabis should pay special attention to Canada and the eight key events listed above.

Amber D. Lengacher also contributed to this post.

Charlie Alovisetti

Charles Alovisetti is a senior associate and co-chair of the corporate department at Vicente Sederberg LLC. Prior to joining Vicente Sederberg, Charlie worked as an associate in the New York offices of Latham & Watkins and Goodwin where he focused on representing private equity sponsors and their portfolio companies, as well as public companies, in a range of corporate transactions, including mergers, stock and asset acquisitions and divestitures, growth equity investments, venture capital investments, and debt financings. He is a graduate of McGill University and Columbia Law School. Charlie is admitted to practice in Colorado and New York.

The post The Path to Cannabis in Canada: Eight Crucial Events appeared first on Law Street.

As part of an effort to engage the Gardiner, Maine, community and clean up the town of roughly 5,000, a nearby marijuana dispensary is rolling out an innovative new program. Essentially, citizens who bring in a bag of collected trash can exchange it for some weed.

Dennis Meehan, owner of Summit Medical Marijuana, offered the marijuana as a gift to adults over the age of 21. Citizens would meet Meehan at the park and get two trash bags to explore the city and collect any garbage they found.

If residents collected a full bag of trash from around the city they could bring it back and pick up their gifted weed. The exchange rate was one full trash bag for one gram of marijuana. Gifting weed to others became legal in Maine after recreational marijuana was legalized in January. Across municipalities with legalized weed, gifting weed has become a common method to circumvent rules against selling the product on the street.

For more information on the status of legalization in Maine check out our “State of Weed” map here. 

He was inspired to put the event together by a similar weed exchange community event he heard about in Colorado. “[I heard of it in] Colorado – there was a town that did this,” Meehan told the local NBC affiliate. “They had a great response to this. So I was hoping to do the same thing in Maine.”

Meehan advertised the event on the dispensary’s Facebook page. After seeing its success, Meehan hopes to expand the program and make it statewide. While there are certainly some business interests at play here, Meehan also said that he wants to promote the “life-changing” aspects of marijuana, according to the Associated Press.

The nascent marijuana industry has been, so far, considered a success. One important aspect is the massive tax influxes that states that have legalized it have seen. For example, Colorado pulled in $200 million in just tax revenue in 2016, according to MarketWatch. Meehan’s actions prove that there are even more interactive ways for the marijuana industry to engage with the community.

For an industry that faces plenty of criticism, working with local communities could have a huge impact on public perception and how quickly critics shift their views. Now, it’s time to see if other marijuana businesses engage their communities in a similar way to Meehan and his Colorado inspiration.

Josh Schmidt

Josh Schmidt is an editorial intern and is a native of the Washington D.C Metropolitan area. He is working towards a degree in multi-platform journalism with a minor in history at nearby University of Maryland. Contact Josh at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Maine Dispensary Trades Weed for Trash in Community Clean Up Effort appeared first on Law Street.

As soon as Jeff Sessions was nominated by President Donald Trump for the position of Attorney General, pro-medical marijuana advocates had reason to feel uneasy. Sessions has long been anti-marijuana, and while he has previously indicated that federal enforcement of marijuana law wouldn’t change too much, there are still concerns that under his tenure, the DOJ will decide to crack down. Sessions addressed law enforcement officials in Richmond, Virginia, earlier today, and his comments about marijuana should only heighten those concerns. But was Sessions right?

Let’s check out what he said:

He stated, “I think medical marijuana has been hyped, maybe too much.” He went on to say:

I realize this may be an unfashionable belief in a time of growing tolerance of drug use. But too many lives are at stake to worry about being fashionable. I reject the idea that America will be a better place if marijuana is sold in every corner store. And I am astonished to hear people suggest that we can solve our heroin crisis by legalizing marijuana–so people can trade one life-wrecking dependency for another that’s only slightly less awful. Our nation needs to say clearly once again that using drugs will destroy your life.

That’s a lot to unpack. Here are the three biggest issues with Sessions’s comments:

“Marijuana Sold in Every Corner Store”

That would be unfortunate, but no one is proposing anything like that. Every state that has legalized marijuana also puts in place a way to regulate sales–the only exception perhaps being the very grey area of D.C.’s sort-of legal marijuana laws that are still being blocked by Congress. Medical marijuana is similarly strictly regulated. And it’s also worth pointing out that two things that are arguably just as dangerous as weed, and certainly more addictive–alcohol and cigarettes–are available at corner stores. Sessions’s comment about “marijuana sold in every corner store” is clear fear-mongering. It paints pro-legalization efforts as extreme and impractical, and ignores the serious regulatory work that goes hand-in-hand with legalization.

Legalizing recreational marijuana and extending medical marijuana efforts are not to be taken lightly. Many considerations are paramount–for example, how marijuana affects young people, and how our DUI laws need to be altered. Those concerns are not to be downplayed. But they’re not to be fabricated either, and the idea that marijuana will suddenly be as easy to get as groceries is a falsehood.

“One Life-wrecking Dependency for Another That’s Only Slightly Less Awful” and “Using Drugs Will Destroy Your Life”

Heroin is absolutely a life-wrecking dependency. And given the huge rise in overdoses, particularly in rural areas of the United States, it’s heartening to hear a politician talk seriously about combatting it. But claiming that marijuana is a “life-wrecking dependency” is, once again, clear fear-mongering on Sessions’s part.

Marijuana dependence is certainly possible. Studies indicate that less than 10 percent of people who use marijuana become dependent on it, although that number rises to 17 percent if you look exclusively at people who begin using marijuana in their teens. Heroin, however, is one of the most addictive drugs out there. (And perhaps we should tell AG Sessions that alcohol and tobacco, available at your friendly neighborhood corner store, also rank in the top 10 most addictive drugs.)

Again, this is not to say that marijuana shouldn’t be strictly regulated, or that it’s impossible to become addicted to it. But to compare heroin addiction to marijuana does a serious disservice to the millions of Americans who have been affected by heroin. Fighting against marijuana–whether that be medical marijuana or recreational marijuana–is not going to do much to combat heroin addiction. Other factors, like prescription drug use, are significantly more pressing. Almost 80 percent of heroin addicts report having misused prescription drugs prior to getting hooked on heroin. While people who are addicted to marijuana are three times more likely to become addicted to heroin than non-addicts, people who abuse prescription opioid painkillers are a staggering 40 times more likely to become addicted to heroin.

“Medical Marijuana Has Been Hyped, Maybe Too Much”

Generally speaking, Sessions’s remarks today were confusing. While he said “medical marijuana has been hyped, maybe too much,” it’s unclear that he was speaking just about medical marijuana. His rhetoric–“legalizing marijuana” and “sold in every corner store” seemed to track more with arguments against recreational marijuana. And if he was talking about medical marijuana, that’s equally confusing, given that there’s evidence to suggest that opioid use does decrease in states that legalize medical marijuana. Given the deadliness of opioid overdoses compared to marijuana (note: there were zero overdoses on marijuana in 2015) that possibility seems at the very least worth exploring.

Sessions did roll back his comments during a question and answer segment after his remarks. He said that the Obama-era Cole Memo, which de-prioritizes the enforcement of federal anti-marijuana law in states where it has been legalized, was “valid.” But the fact that Sessions made the remarks in the first place indicate that pro-medical and recreational marijuana advocates have every reason to remain concerned.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Fact-Checking Jeff Sessions’s Claim that “Medical Marijuana Has Been Hyped, Maybe Too Much” appeared first on Law Street.

Months before lawmakers in Canada are expected to take up marijuana legalization legislation, police in Toronto have been raiding dispensaries; a number of individuals have been charged at this point. Just last week, police raided dispensaries across three cities. The targets were all Cannabis Culture branches, the popular chain owned by Canada’s so-call “Prince of Pot” Marc Emery. Emery and his wife were arrested at an airport last week and charged with drug trafficking, conspiracy, and possession. They were en route to a cannabis festival in Spain.

The cannabis raids have been going on for months, in what Toronto police are calling Project Gator, an effort to clamp down on dispensaries which, under the current law, are illegal. But opponents of the crackdown argue that Canada’s marijuana law is hardly black and white. The laws aren’t consistently enforced, leading to confusion and ambiguity for dispensaries and consumers.

“Just because there’s not a grey area when it comes to the law in the books doesn’t mean there’s not a grey area in practice in terms of what’s happening on the ground,” said lawyer Gerald Chan. Canada’s criminal justice system is “overburdened,” Chan said, and police should focus their attention on graver, potentially more dangerous crimes. In Ottawa, some people accused of committing murder were recently allowed to walk free after the justice system’s resources dried up.

Toronto police are not backing down from Project Gator, however. “The dispensary advocates want you to believe … there’s a grey area,” said Mark Pugash, a spokesman for the Toronto police. “There isn’t.” Pugash added: “The fact is, however you try to shine this, it is against the law.”

Last week was not the first time Emery, the “Prince of Pot,” was arrested on marijuana-related charges. After he was convicted of selling marijuana seeds in the U.S. in 2007, Emery spent seven years in prison. On Friday, soon after they were arrested at the airport, the Emerys were released on bail. Jodie Emery, Marc’s wife, said the arrest was “appalling,” adding that she was “quite disturbed by the fact that we are innocent until proven guilty, yet Cannabis Culture, which is a magazine, head shop, vapor lounge, it’s a movement.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said recently that lawmakers will be looking at marijuana legalization legislation this summer. But, as the recent raids in Toronto indicate, that does not mean the current law will go unenforced. “Until we have a framework to control and regulate marijuana, the current laws apply,” Trudeau said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What’s Going on with Canada’s Cannabis Raids? appeared first on Law Street.

U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents on the Texas-Mexico border seized nearly 4,000 pounds of marijuana disguised within a commercial shipment of key limes. Yes, limes.

Border officers in Texas find nearly 2 tons of weed camouflaged as limes https://t.co/EPxhrjJNBH pic.twitter.com/FlYxZYnNmU

— CNN (@CNN) February 8, 2017

According to a CBP press release, the drugs were discovered on January 30 at the Pharr International Bridge cargo facility inside of a 2001 Freightliner tractor trailer. With the help of a non-intrusive imagining system and canine team, CBP officers located 34,764 lime-shaped bundles weighing a total of 3,947 pounds.

“This is an outstanding interception of narcotics,” Port Director Efrain Solis Jr. said in a statement. “Our CBP officers continue to excel in their knowledge of smuggling techniques which allows them to intercept these kinds of attempts to introduce narcotics into our country.”

The drugs are valued at approximately $789,467.

But even with the help of imagining equipment and drug sniffing dogs, it should have been pretty obvious to the agents that these lumpy green sacks weren’t limes.

Smugglers tried to fool Border Patrol agents with weed disguised as limes: https://t.co/TpZXJlki11 pic.twitter.com/56BzrxCjao

— VICE (@VICE) February 8, 2017

Apparently, this isn’t the first time smugglers have used fake food to hide narcotics. Last year agents confiscated 2,493 pounds of marijuana stuffed inside of pseudo-carrots entering from Mexico at the same border crossing.

So if you happen to be a drug smuggler living in Mexico with a penchant for stuffing marijuana inside fake fruits and veggies, you should seriously try a different tactic…or maybe learn what a lime actually looks like.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Border Patrol Seizes Nearly 4,000 Pounds of Weed Disguised as Limes appeared first on Law Street.

Cannabis and caffeine lovers rejoice: San Diego-based BrewBudz will soon be debuting a coffee, tea, and cocoa pod product, fit for Keurig machines, that are infused with marijuana. According to the company’s tagline, the hybrid product will be “good for you” and “good for the earth.” Its pods will be made of 100 percent compostable material, including the caps, which are made of coffee beans.

Calling cannabis and coffee “two important rituals,” the BrewBudz website says: “The merging of cannabis and coffee delivered in a sustainable and environmentally conscious way invests us in the responsibility of caring for both our customers and the earth.” The site adds: “Our goal is to provide full life-cycle recycling and composting from the plant harvest to the disposal of our coffee grounds and packaging.”

Entrepreneurs are seeing more openings in the cannabis market since Election Day, when nine states voted to legalize marijuana in some form; nearly a quarter of Americans now live in a state with legal marijuana laws. A number of Cannabis-infused products have hit the market: chocolate, candy, syrup, cocktails, and pet treats.

But what about the health effects of mixing two brain-altering drugs into one drink? Consuming coffee, a stimulant, and marijuana, a depressant, at the same time could make the user feel wired and tired at the same time. There is not a plethora of research on how combining THC and caffeine can affect a person’s health.

States that have legalized recreational marijuana have proven to be especially fertile grounds for new companies to spring up. In Colorado, where weed has been legal since 2012, sales for marijuana during the first half of 2016 neared half a billion dollars. By 2020, California, which legalized medical marijuana 20 years ago and recreational in November, is expected to have a legal weed market worth about $6.5 billion.

The pot pods will launch in January in Nevada, which legalized recreational marijuana in November, and Colorado. Washington, Oregon, California, and Arizona residents will be able to purchase BrewBudz products in March. Each pod will cost $7, and a cup of a brew for recreational purposes will consist of 10 milligrams of THC, while a medically-oriented brew will have 25 to 50 milligrams of the compound.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Latest Marijuana-Infused Products: Cannabis Coffee and THC Tea appeared first on Law Street.

Officials in Maine on Monday morning began a recount of ballots from Election Day. Because the state’s recreational marijuana legalization measure, Question 1, passed by a narrow margin (about 4,000 votes), officials wanted to confirm the results of a measure that would have wide-ranging effects in the Pine Tree State. If the results are confirmed, Maine would join three other states–California, Massachusetts, and Nevada–that passed recreational legalization measures on November 8.

The Maine secretary of state’s office has signaled that the recount could take up to a month. The recount–which is taking place in the state capital of Augusta–could cost at least $500,000. State police will be transferring ballots, locked away in password-protected boxes, from 503 towns across the state.

Question 1 would allow Maine residents who are at least 21 years old to possess up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana. Home cultivation would be limited to up to six plants. If the measure passes, state officials would have nine months to construct a regulatory framework.

Governor Paul LePage, in a video released before the vote, said marijuana “can be deadly.” Likening it to heroin, he said, “we do not need to legalize a drug that could lead to more deaths.” LePage, a staunch opponent of the measure, added: “Before you vote, please educate yourself on this dangerous issue.”

The measure was passed by a slim margin, with 381,692 voters supporting Question 1, and 377,619 opposing it. LePage, a Republican, supports the recount, and has said that he would implore President-elect Donald Trump to enforce the federal ban on marijuana. If Trump did respect states’ wishes, however, LePage said he would respect that decision as well.

Election Day was a sizable victory for marijuana advocates, as eight states (nine if the Maine results are confirmed) passed marijuana measures in some form, though marijuana remains illegal at the federal level. Maine residents will have to wait at least a few more weeks to see if their state joins the growing list of states that have legalized the drug since 2012. Maine legalized medical marijuana in 2009.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Recount Begins for Maine’s Recreational Marijuana Ballot Measure appeared first on Law Street.

In the 1960’s, an Israeli scientist, Dr. Raphael Mechoulam, was one of the first to discover CBD in a cannabis plant. Soon after, he unraveled the structure of THC, the psychoactive property of the plant. Now, two Israeli companies are breaking new ground, becoming the first in the world to develop an inhaler that will administer medical marijuana in precise, doctor-prescribed doses. Developed by Syqe Medical and marketed and distributed by Teva Pharmaceuticals, the inhaler is set to hit the market as soon as it’s approved by the Health Ministry. It has already been approved for hospital use. 

Syqe Medical, in a statement released Monday, said its groundbreaking product will “revolutionize the field of medical cannabis,” and “will allow medical professionals to prescribe an optimal dose of cannabis, alleviating the patient’s symptoms while minimizing the psychoactive effects.” Patients at Rambam Medical Center in the port city of Haifa have been using the inhaler for the past year, but now the product–the inhaler itself is a onetime purchase and the disposable cartridges last one month–is ready to hit the market.

Teva signs deal to market Syqe Medical’s cannabis inhaler https://t.co/YYjFulvaDq

— Remi L. Roy (@remilroy) November 28, 2016

Inhaling marijuana, in contrast to smoking or eating it, offers patients and doctors greater precision when ingesting and prescribing the drug for specific diseases. Other modes of ingestion are difficult to monitor and dose. According to a statement from Teva Pharmaceuticals, the world’s largest generic drugmaker, the inhaler would be the first in the world to deliver precise doses of cannabis. Plenty of people around the world use inhalers to deliver medical marijuana, but the doses are not measured or precise according to their diagnosis.

Israel legalized medical marijuana in 1992, and the latest statistics put its number of patients at 26,000, a number that is expected to double by 2018. Teva Pharmaceuticals, which is also one of the world’s top ten drug companies, said in a statement that its partnership with Syqe Medical “demonstrates the company’s commitment to improving the health of its patients and it is consistent with Teva Israel’s strategy of investing in — or partnering with — local startups and groundbreaking Israeli initiatives while providing access to innovative technologies and advanced medical devices.”

Editor’s Note: This post was updated on 11/29 to clarify that the Syqe inhaler has already been approved for hospital use. 

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Israeli Company Develops World’s Most Precise Medical Marijuana Inhaler appeared first on Law Street.

Hemp. It’s a word you have probably heard more than once, and probably had some questions about at the time. Is it marijuana? Is it legal? Why does my vegan friend preach its health prowess? In short, hemp is cannabis, but it is not marijuana, though marijuana is also cannabis. Confused? Read on to find out the details.

Endless Potential

Cannabis is a plant genus with two sub-species, indica and sativa. Both contain THC, the psychoactive chemical that results in a “high,” though they differ in appearance and effect. The fault line between hemp and marijuana is the THC content of an indica, sativa, or hybrid strain. If the THC concentration in a plant of any strain is under 0.3 percent, then it is classified as hemp (with the exception of West Virginia, which defines hemp as having a THC level below 1 percent). If it’s above that threshold, then it is classified as marijuana. The classification largely exists for legal purposes, as marijuana laws are much harsher than hemp laws.

Hemp grows around the world, most abundantly in Pakistan and China. China is also the crop’s largest exporter. An estimated 25,000 products are made from hemp, spanning nine different product markets. Its fibers are spun into a variety of goods: socks, shirts, pants, strong plastics, rope, and paper; a company in France even prints the Bible on hemp paper. Hemp seeds boast a nutritional profile unlike any other miracle seed (like chia or flax), with its perfect omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids ratio and a host of vital vitamins and minerals. 

Persisting Taboos

In the U.S.–where marijuana taboos persist but are slowly crumbling–hemp is a nascent industry, even though its sturdy, long-lasting fibers are woven into the nation’s past. Colonial farmers cultivated the crop, including some famous ones: Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and George Washington all grew hemp and sang its praises. The ropes of the Mayflower were made of hemp fiber.

But the abundance of hemp in colonial times soon became a siren for the demonizing of Mexican immigrants, and their supposed proclivity for the other side of the cannabis equation: marijuana. Marijuana–traditionally spelled “marihuana,” the modern spelling is a dig at Spanish-speaking Mexicans–became associated with all things evil and naughty, and of course, was banned. Hemp could not rid itself of the stigma of its more potent (and polarizing) cousin. That began to change in 2014.

A New Era

The Agricultural Act of 2014, also known as the 2014 Farm Bill, allowed states to pass legislation for the cultivation and study of hemp, with a requirement that growers must partner with researchers from a university to ensure cooperation between the scientific and commercial fields. As of this year, 16 states have passed laws that legalize industrial hemp for commercial purposes; 20 states are dipping into hemp more cautiously, allowing pilot programs that allow for collaborative research between growers and researchers.

One entrepreneur in New York is jumping on the state’s recently passed legislation allowing for hemp pilot programs. Aidan Woishnis is a part of an educational hemp outfit called WhatCannaDo. Aiming to educate prospective growers and consumers alike, Woishnis is passionate about the hemp movement, the importance of educating people on its potential powers, and deconstructing its marijuana-drenched stigma.

“In order to get any movement properly, people need to be educated and know what’s going on,” Woishnis, who dropped out of Prescott College in Arizona to stake his claim in hemp trade, told Law Street in a phone interview. His aim is to “build an educational platform, giving them a source of actual knowledge that’s been researched by a lab, not by someone taking something from the internet.”

State legislatures are showing a greater willingness to embrace hemp. But Woishnis said the greatest barrier to hemp taking off the way he thinks it could is competing private interests. Wealthy and powerful material industries–like plastics and timber–have pushed back on the young and frightening (for them) potential of hemp.

Some see hemp as an all-purpose answer to a green-conscious society’s infrastructure woes, a fix for the typical carbon-emitting materials that make up today’s cities and towns. Woishnis thinks hemp has the ability to remove the guilt from a culture built on consumption, but that is increasingly concerned with the longterm effects consumption will have on the environment. With hemp, people “can still be consumers and be in a capitalist system while not harming anything,” he said. “[Hemp] is a much better option.”

Editor’s Note: this piece has been updated to change the spelling of “WhatCannaDo.” 

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What is Hemp?: Marijuana’s Industrial Counterpart appeared first on Law Street.

Legalizing recreational marijuana, some argue, could lead to a proliferation of underage sales. Profit might trump policy and safety. But a new study offers no evidence, specifically in Colorado, where state-licensed dispensaries popped up in 2014 after recreational weed earned legal status in 2012, that dispensaries sell recreational pot to minors.

Visiting state-licensed dispensaries in Colorado over a period of four days in August 2015, the authors of the study found that all proprietors asked for ID, and only one agreed to sell their product in the absence of an ID. Led by a pair of doctors from the health communications firm Klein Buendel, the study concluded:

Compliance with laws restricting marijuana sales to individuals age 21 years or older with a valid ID was extremely high and possibly higher than compliance with restrictions on alcohol sales. The retail market at present may not be a direct source of marijuana for underage individuals, but future research should investigate indirect sales.

In 2012 Colorado legalized recreational marijuana, the first state to do so. But recreational bud did not hit the regulated market until 2014. Opponents argued shifting to a legal market would lead to minors having easier access to the drug. And despite the new study, published in the November issue of the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, state-sponsored sting operations have uncovered evidence to support both sides.

A police sting operation of 20 retailers in Colorado in June 2014 found no wrongdoing. All dispensaries complied with the law, refusing to sell to minors. “We are pleased with the results, and will continue to monitor the businesses to ensure that the compliance efforts are maintained,” said the director of Colorado’s Marijuana Enforcement Division, which worked with the police in the sting.

But a similar operation nearly one year later contradicted those findings. In September 2015, one month after the Klein Buendel study conducted its study, undercover police visited 30 Denver-area dispensaries. Police issued seven of them–including “The Healing House” and “Herbs 4 You”–citations for selling to minors. “Up until now these compliance checks have been a bright spot for the industry. This recent check drops compliance to 92 percent,” the MED director said at the time.

In Washington, where recreational marijuana is also legal, a sting last May found four stores guilty of selling to minors. For stores in Colorado that break the law and sell to minors, penalties can include a suspended or revoked license, and up to $100,000 in fines.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How Often Do Dispensaries Sell Marijuana to Minors? appeared first on Law Street.

A new study details some of the positive effects Colorado’s legal marijuana industry has had on its economy: in 2015, it created 18,000 new full-time jobs, and there was $2.4 billion in total economic activity. Commissioned by the state, the Marijuana Policy Group’s study is the first scientific, data-based study on Colorado’s cannabis economy. Previous dives into Colorado’s legal pot industry have relied on surveys and anecdotal reports.

The authors write that the study’s purpose is to “help voters, policymakers, and regulators understand how marijuana legalization impacts the state economy in terms of output, tax revenues, GDP, and employment.”

What the new study finds is a thriving market that has led to direct and indirect benefits for the economy. Large-scale growth is expected through 2020, at which point “the regulated market in Colorado will become saturated.”

Chief among the legal pot market’s impact is the $2.4 billion dollars it infused into the economy in 2015. Nearly $1 billion of that activity, the study found, can be attributed to simple retail sales. The rest is from secondary revenue generators, or spillover effects: “warehousing, cash-management, security, testing, legal services, and climate engineering for indoor cultivations.,” the study found.

Legal pot has also raked in a bundle of new tax revenue: $121 million in 2015, the second-highest tax revenue source in the state, nearly twice as much as marijuana tax revenue in 2014. The report found “marijuana tax revenues are growing more quickly than any other tax type in the state,” and that the increase “reflects a combination of demand growth and a demand shift from the untaxed black and gray markets into the taxed retail market.”

Most of the economic growth is due to customers shifting from Colorado’s black market to its legal, regulated market. And though a black marijuana market still exists in Colorado, the study found that by 2020, 90 percent of marijuana sales will come from the regulated market. The other ten percent is expected come from home growers and underground sales.

Finally, the study concludes that “legal marijuana demand is projected to grow by 11.3 percent per year through 2020,” at which point the market will saturate, and begin to mirror other retail industries that follow population trends.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Colorado’s Legal Marijuana Market Created 18,000 Jobs in 2015 appeared first on Law Street.

In the weeks leading up to November 8, America’s attention remains squarely on the presidential race. But Election Day will bring scores of ballot measures to voters across all 50 states as well. In nine states, voters will be weighing in on legalizing marijuana in some form, either medically or recreationally.

Early polls in California–one of states to include a full-tilt legalization measure on its ballot–indicate that it will join the handful of states where marijuana is currently legal in all forms. Opponents and proponents of the California measure, Proposition 64, have their sights set on the next battlefield once legalization becomes a reality: marketing.

Proposition 64, or the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, contains a number of provisions aimed at ensuring marijuana will be safely marketed. These include:

• All marijuana product labels must include a government warning that includes the phrase, “please use extreme caution.”
• Billboards can portray marijuana advertisements, but must be located further than 1,000 feet away from a day care, school, playground, or youth center.

But even with the safe-marketing measures baked into Prop. 64, some opponents of legalization remain worried that as the drug is legalized, companies will commit to mass marketing strategies aimed at turning a profit.

Once cannabis is legalized in California, opponents see a period of experimentation, as brands are weeded out and the big players emerge, perhaps paving a landscape similar to Big Tobacco. This would include a landscape consisting of mass marketing campaigns fueled by a few dominant companies.

Prop. 64 contains additional stipulations aimed at preventing a monopolistic environment. For the first five years of legalization, producers are only allowed to cultivate up to 22,000 square feet.

Though Prop. 64 contains measures safeguarding against marketing, and especially marketing to children, the federal classification of marijuana as an illegal substance and a Schedule I drug will prevent marijuana from being marketed on television or radio in California, even if the measure passes on Election Day.

In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, California’s Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, a legalization supporter, noted how federal law will block many marketing efforts at the state level for the time being. He said:

Oregon, Washington, Alaska, and Colorado have legalized cannabis for recreational use for adults. None of those markets have any advertising, because [marijuana] is federally prohibited. You cannot legally advertise [marijuana] on our airwaves, radio, or TV.

Brands, he said, will design their products to appeal to people. “But targeting our kids,” Newsom said. “Absolutely not. And we’re going to keep an eye on that, and we’ve got to hold ourselves accountable.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How Will Marijuana Be Marketed if it’s Legalized in California? appeared first on Law Street.

New Jersey legislators are now weighing a bill that would legalize recreational marijuana in the state. A new bill introduced by New Jersey State Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll, a Republican, would treat it a lot like tobacco, by allowing it to be sold at places like gas stations, grocery stores, and convenience stores.

Marijuana would be able to be sold to individuals over the age of 19 in unlimited amounts. Carroll told Politico:

To me it’s just not a big deal. It’s already ubiquitous. Anybody who thinks this is somehow going to increase the availability of marijuana has never been 19. If that’s the case, then what’s the big deal about having it available at the local 7-Eleven?

The whole point here is to get the government out of the business of treating at least marijuana use as a crime and treat it instead as a social problem.

The legalization of recreational marijuana at the state level obviously doesn’t mean that New Jersey users would be in the free and clear when it comes to federal law–weed is still treated as a Schedule I substance. This can also be problematic for businesses selling recreational marijuana in states that have legalized it–for example, national banks may be reluctant to work with them, and the IRS doesn’t allow businesses that sell marijuana to take certain tax deductions.

It’s also important to note that this legalization wouldn’t affect medical marijuana, which is already legal in the state of New Jersey.

Carroll’s introduction of the bill is somewhat interesting, given that he is viewed as one of the most conservative state legislators in New Jersey. And while he claims that he has never used marijuana himself, he has consistently taken bold stances when it comes to drug laws. For example, Carroll has repeatedly said the “War on Drugs” has been a failure.

But one of Carroll’s fellow Republicans may create a problem if the bill makes it to the governor’s desk–Governor Chris Christie has promised to veto any bill that legalizes recreational marijuana. While Christie is about to be term limited out from running again, there’s no way to know what the next governor’s position on recreational marijuana will be like.

But the fact that a lawmaker is even proposing treating marijuana like tobacco would have been borderline unthinkable just a few years ago. A handful of states have officially legalized recreational use, and more states are considering it in November. Keep an eye on Law Street’s Cannabis in America coverage to stay as up-to-date as possible.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will New Jersey Start Treating Weed like Tobacco? appeared first on Law Street.

As marijuana is slowly legalized both for recreational and medicinal purposes in a variety of states across the United States, those states’ laws sometimes come head-to-head with already-existing federal legislation. These clashes are problematic, and they can create legal gray areas that courts then need to weigh in on. That’s exactly what happened recently in a federal appeals court in San Francisco, when the court ruled that the federal government’s prohibition on medical marijuana users obtaining a firearm does not violate the Second Amendment.

The case was sparked by a Nevada woman named S. Rowan Wilson, who in 2011 tried to purchase a gun. She had a medical marijuana card, which was legal given that Nevada had legalized medicinal weed over a decade before.  The store refused to sell her the gun, because in 1968 Congress passed a law prohibiting anyone who used illegal drugs from obtaining a firearm. While Wilson wasn’t exactly using an illegal drug–at least under Nevada law–marijuana is still illegal under federal law. That’s what makes this case a perfect example of the confusing interplay between state and federal law when it comes to marijuana, yet Wilson was upset by what she saw as a violation of her Second Amendment rights.

So, Wilson sued the government. According to Consumerist, she:

Filed a federal lawsuit alleging that this refusal to sell her a firearm violated her First and Second Amendment rights, along with the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fifth Amendment. She subsequently claimed that the ATF notice that clarified the legality of selling firearms to medical marijuana users violated the Administrative Procedure Act by effectively making new rules without going through the necessary processes.

But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed 3-0 that “Congress reasonably concluded that marijuana and other drug use ‘raises the risk of irrational or unpredictable behavior with which gun use should not be associated.'”

Wilson now has the option to continue forward with the suit–it could hypothetically make its way to SCOTUS–but it’s unclear if she will do so. Yet as more states legalize marijuana, particularly for medical purposes, these are questions that courts are going to become increasingly familiar with.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Federal Appeals Court: Medical Marijuana Users Can’t Buy Firearms appeared first on Law Street.

Mass producing marijuana for the medical (or recreational) market is a weighty task. Most importantly, given that significant amounts of marijuana are produced in cultivation sites, it is an incredibly energy-intensive industry. In an attempt to reduce costs and impact on the environment, some marijuana growers are experimenting with using green energy–a pattern that seems likely to continue as more states legalize weed and America’s collective concern over the environment continues to worsen.

In order to grow marijuana indoors, grow rooms are constructed. They can range from small, household endeavors, to large warehouses. They require lights to mimic natural sunlight, and air conditioning to keep the temperatures at ideal levels. Both of those functions–lighting and AC–require a lot of energy, especially when you consider that at their largest level, some of these grow rooms could produce over 100 pounds of marijuana a month.

As a result, the overall drain on energy is large. A 2011 study by a California energy and environmental systems analyst yielded some of the following revelations:

U.S. cannabis production results in 15 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year, or the same as emitted by 3 million cars.

[…]

Cannabis production uses eight times as much energy per square foot as other commercial buildings, and 18 times more than an average home.

A recent Las Vegas Sun article by Daniel Rothberg features the efforts of one particular grow center in Clark County, Nevada. The center, owned by a company called The Grove, uses more energy-efficient LED lights in an attempt to slash power costs. The push to make the marijuana industry greener (and cheaper) isn’t just limited to Nevada, however. Rothberg quotes John Morris, who runs Resource Innovation Institute, saying: “The top priority is yield and product quality. When you can add a layer of energy efficiency on top of that, it lowers your operational cost.” At the end of the day, there’s a lot of potential for innovative energy efficiency when it comes to growing marijuana, and the two industries have the opportunity to grow and evolve together.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Are the Marijuana and Green Energy Industries a Perfect Match? appeared first on Law Street.

A new study from the University of British Columbia suggests that there is some truth to the stereotype that smoking weed makes you lazy–at least as far as rats are concerned.

Researchers published a study in the Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, that found THC, the main psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, made male rats less likely to choose more cognitively demanding tasks. (Presumably they used male rats because all the female rats were already busy multi-tasking three things at once.)

UBC conducted the study by training 29 lab rats to complete behavioral tasks where they had to decide whether or not they wanted to engage in a task that required a lot of attention for a larger reward, or complete an easier task for a smaller reward.

Under normal circumstances the rats opted for the harder task to earn the bigger reward. However, when the scientists gave the rats doses of THC and had them pick between the same tasks, they chose the easier tasks for the smaller reward–basically they became “cognitively lazy.” Surprisingly, the rats could still perform the harder task, they just didn’t want to.

Some of the motivations behind the study were to determine whether or not marijuana legalization has an adverse effect on the quality of life of its users. The researches concluded:

We hypothesize that associations between THC and poorer life outcomes may be due to a drug-induced decrease in willingness to allocate cognitive effort, rather than impairments in fundamental cognitive abilities per se. Our findings also suggest that unlike THC, CBD does not adversely affect executive function, and as such its inclusion in medicinal cannabis is not of primary concern.

While the results of this study probably aren’t shocking for most of us, they do provide more information about the affects of THC–at least on rats. Although, I do think they could have gotten the stoned rats to try a little harder if they’d offered them pizza as their reward instead.

Watch the researchers explain the study below

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Shocker: Weed Makes Rats Lazy AF, Say Researchers appeared first on Law Street.

A laser light show. Painting parties. Rattlesnakes and lizards. The 2016 Oregon State Fair is a diverse affair, set to feature the aforementioned activities and reptiles. And for the first time ever at an American state fair, according to its organizers, there will be an exhibit displaying live marijuana plants, with leaves but no buds. The exhibit is focused on promoting pot cultivation techniques. “It’s not to tempt people to use marijuana,” Donald Morse, executive director of the Oregon Cannabis Business Council and the exhibit’s organizer, told ABC. “It is to educate. Cannabis is Oregon’s newest farm crop.”

Oregon voted to legalize recreational marijuana in November 2014. It’s one of four states plus the District of Columbia to legalize the drug. State fairs are communal gatherings, where the latest in food and culture is often showcased side-by-side with local traditions. A public cannabis exhibit represents an important milestone in erasing the long-held stigma associated with pot since the days of “Reefer Madness.” This year’s exhibit is the logical next step from last year’s fair, which had marijuana information booths. A positive response from fairgoers last year allowed for live plants to be displayed this year, Morse said. 

Nine plants will feature at the fair, which begins on Friday in Salem, a city 50 miles south of Portland. Selected from a cannabis competition last weekend, the nine winning plants will evenly be split between sativa, indica, and a hybrid of the two varieties. Sativa and indica are two major species of the cannabis plant, distinguished by the appearance of their leaves and their psychological effects.

The Oregon Liquor Control Commission is still tweaking the state’s regulations regarding marijuana cultivation, transportation, and consumption. A spokesman said the commission hopes to have licensing laws and regulations finalized by 2017. The current code allows people to grow four pot plants in their private residence. But because a flowering plant–one with buds–is illegal to transport, the plants at the fair will be budless. Dan Cox, a spokesman for the fair, said the marijuana exhibit fits right into the ethos of his state’s annual event: “It is a showcase for traditional things. And yet it’s always been a showplace for the new, the different, and the innovative,” he said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post At Oregon’s State Fair, a Groundbreaking Attraction: Marijuana Plants appeared first on Law Street.

It has been nearly two years since Santa Fe, New Mexico decriminalized marijuana, but police officers are still arresting some for possession of the drug. A recent report from the Santa Fe Reporter counted 36 arrests over the past two years–the decriminalization ordinance passed on August 27, 2014–in instances where the possession of less than one ounce of marijuana should have amounted to a $25 fine, not jail time.

Of the 36 arrests, 12 led to convictions. The median age of the arrestees was 24, and 70 percent took place on the city’s Southside. Most of those arrested (20 of the 36) also qualified for a public defender, an indication that they likely fell below the poverty level. Decriminalization efforts at the state level have failed thus far, which has allowed for some officers to make marijuana-related arrests under the state code rather than the city of Santa Fe’s.

Santa Fe’s Mayor Javier Gonzalez told the Reporter in informal discussions that he has had with police officers, at least half of them–the city has 82 total officers–disagree with the ordinance, which considers possession of less than an ounce of marijuana to be the department’s “lowest priority.” Patrick Gallagher, the police chief of Santa Fe, echoed that sentiment, saying, “some of our officers are adamantly opposed to it,” adding, “but that shouldn’t change the way we enforce the law.”

According to the two-year old ordinance, possessing an ounce or less of marijuana and related paraphernalia results in a $25 fine. Under state law, that same offense carries a $50 to $100 fine and 15 days in jail. Subsequent arrests can incur heavier fines and increased jail time. But perhaps the most consequential aspect of an arrest is the fact that it will show up on background checks.

When the ordinance passed in August 2014, the fine print essentially amounts to allowing officers to use their discretion when deciding to arrest someone with an ounce of weed or less. For instance, two men could be carrying .08 ounces of pot on them each, and an officer can slap one of the men with a $25 fine, while another officer can arrest the other man, depending on his subjective assessment of the situation.

As more states begin to vote on legalization measures–including five in November–the ambiguity surrounding city and state law will clarify, and police officers would have a clear law to enforce. New Mexico, however, is not one of the five states to weigh marijuana legalization this fall.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Ounce of Pot in Santa Fe Can Still Lead to an Arrest, Despite Decriminalization appeared first on Law Street.

Sex under the influence is a complicated topic–one rife with questions of consent and the spread of STIs or unwanted pregnancy. Traditionally, that “influence” has been alcohol, but as the legalization of recreational marijuana becomes increasingly the norm in some states, will the same concerns extend to sex while stoned? New York University researchers recently set out to weigh the differences between stoned sex and drunk sex, and their results shed some light on that question.

The researchers, led by Joseph Palamar, PhD, MPH, an affiliate of NYU’s Center for Drug Use and HIV Research and an assistant professor of Population Health at NYU Langone Medical Center (NYULMC), studied 12 heterosexual men and 12 heterosexual women. They conducted in-depth interviews about their sexual experiences while under the two different influences.

The results? Both alcohol and weed lead to riskier sexual behavior overall. But, at the end of the day, drunk sex was riskier than stoned sex. Sex after consuming lots of booze was more likely to lead to negative feelings of regret, shame, and embarrassment afterwards. According to the Washington Post’s analysis of the study:

The most commonly reported feeling after sex on alcohol was regret. Both males and females commonly reported that regret, shame, and embarrassment were associated with alcohol use, but this was rarely reported for marijuana.

However, the study also acknowledged that those feelings may come from the situations in which alcohol and marijuana are likely to be consumed. Given the fact that marijuana is still illegal in most states, it’s more likely to be consumed in intimate settings; alcohol is often consumed at larger parties and in more social situations.

The study also found that sex under either influence led to some technical difficulties for both men and women–the study’s writeup stated: “marijuana use was linked to vaginal dryness and alcohol was commonly described as increasing the likelihood of impotence among males.”

Put simply, sex under the influence–alcohol or weed–has its risks. But drunk sex is riskier than stoned sex, an important distinction as recreational marijuana becomes more and more socially acceptable (and legal).

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What’s Riskier: Drunk Sex or Stoned Sex? appeared first on Law Street.

There is a divide in America between how the federal government classifies marijuana and how some individual states do. And that divide probably won’t be bridged any time soon. On Wednesday, the chief of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) wrote a letter to a trifecta of petitioners who sought to prod the institution into liberalizing its restrictions on the drug. Chuck Rosenberg, the chief of the DEA, wrote: “[Marijuana] does not have a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, there is a lack of accepted safety for its use under medical supervision, and it has a high potential for abuse.” Marijuana is a Schedule I substance, which limits researchers’ abilities to study its medical properties, and of course, renders it illegal.

Governor Gina Raimondo (D-RI), Governor Jay Inslee (D-WA), and a nurse from New Mexico, Bryan Krumm filed the petition with the DEA, and were the fourth straight petitioners to be rejected for similar requests. In his letter, Rosenberg painted his decision as hardly a decision at all, but as a responsibility bound by science and the FDA’s conclusions regarding the lack of evidence in regards to any positive medical properties of the drug.

“This decision isn’t based on danger. This decision is based on whether marijuana, as determined by the FDA, is a safe and effective medicine,” Rosenberg wrote, “and it’s not.”

Keeping marijuana in the same category as heroin is absurd. The time is long overdue for us to remove the federal prohibition on marijuana.

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) August 11, 2016

Marijuana’s classification as a Schedule I drug is a nearly 50 year-old demarcation defined under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. The characteristics of a Schedule I drug, according to the CSA, include “a high potential for abuse,” “no currently accepted medical treatment use in the U.S.,” and “a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or substance under medical supervision.” Rosenberg said the FDA upholds those standards in regards to marijuana, and the classification at this point in time remains the same.

“If the scientific understanding about marijuana changes,” he added, “the decision could change.” Heroin, LSD and bath salts are some of the other drugs classified as Schedule I. Cannabis is treated differently at the state-level, however. At the moment, 25 states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical marijuana.

The War on Marijuana by the DEA continues…

— Tommy Chong (@tommychong) August 11, 2016

And though there is no direct causal evidence that marijuana can treat specific diseases or disorders, doctors often prescribe patients the drug for pain relief. The American Academy of Pediatrics, while it opposes legalizing marijuana for recreational use, supports re-classifying the drug in order to allow for unhindered research. “The Academy supports further study of cannabinoids, which limited research to date shows can help specific conditions in adults,” the group wrote last year.

Rosenberg acknowledged the difficulty scientists face in researching marijuana, but said the DEA has “never denied” requests to study legally produced pot. At the moment, the University of Missouri has the only lab that can legally grow the plant for research purposes. Some analysts see the FDA and DEA as being in an intractable loop: the FDA can’t conduct research on marijuana because of how the DEA classifies it, and the DEA classifies it as such because of the lack of scientific literature proving it as safe and beneficial.

At this point, it might be Congress is the only means forward for loosening the restraints on marijuana research. It’s a largely bipartisan priority, and with five states voting this November to legalize recreational marijuana, the issue won’t be disappearing any time soon.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The DEA Won’t be Reclassifying Marijuana Anytime Soon appeared first on Law Street.

A new study shows a link between recreational marijuana legalization in Colorado and the incidence of children who need medical treatment for ingesting the drug. The study, released Monday by pediatricians at Children’s Hospital Colorado (CHC) in Aurora, retroactively reviewed 163 cases involving marijuana treatment in toddlers ages zero to nine. The cases spanned between 2009 and 2015. Recreational marijuana was legalized in Colorado in 2014.

In 2009, the CHC’s emergency room admitted one child seeking treatment for marijuana ingestion. In 2015, a year after Colorado legalized marijuana entirely: 16 children were treated for a marijuana-related emergency. Forty-eight percent of the 163 cases during that period involved children who ingested marijuana in its edible form: candies, baked goods, and other sweet treats that contain THC, the psychedelic component of marijuana.

The rate of children visiting the hospital for marijuana ingestion increased after weed became legal in Colorado. During the two years prior to the legalization, 1.2 in 100,000 children visited the children’s hospital for marijuana-related issues. That figure increased to 2.3 per 100,000 children during the two years post-legalization. Additionally, the regional poison center in Aurora received nine calls in 2009 regarding children who had ingested marijuana, compared to 47 calls in 2014.

Dr. George Sam Wong, the study’s lead author, said his team’s findings help shed light on the impact state-wide legalization can have on children, and hopes it will lead to smarter regulations. In a video on the JAMA Pediatrics journal website, where his study was published, Wong said:

As more states decide to legalize both medical and/or retail recreational marijuana, we need to be cognizant about the public health impacts in all ages, but also in the young children, and think about proper regulations and rules to help prevent some of these exposures and ingestions.

Current requirements in Colorado require edible manufacturers to use packaging that is difficult for children to get into. Colorado, the first state to legalize recreational marijuana, also introduced new dosing regulations in 2015. Dr. Wong said the next step will be to analyze how other states change as they legalize marijuana. He also said the impacts of regulations that are already in place should be evaluated.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Since Legalizing Marijuana, More Colorado Children Are Ingesting Edibles appeared first on Law Street.

Californians will have the opportunity to vote to legalize recreational marijuana in November now that the proposed ballot measure officially meets the state’s signature requirement. California was the first state in the country to legalize medical use of the drug in 1996. If Californians vote to allow recreational use it could have a big impact on the rest of the country, considering the size of the state and the existing momentum behind legalization.

Six years ago, Californians voted against Proposition 19, a similar initiative that would have made California the first state to legalize recreation marijuana use. But since then, more states have opened up to marijuana use and California recently enacted new rules to regulate medicinal marijuana. This time around, the campaign to legalize has several prominent backers such as Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, billionaire Sean Parker, the California Democratic Party, and the California Medical Association.

To put the issue on the November ballot, pro-Marijuana groups needed over 365,000 signatures, but the campaign collected over 606,000.

Dr. Jill Stein, the Green Party’s presidential candidate, voiced her support for the measure on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/DrJillStein/status/748202943170682884

What Would This Mean?

If the Adult Use of Marijuana Act is passed, it would basically mean that anyone over 21 would be allowed to buy, use, and possess up to one ounce of marijuana and grow up to six plants.

It would also entail huge savings for the state considering all the marijuana related offenses and incarceration of users that no longer would have to be enforced. The savings could be as big as over $100 million per year according to a statement from California Secretary of State Alex Padilla.

Jason Kinney, a spokesperson for the campaign behind the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, said in a statement:

Today marks a fresh start for California, as we prepare to replace the costly, harmful and ineffective system of prohibition with a safe, legal and responsible adult-use marijuana system that gets it right and completely pays for itself.

The anti-Marijuana bloc consists of the California Republican Party and representatives from police and hospitals. Opponents argue that legalization would not change the black market or criminal activity, such as driving under the influence.

But if the ballot measure passes, marijuana businesses would have to be 600 feet away from any school. Related advertising would not be allowed to target kids and marijuana products could not be easily confused with candy or other products that to not contain the dr.

The ballot measure currently has a broad base of support. A recent poll conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California found that 60 percent of California voters favor of legalization.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Californians to Vote on Recreational Marijuana in November appeared first on Law Street.

It is a foregone conclusion, less a question of if than when: marijuana will be legalized for recreational use across all 50 states. Three states–Washington, Colorado, and Oregon–have already done so. Medical marijuana is legal in 25 states and the District of Columbia. This fall, five states–including California, a heavily populated pot playground–will vote on measures to legalize the long demonized plant.

Marijuana is less stigmatized in popular culture and society than ever before. Studies of weed–though stymied due to federal classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug, reserved for the most dangerous substances–have largely hinted at its curative properties. Weed is inevitably headed toward a legal, taxed, regulated market in the vein of tobacco and alcohol. What effects could that have on consumers? What dangers could it cause? How will consumers benefit from marijuana shifting from an unchecked black market to one that is legal and perhaps beholden to powerful interests? Law Street investigates:

The State-Level Model

In a 1932 case, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously called states the “laboratories of democracy.” And so far, in the twilight years of marijuana legalization, states are the testing grounds for setting standards and establishing norms. Colorado and Washington were the first states to fully legalize recreational marijuana in 2012. Oregon passed a similar measure last fall. At the Brookings Institute in Washington D.C. last week, the authors of a paper on how special interest groups will shape the legal marijuana landscape presented their findings. They concluded, “the emerging model of state-level regulation provides valuable insulation against interest-group depredations.”

Philip Wallach, a senior fellow at Brookings and co-author of the paper, believes states can act as a bulwark against the potentially self-serving, damaging motivations of special interest groups, and sort through what works and what does not. During a panel discussion that followed the presentation of his paper, Wallach ticked off the benefits of a state-level model versus a federal one. A state model would “[offer] room for experimentation, limit the stakes of any misstep, and spread out the resources of interest groups, preventing them from concentrating their firepower,” he said. Decentralization, according to Wallach and his colleague Jonathan Rauch, co-author of the paper and moderator of last week’s panel, would make for a healthier and more robust legal marijuana market.

But Kathleen Frydl, a history professor at the University of California, Berkeley and author of “The Drug Wars in America, 1940-1973,” questions the ability of the state-level model to act as a decentralizing mechanism. She worries the best practices formed within states would be co-opted by interest groups regardless. Frydl argues that these groups might “then promote those best practices, or what they see as best practices, and the other states kind of fall as dominoes,” without taking statewide “indigenous concerns” into account. Interest groups would be, in effect, “ordering from a legislative menu.”

A member on one of two panels at Brookings last week and a “full-throated advocate” of legalizing marijuana, Frydl also expressed concern over the lack of watchdogs at the state level. But, she conceded, “state taxation is the principle way in which states can regulate marijuana” and regulation is “best maintained by a variety of state experiences.”

Misregulation vs. Overregulation

For Andrew Freedman, the last few years have been a “regulatory honeymoon period.” Freedman is the Director of Marijuana Coordination in Colorado, a role that did not exist until a few years ago. As the “marijuana czar” of the first state to legalize pot, Freedman has dealt firsthand with the trial and error regulatory process of marijuana legalization. He participated in both panels last week and provided insight into how easy it was for Colorado to pass new legislation to shape the rules of its growing marijuana market.

Good regulations are key to a thriving legal marijuana market, he said, but the challenge is “how to draw the line between what is overregulation and what’s running as fast as possible, as smart as possible to create a good guideline later on.” Since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana in 2012, the trailblazing state has tweaked rules and amended the initial legislation in an effort to find a regulatory sweet spot.

Originally, tourists in Colorado were only allowed to purchase seven grams of weed while residents could buy up to 28 grams. Now, both tourists and residents can purchase up to 28 grams. And after a number of incidents involving edibles and children, Colorado is lowering the concentration of THC–the compound in marijuana that has psychological effects–allowed in edibles sold for purchase. That measure will go into effect in October.

But Freedman understands the freedom to adjust and establish new norms will likely be short lived. In five years, as a legal framework is established and interest groups consolidate, he sees pushing new regulations as “day to day battles versus big pieces being moved.” A consolidated marijuana industry with increased regulations would create obstacles for new entrants and more hurdles for existing businesses. But according to Alexander Tabarrok, professor of economics at George Mason University and a member of last week’s panel,  stifling regulatory measures and barriers to entry could be a good thing for the marijuana industry. “Capitalism plus an addictive drug—is this really the best combination?” he said, “maybe sometimes efficiency is not the best thing, maybe innovation in all things is not always good.”

Big Marijuana

Like the tobacco and alcohol industries before it, some experts say the marijuana industry is headed down a road of narrow interest groups and concentrated power. Big Marijuana: where rules of the road are set by only a handful of national actors. In their new paper, Wallach and Rauch conclude: “Over time, multiple interests will coalesce and colonize the regulatory process.” But Big Marijuana does not have to be an inherent evil, said John Hudak, who also presented a paper at the Brookings event. “This idea that big is always bad is wrong, and that differently sized is good is also wrong.”

Big Marijuana has its advantages, he said. Powerful actors have more to lose, and thus more incentive to play by the rules. They also have a reputation to uphold, since consumers buy into their brands and care about their actions, forcing them to act with the public’s spending power in mind. Hudak, who wrote a book called “Marijuana: A Short History,” said that big firms will also have the advantage of pairing business acumen with marijuana know-how. “Not every marijuana grower should run a business, and not every businessman should be growing marijuana,” he said.

That business acumen could come with costs, however. Freedman is concerned that as national marijuana brands accrue capital and influence, they will follow in the footsteps of tobacco and alcohol brands that market to underage users and exploit people with abuse problems. “Those who have access to capital know how to do that in a much better way than those who don’t have capital,” Freedman said. He wasn’t the only panelist who expressed caution at the exploitative potential of powerful marijuana companies. Jeff Zinsmeister, vice president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, opposes legalizing weed because legalization would “inevitably push marijuana into a model that is constantly going to be pushing the limits when it comes to targeting children and heavy users.”

Whatever forces end up governing the legalized marijuana market–a handful of powerful brands and interest groups; a smattering of smaller, statewide actors; or something else entirely–there will be a time in the not so distant future where the entire country recognizes the drug as a legal substance. And like tobacco and alcohol before it, marijuana will pose difficult questions for society, government, and industry to answer.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Once Marijuana Is Legal, Who Sets the Rules? appeared first on Law Street.

Microsoft came out with more big news this week following its announcement that it will buy LinkedIn. The tech giant is dipping its toes in the marijuana industry, partnering with a startup company that will track legal marijuana to make sure everything is in compliance with regulations from “seed-to-sale.“

As more and more states legalize marijuana either recreationally or medically (the total count is up to 25 states now) corporate companies are shying away from joining the green profit boom–marijuana is illegal in the eyes of the federal government, after all. But, Microsoft is the first big tech company to break this taboo.

KIND Financial, a company focused on cannabis technology, and Microsoft will collaborate with governments to ensure marijuana stays within legal realms. The software will monitor the entire process, from growth and harvest of marijuana plants to sales in stores, entering a special niche in the marijuana market.

Only nine of the twenty-five states that have legalized pot, either medical or recreational, have implemented regulatory systems. These sorts of systems can also track how much marijuana is being sold to whom, the taxes that are being collected, and if growers and sellers are obeying the law.

“Microsoft is helping us support governments in their expansion of cannabis legislation,” KIND CEO David Dinenberg told The New York Times. “They’re experienced at providing platforms for government regulation. This is something Microsoft does every day of the week with other businesses in other categories.”

For now, Microsoft is sticking strictly to the government and compliance side of business, while KIND is more hands-on with the weed, but that could change. In the beginning, Microsoft will market the software at government-employee conferences, but it could eventually make appearances at cannabis events where KIND already has a regular presence. KIND, a start-up from Los Angeles, is one of the many companies trying to mainstream the marijuana industry. One of their most popular products is an ATM-style kiosk that dispenses marijuana.

“We do think there will be significant growth,” Kimberly Nelson, the executive director of state and local government solutions at Microsoft, told The New York Times. “As the industry is regulated, there will be more transactions, and we believe there will be more sophisticated requirements and tools down the road.”

Although KIND and Microsoft do not currently have any state contracts, they have applied to provide their software to Puerto Rico, which legalized medical marijuana earlier this year. Microsoft’s willingness to join the up-and-coming legalized weed industry is a big step forward.

“Nobody has really come out of the closet, if you will,” said Matthew Karnes, the founder of Green Wave Advisors, a company that provides data and analysis of the marijuana business. “It’s very telling that a company of this caliber is taking the risk of coming out and engaging with a company that is focused on the cannabis business.”

State governments and weed stores alike are relying on start-ups like KIND to facilitate the sales flowing through the industry. Because many banks are unwilling to hold money that is “illegal” in a federal sense, dispensaries are forced to rely on cash or the types of kiosks like those that KIND provides. States like Washington, New Mexico, and Illinois currently depend on start-ups similar to Kind to monitor marijuana sales.

Either way, partnering with KIND was a solid business decision for Microsoft, whose revenue is declining from its fading software business. Legal marijuana sales are expected to jump to $6.5 billion this year, from $4.8 billion last year; and another five states will vote in the fall on whether or not to legalize marijuana.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Microsoft Enters the Marijuana Industry appeared first on Law Street.

In an America where marijuana laws are being liberalized and the drug itself de-stigmatized, drivers who are found with traces of a cannabinoid in their blood can incur similar punishments in some states to those who drive under the influence of alcohol, a much deadlier exercise.

Marijuana researchers have been publishing studies over the past few years that have found marijuana to be a less dangerous substance than alcohol, and a recent study by the AAA Foundation for Public Safety appears to substantiate those claims when it comes to criminalizing drivers: “Legal limits, also known as per se limits, for marijuana and driving are arbitrary and unsupported by science.”

At the moment, drivers in Montana, Washington, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Nevada, and Colorado are convicted of a DUI if they are found with a certain amount of a cannabinoid–THC, hydroxy-THC or carboy-THC–in their bloodstream. And similar to a DUI involving alcohol, this can result in hefty fines or even a lengthy prison stay. The problem is that THC can linger in a user’s bloodstream for days after actively ingesting the drug, whether for recreation or medical purposes, so a driver can be perfectly safe and sober while driving yet convicted of a crime because of an action taken a day or more prior. 

Michael L. Becker of the Las Vegas Defense Group and one of Nevada’s top criminal defense lawyers called the law “hypocritical”; that in a state where medical marijuana is legal it is possible for someone who uses the drug as a medicine one day and then is found with it in his or her bloodstream days later can be found guilty of a DUI offense.

“I’ve had cases where prosecutors have said to me ‘I know your client wasn’t under the influence, but I can prove he has metabolized marijuana in his system’,” Becker said in a phone interview with Law Street, pointing to cases in which a client’s body is still processing marijuana from a dose taken a day or more prior to when an arrest is made. “People are literally being prosecuted where everybody knows they weren’t even high.”

The current threshold for what is considered above the legal limit in Nevada is two nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood, lower than the five milliliter threshold in Colorado and Washington, both of which have legalized marijuana completely. The new study by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety used psychophysical tests (walk-and-turn, finger-to-nose) and physical indicators (bloodshot eyes, pupil dilation) on drivers who had consumed marijuana and those who had not, and determined quantifiable thresholds for THC “cannot be scientifically supported.”

That’s not to say driving high poses no danger whatsoever. Being under the influence of marijuana while driving doubles the chances of a crash, a figure most researchers accept. But according to a study from 2014, 20-year-olds who drive with an illegal amount of alcohol in their system (above 0.08 percent) are twenty times as likely to crash. The researcher who conducted that study, Eduardo Romano, told The New York Times, “Despite our results, I still think that marijuana contributes to crash risk, only that its contribution is not as important as it was expected.”

So how can THC levels be accurately quantified in determining whether a driver is under the influence of cannabis, and above the legal threshold, if not by blood-THC content?

There is hardly a consensus among researchers, partially because they are limited in their research since cannabis is classified as a Schedule I drug in the U.S., meaning any research into it requires a special permit. Experts see saliva sampling as a promising alternative to blood testing, but the jury is out until more research is conducted.

While scientists try to figure out more reasonable ways of measuring the dangers of driving stoned, Becker, the lawyer in Las Vegas, continues to help his clients navigate the ironic situation of being legally allowed to use a drug that could put them in jail days after using it, if it’s in their system while they’re later behind the wheel. Becker wasn’t able to give an exact number of clients he represents who find themselves in this quandary, but he said it does happen.

And as marijuana is decriminalized and used more frequently, “[the law] is going to impact more people,” he said. Nevada’s law–drafted at a time when “communities were fearful and anti-marijuana”–has been examined for a repeal, but according to Becker, real change has been resisted because it’s not a “politically expedient” issue.

Becker hopes change is on the horizon: “The Nevada legislature is finally deciding to have an honest look at things. That’s the bright side,” he said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Cannabis DUI Laws Unsupported by Science, New Study Suggests appeared first on Law Street.

I’m a little late for the gathering of the parade, but can still smell it from at least two blocks away. The cloudy New York sky matches the fumes from the joints as the 17th annual NYC Cannabis Parade marches south on Broadway toward Union Square. An enormous hot air balloon in the shape of a lit joint is carried along to the chanting of classic rock songs, with the lyrics replaced by one word–‘marijuana’.

The group in the parade was as diverse as New York itself–people of all ages, ethnicities and backgrounds, people wearing all green, people in one-pieces with weed patterns, and one group wearing t-shirts saying “Law enforcement for legalization.”

Image courtesy of Evershed Mattingly

“I’m in the long-term care field, and I see way too many people in jail for just using,” said Jeanette McDonald, one of the t-shirt wearers. She’s not a user herself, but is all for the medical use of marijuana for pain management. “To arrest them doesn’t make any sense, go after the terrorists instead.”

The medical use of weed to ease pain seemed to be the most important aspect for many people at the event. Beata Kosmik, dressed in a green creation with a crown of tulle on her head, is in a band that performs to raise awareness about the medical benefits of marijuana. She’s an eco educator–campaigning for a natural, green way of life. Her granddaughter has Dravet syndrome, a kind of infant epilepsy that can be alleviated by a drug containing cannabis but is still in the research stage here in the U.S., so she lives in London.

Image courtesy of Evershed Mattingly

Steven, who wore American Flag overalls and carried a Pride flag, told me he wants decriminalization of all drugs. “It’s corrupt–all these people that are incarcerated for using, it breaks up families, people go to jail for this. Weed doesn’t kill.” Steven also pointed out that so many Afro-American youths get locked up for something that now is considered cool by young white hipsters.

Marijuana was legalized for medical use in New York almost a year ago, and the law came into effect in January. But among the states that allow some kind of marijuana use, it’s one of the most restrictive, and it’s really hard for patients to gain access to legal pot. Classic smoking is actually still forbidden. But if the participants of the Cannabis Parade get their way, that will soon be changed.

To sum up the situation, Steven said: “America has bad fucking karma. The roller coaster is going downhill, and now it’s time to deal with it.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Fight for Total Legalization Continues at the NYC Cannabis Parade appeared first on Law Street.

Whoopi Goldberg is the latest celebrity to try to get in on the legal marijuana market. She has started the “Whoopi & Maya brand,” which will produce marijuana-infused products advertised as solutions for pesky period cramps.

Whoopi Goldberg partners with Maya Elisabeth, And announces launch of @whoopiandmaya. A product line for women. pic.twitter.com/sUC5N8rs8r

— _DCNetwork_ (@_DCNetwork_) March 30, 2016

Goldberg is teaming up with Maya Elisabeth from Om Edibles, an all-female edibles company, hence the company name. They plan on starting with four products, available this April. The products will only be sold in California right now due to complicated legal restrictions in other states. According to the Daily Beast, the product line will include:

A ‘raw sipping chocolate’ infused with CBD or THC, a tincture (liquid extract) for ‘serious discomfort,’ a THC-infused bath soak, and a topical rub for localized pain.

Goldberg has been transparent about her marijuana use, particularly the fact that she uses a vape pen to help her with pain relief and dealing with stress. Goldberg explained her motivation for creating these products, highlighting the difficulties that are inherent in using medical marijuana:

For me, I feel like if you don’t want to get high high, this is a product specifically just to get rid of discomfort. Smoking a joint is fine, but most people can’t smoke a joint and go to work.

This, you can put it in your purse. You can put the rub on your lower stomach and lower back at work, and then when you get home you can get in the tub for a soak or make tea, and it allows you to continue to work throughout the day.

It makes sense that Goldberg wants to tap into the rapidly-growing marijuana market. The results of early legalization in states like Colorado and Washington look very good, the market is growing annually by 31 percent, and some experts estimate that it could become a $20 billion market by 2020.

While others have called their product niche, Goldberg and Elisabeth disagree, given that women do make up a little over half of the United States population. If the marijuana industry grows as quickly as is expected, and these products catch on, Goldberg and Elisabeth could have a total winner on their hands.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Whoopi Goldberg is a Ganjapreneur Who Wants to Help Treat Your Period Cramps appeared first on Law Street.

Recreational marijuana may be legal in four states (and the District of Columbia) but it’s still not legal at the federal level. This has caused some problems and inconsistencies with between states and federal agencies–most recently, the United States Postal Service has declared that it is illegal to mail materials, including newspapers, that advertise marijuana.

This revelation comes after the Democrats of Oregon’s Congressional delegation wrote a letter to the Postal Service asking the agency to explain its policy. That inquiry was sparked by a memo that was circulated in the Portland, Oregon, postal district that stated that it was illegal for any media sources to run ads for marijuana and still distribute their publications through the Postal Service. The Democrats of the Oregon Congressional delegation explained their frustrations with the Postal Service’s policy, which they say is too rigid and doesn’t respect the voters of Oregon, stating:

We are working as a delegation to quickly find the best option to address this agency’s intransigence. Unfortunately, the outdated federal approach to marijuana as described in the response from the Postal Service undermines and threatens news publications that choose to accept advertising from legal marijuana businesses in Oregon and other states where voters also have freely decided to legalize marijuana.

In response, the Postal Service explained that “the Postal Service has released a national policy, which also spells out that local postal officials can’t refuse mail that contains pot ads, but they must report it; the matter must then be turned over to law enforcement agencies who can decide if an investigation is warranted.”

So, it’s actually pretty unclear what will happen if a newspaper or magazine publishes an ad for marijuana–the Washington Post points out that it’s tough to determine whether or not any prosecutions would come from breaking the policy. The law being broken would technically be advertising for illicit goods, but as the Washington Post states: “federal authorities have generally not cracked down on pot sales in states where they’re legal.”

Given that the number of states that have legalized marijuana are a notable minority, and traditional advertising isn’t necessary flourishing, this may not be a big deal. But it’s another messy manifestation of the current divide between state and federal law–one that only threatens to widen as more states legalize recreational marijuana.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Newspapers Can’t Run Marijuana Ads if They Want to Use the Postal Service appeared first on Law Street.

Yesterday, I wrote a breakdown of some of the top races to watch on election day 2015. Here are the results of these contentious votes:

Virginia’s General Assembly

Why we should have watched it: With just a few key races promising to decide the lean of the state Senate overall, and Governor Terry McAuliffe pushing hard for a Democratic Senate, it was certainly a race to watch. Given that Virginia promises to be a hotly contested swing state in 2016, seeing just how purple the state has become is always interesting.

What happened: The GOP retained control of the state senate, and therefore the General Assembly as a whole. This leaves McAuliffe still without allies, and may indicate an uphill battle for whoever ends up as the Democratic nominee for 2016.

San Francisco’s Airbnb Vote

Why we should have watched it: San Francisco voters were offered a sort of referendum on Airbnb’s model of short-term rentals. Proposition F promised to levy some serious restrictions on the company. Add to that Airbnb’s $8 million dollar investment in fighting against the proposition, and a series of weird ads that certainly turned San Francisco voters off, and it became a tense race from start to finish.

What happened: Airbnb’s massive investment paid off, as voters rejected Proposition F. So, Airbnb will continue business as usual in the city where it is headquartered, but it was still a very expensive fight. As other cities may try to create similar restrictions, Airbnb might not want to make spending that kind of cash a precedent.

Kentucky Gubernatorial Race

Why we should have watched it: The Democratic Attorney General Jack Conway faced off against tea party candidate and businessman Matt Bevin. This was an incredibly hotly contested race; recent polls actually showed Conway in the lead. Bevin last year tried to primary Mitch McConnell, and was almost successful, and then beat a more establishment Republican for the Republican gubernatorial nomination.

What happened: Bevin won, marking the first time in a while that a Republican has taken the governorship in Kentucky. Moreover, he showed that tea party wins aren’t a thing of the past. His successful rallying against the establishment may indicate who Kentucky will vote for in 2016.

Ohio Marijuana Initiative

Why we should have watched it: There were a lot of weird aspects to Ohio’s attempt to legalize marijuana. For one, it would have been the first state to legalize recreational marijuana having not first legalized medical marijuana. Moreover, there were concerns of a “marijuana oligopoly,” given that only 10 facilities backed by a group of investors would receive licenses to grow it. So, some that rallied against it were more fighting against the threat of a restricted market than the legalization of weed itself.

What happened: The initiative failed, so weed won’t be legalized in Ohio. However, it’s unclear whether it was rejected because of the oligopoly fears, or because Ohioans actually didn’t want to legalize weed. If it’s the former, we should expect to see another measure up for vote soon that allows a wider market.

The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance

Why we should have watched it: The city of Houston, Texas voted on an equal rights ordinance that would have included protections for the LGBTQ community, including on the basis of gender identity. However, the entire thing became a nasty firefight when groups that opposed the ordinance began suggesting that it would allow predators to enter women’s bathrooms.

What happened: The fear-mongering paid off, and the ordinance didn’t pass. The opponents focused on one incorrect assumption, and were successful. Although the U.S. is doing a little better on LGBTQ rights in the wake of Obergefell, the resounding defeat of the ordinance in a relatively liberal city run by Annise Parker, one of the most high profile openly gay mayors in the United States, isn’t a great sign.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Results are in: Election Day 2015 appeared first on Law Street.

Oregon’s first week of selling legalized marijuana has been, by pretty much all accounts, a success. The first week of sales topped an estimated $11 million, blowing sales from other states with legalized weed, including Colorado and Washington, out of the water. If those sales keep up, Oregon can expect to see a pretty noticeable bump in new revenue when the sales taxes kick in this January.

Oregon began selling legal marijuana for recreational uses on October 1, after Ballot Measure 91 to legalize it was successful during the 2014 midterm elections. Just over 56 percent of voters voted to legalize marijuana, and the state took almost a year to put in place the necessary regulations and protocols to sell legalized week. However, there are still some aspects of the industry that are being sorted out.

Currently, only adults 21 and older are allowed to purchase marijuana. Only “flower and dry leaf products, plants, and seeds” are being sold and there are restrictions on the amounts of those items that are able to be sold. Other products, like edibles, are still not being sold to recreational users as some regulation kinks are worked out, but are still available to medical marijuana license holders.

Currently, only licensed medical marijuana dispensaries are allowed to sell the products; there are roughly 200 of those in Oregon. There are plans to begin allowing standalone stores dedicated to selling legalized marijuana sometime next year. Additionally, there are some places where legalized marijuana won’t be sold in Oregon, as the state has allowed individual cities and counties to prohibit the sale.

One the first day of sales–October 1–the Oregon Retail Cannabis Association estimated that there was roughly $3.5 million in sales. This is good news for the state, given that it set a tax revenue goal of $9 million for the first fiscal year. Recreational marijuana won’t be taxed in Oregon until January, at 25 percent. The Oregon Retail Cannabis Association is very optimistic about that $9 million goal–it believes that the tax revenue brought in will be three to four times as much.

So far Oregon’s foray into legalized marijuana has been a success, even just a week in. While there are still regulations that need to be figured out, and the addition of taxes in January may slow down some sales, Oregon is on its way to being a great economic example in the argument for legalizing marijuana.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Oregon’s First Week of Legalized Weed Sales Rakes in $11 Million appeared first on Law Street.

Attention all stoners, occasional smokers, and cannabis curious! South Dakota has announced that it will soon become home to the nation’s first marijuana resort. Owned and operated by the Santee Sioux tribe, this weed lover’s paradise promises to be the ideal spot for vacationers looking to blow off some steam with the help of a few blunts.

But before you begin booking your ganja getaway here are five things you need to know about the nation’s first weed resort.

1. It’s Legal Even in a State Where Weed is Illegal

In 2014 the Justice Department determined that Native American tribes can grow and sell marijuana, even in states where pot is illegal. So far the Santee Sioux tribe seems to be the only reservation taking advantage of the ruling, but others will surely be monitoring their experiment to see if it is economically viable. Something tells me it will be, especially when tribe members are already projecting the project to generate up to $2 million a month in profits.

2. There will be 30 Different Strains

This isn’t amateur hour. The Santee Sioux tribe hired Denver-based cannabis consultants Monarch America to teach them the weed growing basics. According to the Associated Press, workers at the Flandreau indoor marijuana farm are “working to grow more than 30 different strains of the finicky plant, including those with names like ‘Gorilla Glue,’ ‘Shot Glass’ and ‘Big Blue Cheese.'”

3. It Will Have Some Awesome Amenities

“We want it to be an adult playground,” said tribal President Anthony Reider. And from the sounds of it, it definitely will be. This stoner’s paradise will sell weed in a smoking lounge that comes complete with a nightclub, arcade games, bar and food–for when those munchies hit. They also have plans to later add in slot machines and an outdoor music venue.

4. Don’t Plan on Bringing any Weed Home

Even though marijuana will be legally sold at the resort, it cannot leave the reservation. According to AP, leaders of the project plan to ensure that this won’t happen by assigning a bar code to every plant in the Flandreau’s growing facility. AP writes,

After being harvested and processed, it will be sold in sealed 1-gram packages for $12.50 to $15 — about the same price as the illegal market in Sioux Falls, according to law enforcement. Consumers will be allowed to buy only 1 gram — enough for two to four joints — at a time.

5. The Resort’s Future Isn’t Certain

Currently four states and Washington, DC have legalized marijuana, but pot remains illegal on a federal level. The Obama administration has agreed to let Native American tribes legalize the drug without interference, but our nation’s next president may not be so lenient. If one of the current Republican presidential candidates (especially Chris Christie) is elected, we could soon be saying farewell to lawful Mary Jane.

If you’re interested in being one of the first to visit the resort, be prepared for a bit of a wait. The tribe says that joints won’t be going on sale until Dec. 31 at a New Year’s Eve party. But if all goes well, this reservation could soon become the U.S.’s #1 destination for marijuana tourism.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post 5 Things you Need to Know About the Nation’s First Marijuana Resort appeared first on Law Street.

During the early morning hours of September 8, Maya Donnelly was awaken by a crash that she believed was just thunder. Later that morning she looked in her garage and noticed pieces of broken wood and signs that Hulk, their large German Shepherd, had been making a mess. Donnelly went outside to get a closer look at things and to her surprise there was a mysterious package wrapped in black plastic. Donnelly stated:

I went out to investigate, and sure enough, I looked up to see the hole, and then my eyes trailed down and the big dog’s house was destroyed. It made a hole in that hard plastic doghouse and the bundle was inside…

Donnelly lives with her husband and three teenage daughters in Nogales, Arizona, near the U.S.-Mexico border. Because of the large amount of smuggling that occurs near the border area, she immediately assumed that the package was drugs and called the police. When the police arrived, they revealed that Donnelly was correct. The package contained 26 pounds of marijuana and was worth nearly $10,000.

Nogales Police Department officers searched their property and other nearby areas for additional bundles but nothing was found. The officers then took possession of the drugs.

Nogales family woke to find a bail of marijuana fell through their roof. http://t.co/Y0gsVpCwCT pic.twitter.com/ZG7pqlJWRZ

— KVOA News 4 Tucson (@KVOA) September 27, 2015

Police are trying to determine if the bundle was transported by an aircraft or a pilotless drone. Authorities told Donnelly that an ultralight aircraft smuggling marijuana from Mexico had probably let part of its load go early by mistake. These aircrafts are one of the tools of the local drug smuggling trade. Nogales Police Chief Derek Arnson stated, “Someone definitely made a mistake, and who knows what the outcome of that mistake might be for them.”

In the United States, ultralight aircrafts are classified as “vehicles” and not aircrafts. They are not required to be registered nor is the pilot required to have a pilot license or certificate, thus making it easy to smuggle drugs. Arnson told Nogales International,

Ultralights, we’ve seen those on occasion. They’ll take a couple, two, three bundles. You can hear those kind of buzzing. They come at nighttime and they don’t land, they just drop and go back to Mexico.

Now, I’m sure some people may be surprised by the Donnellys’ integrity in calling the police and not keeping the bundle to make a profit.

Let 26 pounds of marijuana fall on my house. The last thing Ima do is call the police…the last.

— Bria (@BriaMaria92) September 28, 2015

Despite their friends joking to them that they could have kept the package and illegally sold the drugs, the family did not want to feel any guilt about the situation. “That’s what everybody says: ‘Why did you call 911?” Maya Donnelly stated. “But how can you have a clear conscience, right?”

The Donnellys do not feel any less safe after the incident and doubt that anyone will come looking for the drugs since the bundle is now in police custody. Arnson agreed, but placed patrols in the Donnelly’s neighborhood for now just to be safe. Although the family will have to pay an estimated amount of $500 in roof repairs and a new home for their dog, they are just happy that the package did not come through another part of their home and that no one was harmed.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Surprise: 26 Pounds of Marijuana Crash Through Arizona Home appeared first on Law Street.

College students are big partiers–that’s no secret. But their vice of choice may be changing. Marijuana use is up among college students, surpassing cigarettes for the first time. Even more surprisingly, rates of alcohol abuse are also falling.

The study looked at 1,500 students at two and four year universities around the country in order to reach its conclusions. According to the study, habitual cigarette usage among students is down to about five percent, a sizable drop from years past. Just 16 years ago, in 1999, 19 percent of college students reported daily cigarette use. On the other hand, almost six percent of college students use marijuana daily. That’s the highest rate since 1980, when data reporting marijuana use among college students was first reported.

The rate of students using marijuana semi-regularly is also up. According to the Chicago Tribune: “Twenty-one percent of the college students surveyed said they had used marijuana at least once during the previous month, and 34 percent said they had used it in the past year.”

Incidences of dangerous drinking among college students are also decreasing. Binge drinking among college students, defined as having five or more drinks in a row in the past two weeks has dropped  from 44 percent in 1984 to 35 percent in 2014. Extreme binge drinking, which is defined as “having had 15 or more drinks in a row at least once in the previous two weeks,” is falling. Only five percent of students reported that behavior in this year’s study.

But this news isn’t unique to college students. This sort of shift is consistent with the general population’s views on cigarettes and marijuana. Now that multiple states have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, and medical use is all but commonplace in many other states, the use of weed is becoming more and more acceptable. A majority of Americans–a slim majority, but a majority all the same–believe that recreational marijuana should be legalized for adults. Additionally, a majority of Americans believe that alcohol is more dangerous to an individual’s health than marijuana. And possibly most strikingly, almost exactly half of Americans have tried marijuana at some point in their lives.

Of course as weed becomes more acceptable generally nationwide, it’s important that the risks that are still associated with marijuana, particularly for young people, are not overly minimized. Some studies have raised concerns that for young people whose brains are still developing, marijuana can have some negative long term effects.

That being said, overall there’s a lot of good news in the study. Alcohol and cigarettes have long been consumed at worrisome levels by college students. College students will probably always partake in illegal substances, but changes to the ways in which they do so will probably continue to reflect the national zeitgeist when it comes to drug and alcohol acceptance.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post College Students Are Smoking More Marijuana, Fewer Cigarettes appeared first on Law Street.

The ways in which the law interacts with marijuana is, in many ways, still in its infancy. Most glaringly, there a lot of legal issues that come with the use of marijuana that still need to be solved. However, the latest weed legal question was just answered by an Oregon appeals court: does the smell of marijuana smoke constitute an “olfactory assault?” The Oregon court didn’t think so, possibly setting a precedent for how to deal with particularly smelly weed smoke moving forward.

The particulars of the case are bit confusing, but here’s the breakdown: in 2012, Jared William Lang lived in an apartment building in Philomath, Oregon. His neighbors believed he had been smoking weed. Given that there were other people in the apartment complex, they could smell it, and finally had had enough. One of them called the police, who came to check it out. Keep in mind at this point that while weed was decriminalized in Oregon, it wasn’t legal yet.

So, the police officer showed up and talked to Lang’s neighbors–some of whom had some pretty serious complaints about the weed smell. One mentioned that he was a recovering drug addict, and smelling weed constantly acted as a sort of “trigger.” Given this concerning context, the police officer went to get a warrant to search Lang’s apartment. While the officer likely finding weed wouldn’t have been a big deal, given the drug’s decriminalization in Oregon, the officer did find spray paint and stencils in Lang’s apartment that he believed had been used to create nearby graffiti. It was at that point that Lang was charged and later convicted on three counts of criminal mischief for the graffiti.

While that seems like an open-and-shut case, there was one part of the story in particular that Lang based his appeal on–the grounds on which the police officer acquired the search warrant. The officer based it on the fact that the smell of weed constituted a “hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which the person is not licensed or privileged to do.” So amazingly, that became the crux of the legal question–does weed smell so bad that it can be considered “hazardous” or “physically offensive?” Is it an “olfactory assault?”

Those terms in and of themselves are ambiguous. The appeals court tasked with weighing the question ended up defining “physically offensive” as “must be more than minimally unpleasant but need not be dangerous or harmful.” While that’s still a vague parameter, the court decided that in case, the smell wasn’t offensive enough for the officer to obtain the warrant, rendering the charges against Lang invalid.

So, can you get in trouble with the smell police for smoking weed? Maybe–as Judge Erika L. Hadlock put it:

We are not prepared to declare, as the state would have us, that the odor of marijuana smoke is equivalent to the odor of garbage. Nor can we say, however, that the odor is inoffensive as a matter of law. We could perhaps say with confidence that a fleeting whiff of marijuana smoke would not offend a reasonable person, but as the intensity, duration or frequency of the odor increases, it stands to reason that it would become objectively offensive at some point, particularly depending on the location in which it is smelled.

So there you have it, the smell of weed probably isn’t “olfactory assault” but as it continues to become more popular (and legal), we will most likely need to constantly re-examine these boundaries.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Oregon Court Answers the Time-Old Question: Is Weed Too Smelly? appeared first on Law Street.

Popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia has found itself a new enemy: the Russian government. Russian internet service providers were just ordered to block the site, another interesting move by a regime that is increasingly veering into the field of internet censorship.

Russia’s grudge against the online information hub was sparked by one article regarding a marijuana product called hashish, or in Russian, “charis.” Roscomnadzor​, the section of the Russian police that has jurisdiction over the internet and media, flagged this particular page on charis because it believed it contained enough information for a reader to learn how to produce the drug. Providing information about how to produce drugs is illegal in Russia; this law was solidified by a court ruling in June that specifically pertained to instructions for making charas.

Last week, Roscomnadzor put a statement out about Wikipedia that implied that not taking down the charas page could have serious consequences:

In the event that [Wikipedia] refuses to comply with the court‘s ruling, Roskomnadzor will block the webpage on Russian territory using the registry of illegal information. In this case, insofar as Wikipedia has decided to function on the basis of https, which doesn’t allow restricting access to individual pages on its site, the entire website would be blocked.

Essentially, Roskomnadzor doesn’t want to block all of Wikipedia, but the way that Wikipedia is set up basically makes it an all-or-nothing deal. Officials have stated that if Wikipedia just takes down that one page, the rest of the site won’t be affected. But the head of Wikipedia Russia, Stanislav Kozlovsky, isn’t going down without a fight. According to RT he said on Friday:

His company was aware of the situation and that its staff had assessed the situation and decided not to comply with the authorities’ demands. He claimed that the sources of the information on the banned page were legitimate and taken from open and reputable sources, such as the United Nations’ website, and added that Wikipedia was prepared for the website’s blockage in Russia.

Wikipedia did try to change the URL of the article, but Roskomnadzor still deemed that insufficient and the site is still under threat.

It’s no secret that there are high levels of internet censorship and government oversight in Russia, particularly under current President Vladimir Putin’s leadership. For example, any blogger or website that has 3,000 or more daily readers has to register with the government. Additionally, like posting about how to produce certain types of drugs, other resources are blocked by the Russian government. Most notoriously, Russia bans “homosexual propaganda” from being posted online–essentially any positive information about LGBT rights or individuals is prohibited. Banning Wikipedia is just the latest restrictive move, and it almost certainly won’t be the last.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Wikipedia Banned in Russia: Internet Censorship Continues appeared first on Law Street.

Okay. I can’t believe I am about to say this. I don’t care if someone takes your $5 but does not give you your weed, you just cannot call the cops to complain about being stiffed. If you do, you will get in trouble. And if my admittedly limited knowledge of pot prices is accurate, you will get in trouble over some very poor quality marijuana.

(Before I continue with this story, I have a confession to make. Whenever I do not have a good story lined up for the week, I just Google ‘weird legal stories Florida.’ It never disappoints. Now back to this week’s weird Florida story … )

Courtesy of Giphy.

I’ve Been Robbed!

Daneshia Heller, a 19-year-old Florida resident, had an emergency. She had just been robbed. When she went over to a man’s house to buy some pot, she had expected to receive said pot in exchange for the $5 she had given him.

Unfortunately, the man allegedly took the money but didn’t give anything back. Heller did what any irrational person would do. She called 911.

“He got my money, and I want my drugs. Can you send an officer?” she asked the operator.

A Wish Come True

You know how if you find a genie and you make a wish it is going to come true in a way you never expected? Like how in the Geico commercial a million bucks gets granted as a million male deer (aka bucks)?

Courtesy of Giphy.

Well think of this 911 operator as Heller’s genie in a bottle. Heller was granted her wish: a cop did come to the scene of the alleged crime. Only, the cop didn’t arrive for precisely the reason Heller had wanted him.

You see, drugs are illegal in Florida, both in buying and selling. Which means if you call up and admit you are trying to buy some, especially if you dial 911 to do it, you will probably get in a little trouble yourself.

Taking Some Flakka

If this had been the only thing to happen, though, then maybe this story would not have been so bad. However, when the cops arrived, they saw an angry Heller talking to herself. This aroused their suspicion.

When they checked her person, they found a white substance in one of her pockets. As it turned out, it was Flakka, a psychosis-inducing drug.

The Legal Consequences

After the substance was found, Heller was taken into custody and charged with the following:

• Drug possession
• Misusing the 911 system
• Violating parole from an earlier, unrelated charge

Moral of the Story

As with any good story, there are a few key takeaways:

1. Don’t be a tattletale (especially don’t tattle on your potential drug dealer);
2. Don’t call 911 unless it is actually an emergency;
3. If you call the cops about a theft, make sure you hide your drugs before they get there; and,
4. Just don’t do drugs in general.

This may all seem like a lot to ask, but I promise you they are all good ideas if you do not want to get arrested and be talked about here.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Woman Calls 911 When She Doesn’t Get Her Drugs, Gets Arrested appeared first on Law Street.

ICYMI, check out this week’s best articles from Law Street, including ridiculous LSAT anecdotes, shocking news out of Egypt’s hospitals, and how you can be fired for legally smoking weed.

#1 The Most Ridiculous LSAT Stories of the Year

The June 2015 LSAT is over, and approximately 20,000 people are eagerly–or anxiously, depending on how they did–waiting on their results. In the meantime, users of law school forums like Top Law School (TLS) and PowerScore have created post-test impressions and waiter’s threads to pass the time. Read full article here.

#2 The Sad State of Egypt’s Hospitals: Shocking Pictures Released

Doctors need the proper resources to be able to treat their patients. But a new viral Facebook page started in Egypt illustrates that doctors and dentists in that country don’t necessarily have access to what they need. The page is shocking to many, as photos of multiple hospitals in Cairo, Egypt have been shared illustrating that they are unequipped and unsanitary for doctors to properly operate in. Read full article here.

#3 Can You Be Fired For Legal Marijuana Use?

In Colorado and thinking about smoking marijuana after work? Might want to reconsider that. Even though many Colorado residents qualify to use medical marijuana regularly, it can carry many consequences for consumers. In a landmark Colorado Supreme Court decision, Coats v. Dish Network, the court decided that employers can now lawfully terminate employees for using medical marijuana, even if they are off the clock. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

In Colorado and thinking about smoking marijuana after work? Might want to reconsider that. Even though many Colorado residents qualify to use medical marijuana regularly, it can carry many consequences for consumers. In a landmark Colorado Supreme Court decision, Coats v. Dish Network, the court decided that employers can now lawfully terminate employees for using medical marijuana, even if they are off the clock.

This case originated in 2010 when Dish Network fired an employee, Brandon Coats, for not passing a random drug test. Testing positive for marijuana went against the company’s “zero-tolerance” drug policy. Coats is a quadriplegic who is licensed to use medical marijuana under Colorado state law to help ease the pain of his muscle spasms. He claims that he never used marijuana while working, nor was he ever high at work. Coats filed the lawsuit claiming that his rights were violated since he is legally allowed to use marijuana in the state of Colorado, so this should not affect his status of employment.

Colorado Supreme Court: Worker can be fired for using pot even though it's legal in state http://t.co/VNP5g4CEZY pic.twitter.com/DSeFkSGZJ4

— USA TODAY (@USATODAY) June 15, 2015

In a unanimous decision, all six judges ruled in favor of Dish Network, stating that the company was in the right when it let go of Coats. This case sets a precedent for future workplace conflicts over the matter. Medical marijuana is legal in Colorado, as well as recreational marijuana, but it is still illegal in all forms under federal law. Federal law trumps state law and so despite some people being able to obtain licenses to use medical marijuana, they still have to obey their employers’ drug policies.

Colorado is one of the most liberal states in the United States when it comes to marijuana use, as it legalized the medical consumption of it in 2001, and the recreational use of it became legal in 2012.  Marijuana use in Colorado has become ubiquitous. Doctors prescribe medical marijuana to patients for a multitude of reasons, such as to help combat the nausea induced by chemotherapy, to treat seizure disorders, or to curb the poor appetite and weight loss associated with HIV. People can grow the plant in their basements and there are dispensaries throughout many of the major cities. People can even take yoga classes focused on marijuana or marijuana themed cooking classes. Reports state that the legalization of cannabis has caused crime rates to decrease, lowered unemployment rates, and has contributed to greater economic growth thanks to the enormous tax revenues that the sales have created.

This decision will clear up many issues in Colorado, although it could also cause tensions to rise among citizens throughout the state and the whole country. Seeing how this case will impact other states’ decisions regarding the workplace and the use of medical marijuana will be interesting, considering that 23 other states have legalized it for medical consumption so far. To avoid future legal problems, this decision will likely prompt other companies to devise new drug policies so it is clear what they expect of their employees.

Toni Keddell

Toni Keddell is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2017 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Toni at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Can You Be Fired for Legal Marijuana Use? appeared first on Law Street.

The Supreme Court of Canada has just ruled that the users of marijuana for medical purposes now have the right to bake the drugs in cookies, take it in lozenge form or as tropical oils in addition to smoking it. The unanimous ruling against the federal government expands the definition of medical marijuana beyond the “dried” form, and speaks volumes about the changes happening in the marijuana industry.

The Court found that the current restriction to dried marijuana violates the right to liberty and security “in a manner that is arbitrary and hence is not in accord with the principles of fundamental justice.” Restricting medical access  in Canada to marijuana in a dried form has now been declared “null and void.” That renders sections four and five of the Controlled Drug and Substances Act, which prohibits possession and trafficking of non-dried forms of cannabis, unenforceable.

This decision supports earlier rulings by lower Courts in British Columbia that said they went against a person’s right to consume medical marijuana in the form they choose.

Medical marijuana patients don’t always want to expose themselves to the effects of smoking the drugs. Inhaling marijuana could present health risks, and is said to be less effective for some conditions that administer cannabis derivatives. With inhalation being a large issue, the smoking process is said to irritate the lungs, which is why smokers are more likely to have an ongoing cough or other health problems like chest colds and lung infections.

A 2011 systematic review of the research concluded that long-term marijuana smoking is associated with an increased risk of some respiratory problems, including an increase in cough, sputum production, airway inflammation, and wheezing–similar to that of tobacco smoking. 

Some medical marijuana users wanted to avoid those side effects. But other methods like brewing marijuana leaves in tea or baking weed into brownies left patients vulnerable to be charged with possession and trafficking under the law.

“This is monumental,” said David Posner, CEO of Nutritional High, a Canadian company that has been testing marijuana-infused candy and drinks for sale in the United States later this year. “Another market the size of California just opened up for our products.”

So what does this mean for the U.S. exactly? Four states–Washington, Colorado, Oregon, and Alaska, as well as Washington D.C.–have legalized marijuana, while a total of 14 states have decriminalized certain amounts of possession. Legal marijuana is said to be the fastest-growing industry in the U.S. According to ArcView, over the next five years, the marijuana industry is expected to continue to grow. They are predicting that 14 more states will legalize recreational marijuana and two more will legalize medical marijuana. At least ten states are already considering legalizing recreational marijuana in just the next two years through ballot measures or state legislatures.

In that context, Canada extending its medical marijuana market, and the U.S.’s current growing market promise continued growth. Non-traditional ways to consume marijuana will continue to rise–this week’s decision was just the beginning.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weed Trend Grows: Canada Legalizes Medical Edibles appeared first on Law Street.

A soda, a pack of gum, and some psychoactive drugs might all be available for checkout at typical gas stations across the globe. Head shops, gas stations, and online sites are legally selling drugs that the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime call new psychoactive substances (NPS). Also known as “designer drugs,” “herbal highs,” or “legal high” drugs, NPS have come under increased international scrutiny as variations of these drugs continue to develop and as alarming research on the dangerous health effects of these substances emerges. In light of this, some places, such as Scotland, are beginning to shut down the sale of these substances.

Harminasion, a shop that sells legal high drugs in Aberdeen, Scotland, was forced to close its doors last Wednesday and will remain out of business for the next three months after Aberdeen police and city council members secured a closure order under the Antisocial Behaviour Act of 2004. The shop’s closing is believed to be a Scottish first in an effort to thwart the destructive consequences of NPS.

NPS are defined as “substances of abuse, either in a pure form or a preparation, that are not controlled by the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs or the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances, but which may pose a public health threat.” “New” does not necessarily mean that the drug is a new invention, but rather that the substances have recently become available. These drugs are synthetic, “legal” alternatives to internationally controlled drugs, intended to mimic the effects of illicit drugs. NPS emerge rapidly, making controls for these drugs extremely difficult. The increased use and emerging trade of NPS have created concerns that transnational organized criminal groups could exploit the market for these substances.

One class of new psychoactive substances is synthetic cannabinoids, such as “spice,” which was introduced to the United States around 2009, marketed as potpourri, and labeled “not for human consumption” to avoid FDA regulations. Spice or “K2” is an herbal material infused with dangerous chemicals that imitate the effects of THC, although it is much more potent and can be extremely harmful. Due to the ever-changing concentrations of chemicals used to make synthetic cannabinoids, data on human toxicity related to the use of these drugs remains limited. However, known health-related problems associated with their use include cardiovascular complications, psychological disorders, physiological dependence, hallucinations, paranoid behavior, agitation, anxiety, nausea, vomiting, and seizures. Data has also shown that an increasing number of suicides are also associated with use of synthetic cannabinoid products such as spice.

The Scottish decision to close the Aberdeen shop comes just weeks after the launch of an interactive online video that warns teens of the dangers and risks associated with legal high drugs. The video will be available to every secondary school throughout Scotland. Detective Inspector Michael Miller said of NPS use:

It’s become clear that officers are spending an increasing amount of time dealing with the diverse issues brought on by new psychoactive substances as the trend to take them escalates… It horrifies me that young people willingly take a substance without knowing what it contains or the effects it will have.

Scotland is not the only country in Europe feeling the daunting impact of NPS. The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction reported an unprecedented increase in the number, type, and availability of new psychoactive substances in Europe over the past five years. The report claims that 101 new psychoactive substances were reported for the first time in 2014. What is truly shocking is the alarming number of seizures–46,730–of new psychoactive substances in 2013 alone. To combat the rapid increase of the drugs, several countries have amended their legislation to control the manufacture, trafficking, possession, sale and use of NPS. However, including a drug on a prohibited or scheduled list is often a lengthy process that requires health risk assessments based on scientific data, (data that is scarce for NPS) and can take several months to approve. For this reason, many governments have resorted to “emergency scheduling” to introduce temporary bans on NPS until the legislative process can be completed. Australia, China, Croatia, Bahrain, Ghana, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom and the United States reported in a UNODC questionnaire on NPS to having used emergency scheduling to temporarily ban NPS. New psychoactive drug information has also begun to appear on national drug surveys due to the growing need to monitor and combat their use.

In the United States, NPS use is on the rise, mimicking the international trend. In 2011, the annual “Monitoring the Future” national survey asked 12^th graders about their drug use; the survey found that synthetic cannabinoids ranked second in annual prevalence only to natural cannabis. Notably, the states with the highest number of calls to U.S. Poison Centers involving synthetic cannabinoids in 2015 are states with harsher cannabis laws. Washington, Oregon, Colorado, and Alaska are the only four U.S. states with legalized recreational cannabis, although they are in different stages of implementation. Those four states combined have had a total of 41 calls to poison centers this year, while Mississippi, a medical marijuana state with decriminalization laws, alone has had over 1,000 calls. In April, New York officials issued a health alert after more than 160 patients over a span of just nine days were admitted to hospitals across the state for adverse reactions to spice. In Mississippi, 97 cases of synthetic marijuana abuse were reported to the Mississippi Poison Control Center over an eight-day span in April. Although the Synthetic Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 2012 banned the synthetic compounds found in NPS, there is obviously still an NPS abuse problem in the states, and we will probably see crackdowns similar to Europe on the rise.

In one German study on NPS, more than three out of five respondents indicated the legal availability of NPS as a major motivation for use. This result speaks to the importance of monitoring and scheduling new variations of NPS, shutting down head shops, gas stations, and websites that sell the drugs, and educating young people that the legality of the drugs does not imply their safety. Closing stores that sell these drugs will attack the infrastructure of NPS propagation and will deter novice NPS users from experimenting with these unsafe substances. Openly condemning the NPS market will also combat the current normalization of NPS use, which the open, “legal” sale of these drugs promotes. While policy reform is important, education is the most powerful tool for change. The U.S., and other locations, should take after Scotland in its efforts to inform young people about the detrimental impacts of new psychoactive substances.

Emily Dalgo

Emily Dalgo is a member of the American University Class of 2017 and a Law Street Media Fellow during the Summer of 2015. Contact Emily at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Legal Doesn’t Mean Safe: The Rise of Synthetic Drugs appeared first on Law Street.

On New Year’s Day 2014, it became legal in Colorado to sell marijuana in specially licensed dispensaries to adults 21 years and older. Much like any liquor store, you can walk in, show your ID, and make your purchase. But the dispensaries don’t just sell marijuana you smoke; you can also buy edibles, as well–marijuana you eat. As a newly legal product, the state was in uncharted territory. As we fast forward a little more than a year later, what are the state regulations on edibles, what effects have the sale of edibles had, and are other states following suit?

What is edible Marijuana?

The Science

Cannabis, or marijuana, has three primary active compounds: THC, CBD, and CBG. THC is the only psychoactive ingredient. CBD and CBG have medicinal properties and alter the effects of THC. The drug reacts with the body’s endocannabinoid system, a “regulatory mechanism that modulates the release of compounds produced throughout the body,” and causes humans to experience a high. Marijuana can be vaporized, smoked, or consumed orally.

When marijuana is smoked or vaporized, delta-9-THC is absorbed through the lungs and heads straight to the brain. The onset high is relatively quicker and shorter than if marijuana is eaten. When the marijuana is consumed and digested by the liver, the delta-9-THC turns into 11-hydroxy-THC. The transformation causes the THC to quickly bypass the blood-brain barrier and produce a more psychedelic effect than smoked THC. Smoked and vaporized marijuana completely sidestep the liver and the THC never converts.

While the high from smoking marijuana is faster, edible highs last longer. When smoking marijuana, 50 to 60 percent of the THC in a joint can reach the blood plasma. The peak of the high can come after five to 10 minutes of smoking. In comparison, only ten to 20 percent of the THC in edibles hit the blood plasma and the high takes effect an hour or two later. The high from edible marijuana is described as a “whole body” high and can last from six to ten hours. Essentially, people experience the highs from smoking eating marijuana differently.

Why would someone choose edibles over smoking?

Although the high from edibles lasts longer, it isn’t necessarily stronger. The high from smoking is rapid and strong, and the effects wear off rather quickly. It is also relatively easy to know when you’ve reached a limit since the high is so immediate. One answer could be personal choice–some people prefer the experience of edibles. Edibles could also alleviate any problems a person has with consuming smoke, and coughing fits are essentially eliminated.

Also, edibles are inconspicuous. A person eating won’t invite attention the way someone smoking will. This is probably most important to medicinal marijuana patients. Amanda Reiman, policy manager of the California Drug Policy Alliance, explains that “people using marijuana medicinally for long-lasting chronic pain often prefer oral ingestion because it lasts longer and they don’t have to consume as often.” Bob Eschino, a partner at Medically Correct, says “They’re discreet, and it’s an easy way to dose the medication…especially here in Colorado, where you can’t smoke in public, you can still medicate with edibles.”

Edible Products

The sky seems to be the limit. Marijuana comes in the form of cookies, gummies, brownies, caramels, hard candies, chocolate bars, Rice Krispies treats, and beyond. Colorado dispensaries estimate edibles account for 20-40 percent of sales. Nearly five million edibles were sold in Colorado in 2014. For example, Dixie Elixirs, a popular cannabis products store, sold THC-infused mints, truffles, dew drops, whipped cream, coffee, and tea all in a variety of flavors. There are plenty of companies getting onboard. In an interview just this past February, Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield of Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream even stated they would experiment with cannabis-infused ice cream if legal hurdles were removed.

Health Concerns

A major issue when ingesting marijuana is a person’s inability to predict the right amount to take. In order to receive the intended effect, there are many factors to take into consideration. Dosage is based on the type of marijuana, tolerance, body weight, gender, body chemistry, and more. The issue is further exacerbated by the fact that an edible’s effect can take an hour to two hours to reach its height. This prompts impatient people to ingest more.

The Cannabist, which seeks to educate readers about marijuana, recommends the following steps to be safe. First, a user must acknowledge his or her drug history and tolerance and recognize body factors like body type and gender when ascertaining the proper dosage. Also, it’s recommended when eating an edible to have a full stomach or to do so while also consuming food. Next, a user should measure by milligrams. A unit is generally ten milligrams of cannabinoids. A user should stick to a brand that works for him after lightly experimenting with a variety. Be patient, and cautious.

Controversy arose after a string of tragic incidents occurred involving edible marijuana. Levy Thamba, a Wyoming college student, committed suicide by jumping from a hotel balcony after eating an entire marijuana-infused cookie. The recommend dosage was probably only a portion of that cookie. Lack of portion control knowledge is a problem. Al Bronstein, a physician and medical director of the Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center, explains “[portion control is] difficult to do, practically. I know, myself: I wish I could only eat one-eighth of a Snickers bar and leave the rest for later.” Another concern is that consumers don’t realize that ten milligrams refers to one-tenth of a candy bar, for example, as opposed to the entire thing.

A Colorado man was accused of killing his wife after consuming pot candy. This man is thought to also have been on prescription drugs. As with alcohol, it is extremely dangerous to mix marijuana and prescription drugs.

Another major concern is children accidentally ingesting edibles that look like their non-marijuana-infused counterparts. According to a 2013 JAMA Pediatrics study, Children’s Hospital Colorado saw a “significant spike in the number of children treated for accidentally eating marijuana-laced treats” after the new marijuana-based laws were set in place. In one month, three seventh graders were hospitalized after ingesting marijuana-infused brownies.

The culmination of these events prompted public outcry that inspired new and stricter regulations on the selling and packaging of edible marijuana

Laws and Regulations

Stricter laws and regulations in Colorado went into effect on February 1, 2015 aimed at standardizing the labeling, packaging, and potency of edibles.

The recommend amount to take is one unit or ten milligrams. According to the new law, to avoid any consumer confusion, the serving portion must be transparently clear and marked “in a way that enables a reasonable person to intuitively determine how much of the product constitutes a single serving of active THC.” For example, Dixie Elixir’s marijuana-infused mints used to come in a loose tin of ten, with ten milligrams of THC each. They are now wrapped individually and sold at 16 mints of five milligrams apiece.

Packaging must now be child-resistant. Packages must be “constructed to be significantly difficult for children under five years of age to open…opaque so that the packaging does not allow the product to be seen without opening the packaging material…[and] resealable for any product intended for more than a single use.”

Labels must be more informative and give clear warning signs such as “This product is unlawful outside the State of Colorado” and/or “The intoxicating effects of this product may be delayed by two or more hours.” This specifically targets overdoses caused by impatience and overconsumption while a user is waiting for the drug to take effect.

The Marijuana Enforcement Agency now provides incentives for companies to sell ten milligram-portioned products. Manufacturers will face larger obstacles for production of ten to 100 milligram products.

Other Laws

Marijuana is still prohibited under federal law. This means you can still be fired for recreational use, and it can also lead to the loss of benefits, public housing, and financial aid.

Driving under the influence of marijuana will always be illegal, like alcohol. In Colorado, you can transport an unopened original package, but never across state lines. It is also forbidden to fly with marijuana even if you are traveling to another state with legalized marijuana.

You can obtain marijuana from a licensed dispensary or another adult over 21 as long as no money is exchanged. It is illegal to sell or resell any marijuana.

Alaska and Washington have also legalized marijuana for adult use with similar regulations. Washington D.C. and Oregon are following suit, but certain aspects of regulation have yet to go into effect. A total of 23 states allow marijuana for medical necessity.

Conclusion

Education and clear information are both vital. The tragedies surrounding edible marijuana seem like they most likely could have been avoided if these regulations were initially set in place, but it is hard to say for sure. Legalized marijuana, including edibles and other products, remains a new territory. New consumers need to learn what is safe and right for them as a learning curve is involved. If you are going to try it, it is important to be as informed as possible and in a safe environment. In the future, additional states may follow suit and legalize marijuana, and these questions will remain essential to keeping everyone as safe as possible.

Resources

Primary

Colorado Department of Revenue: Retail Marijuana Regulations

Additional

ABC News: Why Marijuana Edibles Might Be More Dangerous Than Smoking

Cannabist: Get Educated About Edibles: Eight Tips For Getting the Right Dose

Cannabist: New Rules in Effect for Colorado Marijuana Edibles Feb. 1

CBS: Colorado Moves to Curb Dangers of Edible Pot Products

BoingBoing: Everything You Need to Know about Marijuana Edibles

Consumer Responsibly: Know the Law

Denver Post: More Than 15 Months in, Pot-infused Edibles Still Confound

Dixie Elixirs: Products

Huffington Post: Ben & Jerry’s Founders Are Totally Down With Weed Ice Cream When It’s Legal

Jessica McLaughlin

Jessica McLaughlin is a graduate of the University of Maryland with a degree in English Literature and Spanish. She works in the publishing industry and recently moved back to the DC area after living in NYC. Contact Jessica at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Marijuana Edibles: A New Challenge for Regulators appeared first on Law Street.

There’s a hot, new startup in town and it’s solving a problem that has long gone unanswered–how to get medical marijuana delivered to you. It’s called Eaze and it’s being promoted as Uber for weed. As more and more states legalize marijuana, and many more allow the substance to be used for medicinal purposes, the commercial industry is going to continue booming. Eaze wants a piece of that–and from the looks of it, so do Eaze’s many investors.

The San Francisco-based company has already gotten quite a bit of funding. In its series A funding round–essentially its first big push for venture capital money–it received a very impressive grand total of $10 million. One of the more prominent investors is Casa Verde Capital. For those of you for whom that doesn’t ring a bell, that’s the name of the venture capital fund run by Snoop Dogg. Although this was Eaze’s first major funding push, it also received $1.5 million at the beginning of last year to get started.

Calling Eaze the Uber of weed, or at least medical marijuana, seems pretty much spot on. Users can order the drug with the click of a button, and Eaze promises a ten minute or less turn-around time. The company connects already-existing dispensaries with customers, and has a fleet of drivers ready to transport the orders. Eaze also allows customers to look through what each dispensary offers, including lab results, in order to find a good match between customer and product.

The business certainly has some kinks to work out, but they seem to be relatively minor. TechCrunch’s Ryan Lawler tried it out over the weekend and pointed out that right now it only accepts cash, which can be viewed as inconvenience for anyone who operates mostly in plastic.

Eaze isn’t the only business trying to capitalize on medical marijuana, however. There are plenty of others that have similar ideas and business plans. Some of the more well known include Nestdrop, Meadow, Grassp, Dave, and Canary, each of which have slightly different business models, platforms, and markets.

Moreover, that’s only considering the weed delivery industry. Other pot-based startups have already begun to try to break off chunks of what will inevitably end up being a gigantic market. For example, Privateer Holdings, based in Seattle, recently raised $75 million in funding for its many endeavors in the marijuana market. Privateer Holdings already has a hold on the Canadian medical marijuana market, and plans on “branding” marijuana to sell in the United States. One of those brands will be “Marley Natural“–based on the late Bob Marley. The business will involve his family and estate.

Now that the tide really does seem to be turning both for medical and recreational weed, it seems like there’s no good reason for funders not to back some of these projects. After all, legal marijuana has been named the fastest growing industry in the United States. A company like Eaze has the potential to become massively profitable, given the convenience of having items delivered to your door, as well as its ability to prevent any sort of “high” driving. Snoop Dogg’s investment is probably a pretty good one, and with that kind of backing, we should expect to see Eaze expand with this growing market.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New Snoop Dogg-Backed Startup Brings Weed to Your Door appeared first on Law Street.

This week’s most popular stories ran the full gamut from the sublimely ridiculously to the deadly serious. The number one article of the week, by Ashley Shaw, follows the story of a Nebraska man who tried to fool cops by labeling his weed “not weed;” the number two article, from Alexis Evans, takes a look into the world of people taking the law into their own hands and patrolling their streets as private cops; and the number three article, from Anneliese Mahoney, recounts Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s divisive speech to Congress.

#1 Man’s ‘Not Weed’ Label Does Not Fool Nebraska Cops

Jordan Meir of Nebraska thought he found the perfect way to disguise his stash–just mark it up as ‘not weed.’ After all, labeling it as weed is a sure fire way to get caught, so the opposite must be the solution, right? Maybe in the rest of the world, but the cops in Nebraska must be extra smart because this ingenious scheme actually did not end up working in their neck of the woods. Read full article here.

#2 Special Conservators of the Peace: Private Police Forces of One

If he looks like a cop, talks like cop, and acts like a cop, he’s probably a cop right? Well, sort of. A growing trend shows civilians are forming private police forces of one to patrol our streets. Armed with a gun and a badge, they can write citations and make arrests. The kicker? The whole thing is completely legal. Read full article here.

#3 Netanyahu’s Speech Shows Israel Isn’t Always a Bipartisan Issue

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the United States Congress today. The speech was much anticipated after weeks of political back and forth regarding the invitation extended to Netanyahu by Speaker of the House John Boehner; however, Netanyahu did end up giving his speech as planned, and it focused heavily on Iran and the ongoing American-Iranian talks over nuclear power. That being said, in some ways the speech is less interesting from an international politics standpoint as it is from a domestic policy window. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Jordan Meir of Nebraska thought he found the perfect way to disguise his stash–just mark it up as ‘not weed.’ After all, labeling it as weed is a sure fire way to get caught, so the opposite must be the solution, right? Maybe in the rest of the world, but the cops in Nebraska must be extra smart because this ingenious scheme actually did not end up working in their neck of the woods.

Twenty-one-year-old Meir was cruising around town one night when he was pulled over for suspected drunk driving. He was not worried. Sure, he was riding dirty, but in such a way that he knew he could not be caught. So when the officer saw a sour cream container labeled ‘not weed,’ Meir was probably as surprised as everyone reading his story that, in the words of the cop, containers labeled ‘not weed’ are what they in Nebraska call “a clue.”

Courtesy of Giphy.

When the cop opened it up, it turned out that the container had indeed accidently been mislabeled. Inside was 11 ounces of marijuana. (This really could have been an innocent mistake, by the way. If Meir is anything like me, he probably just reuses containers when he is done with them. When this specific container was first labeled, it probably was not stashing weed, and he just forgot to re-label when he was done.)

Courtesy of Giphy.

Meir admitted that it was his–are you surprised that he was so honest? Whatever gave you the impression that he was a liar?–and was fined $100 and arrested on suspicion of drunken driving.

It is a pity that the world has become so dishonest that nobody can trust anybody anymore. I dream of a day when we can see someone’s sour cream tub labeled “not weed,” and just take it for a tub of pot-free sour cream instead of being suspicious and untrusting. I want to live in a world where we can rely on others and take what they tell at face value. I want honesty and trust to be our guiding forces.

But until that day, I probably need to go re-label some sour cream jars…

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Man’s ‘Not Weed’ Label Does Not Fool Nebraska Cops appeared first on Law Street.

I’m writing this from Washington D.C. As many of you know, as of 12:00am Thursday, recreational marijuana became legal in our Nation’s Capital. Things will never be the same. Our Congresspeople are lounging on the steps of the Capitol, smoking joints. (This hasn’t affected their productivity–it has remained dismal.) All of the CVSes are out of Doritos. The National Mall looks like modern day Woodstock. It’s the end of this city as we know it.

Just kidding. Everything is still normal. Although it did snow in D.C.–a rarity for late February–I don’t think that had to do anything with recreational marijuana becoming legal. No, everything here in D.C. is basically the same. The line at Starbucks was still too long. The metro is a fiery pit of despair. My hallway still smells like weed–although I guess we shouldn’t be as surprised by that one.

Regardless though, nothing has changed, but it is now legal to smoke, possess, and grow recreational pot in D.C., with some obviously pretty heavy restrictions. But, given D.C.’s status, it’s kind of a mess.

D.C. is a unique place, to say the least. For a long time there was almost no ability to self-govern–an attitude left over from the idea that D.C. was to be the city where our federal government was located and little else. We did receive some limited home rule in the 1970s, but there’s still a lot in D.C. that’s controlled by everyone’s favorite group of whiny toddlers–Congress.

Now, weed became legal because a pretty sizable majority of the population of the District of Columbia voted to legalize it during the 2014 midterms. The ballot measure was named “Initiative 71.” However, unlike the states that have approved the legalization of recreational marijuana, D.C. has had to wait to figure out if our votes actually allow us to control the legislation of our own city. (I’m clearly not bitter.) Basically, we had to wait and see if Congress would step in and stop the legalization of weed. It didn’t–or at least not in so many words, though we’ll get to that later–so we’re in the clear, right? If only. There are still a lot of complicated, absurd things happening here in D.C. with regard to the legalization of marijuana, and here are a few of the most pressing:

D.C. Has a Lot of Federal Land

D.C. has two kind of distinctive parts to it–there’s federal land and then there’s the land that’s occupied by the city and by private residences, businesses, and buildings. Initiative 71 obviously only legalized weed on non-federal land. Although you can’t smoke in public anywhere, you can have it on your person without it being against the law.

While that sounds pretty straightforward, it’s not. In D.C. Twenty-nine percent of the land is actually federal–including parks, monuments, and buildings. With a few exceptions, every time that two diagonal streets meet, a park, square, or circle is formed. And all of those grassy areas are federal land–meaning they’re not good “grassy” areas, if you catch my drift. Here’s what the map of D.C. looks like if you mark all the federal land–it’s in green in the map below.

Watch your step. Weed will be legal in D.C. but not on 29% of city that is federal land. Map http://t.co/5tOfIZi33Zpic.twitter.com/kKOWCKy3bN

— Mary Pat Flaherty (@marypatflaherty) February 24, 2015

So unless you want to memorize that map, be careful, and be prepared take some weird routes home.

D.C.’s Weed Legalization Expects Everyone to be Very Generous

So, what D.C. legalized is actually kind of weird–it didn’t set up any sort of parameters to sell recreational marijuana. So you can have recreational weed, but you can’t buy or sell it. You can, however, gift it, or receive it as a gift. So, there will be a lot of “gifts” happening, presumably.

Congress is Still Freaking Out

The situation with Congress right now is very complicated. There’s basically an argument over whether or not what D.C. is doing is legal. In a federal spending bill, Congress had included a measure preventing D.C. from using money to “enact” marijuana legalization. That, however, isn’t what D.C. is doing. There really isn’t any money being used–not arresting people for possessing marijuana doesn’t cost anything. Furthermore, it may have already been “enacted” when it passed in November, so that measure, passed later, wouldn’t apply. It just depends a lot on your definition of enacted. Congress could still act, but right now it’s all up in the air.

So, that’s the news from here in the District. Whether or not legalized marijuana is here to stay is yet to be seen. Everyone’s confused, avoiding public parks, and Congress is being a pain, so it’s basically just business as usual here.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Absurdity of D.C. Marijuana Legalization appeared first on Law Street.

It’s that time of the year again: yesterday the Obama administration released a proposed budget for the next fiscal year. As always, it made waves, sparked plenty of political statements from both sides of the aisle, and will take a while to get sorted out. There are some interesting provisions included in this budget though–one of the most notable is that it may allow Washington D.C. to finally move forward with the recreational marijuana legalization initiative that was passed in November.

Obama’s support for Washington D.C.’s ability to legalize recreational marijuana is incredibly subtle. In fact, it’s so subtle that it pretty much hinges on one word included in the budget: federal.

How can one small word have such a large impact on the ability of a city with roughly 650,000 people to enact a law? Well, there’s a lot of background that needs to be considered. D.C. residents voted to legalize recreational marijuana in November, with a huge margin–roughly 65 percent–in favor. The way that D.C.’s ability to pass laws is set up is very complicated, and has changed numerous times, but at the end of the day, Congress usually has final say.

Many Republicans, as well as some others in Congress, were unhappy with the idea of the nation’s capitol legalizing marijuana, so when Congress made a funding bill, it included wording that pretty much blocked D.C. from moving forward with the initiative. It stated that no funds could be used to enact the legalized marijuana initiative in the District of Columbia. Republican House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz explained the logic behind the block, saying:

Looking at the Constitution, Washington, D.C. is different. They are not a state and we have a role to play and the Congress passed this. I respect the people who live here and most everything passes through without a problem. But the idea that this is going to be a haven for pot smoking, I can’t support that

But Obama’s budget deviated from that slightly with the use of that one word: “federal.” Obama’s budget states that no federal funds can be used to implement the law. The distinction there is it doesn’t preclude D.C. from using local funds to do so.

There’s obviously no guarantee that the changed language will end up having any effect on whether or not legalized recreational marijuana actually happens in Washington D.C. However, it does show Obama’s continued support for the autonomy of Washington residents. This last July, Obama became the first sitting president to endorse D.C. statehood, saying:

I think I’ve long believed that D.C. pays — folks in D.C. pay taxes like everybody else. They contribute to the overall well-being of the country like everybody else. They should be represented [in Congress] like everybody else. And it’s not as if Washington, D.C., is not big enough compared to other states. There has been a long movement to get D.C. statehood, and I’ve been for it for quite some time.

While there are a lot of debates over D.C. statehood, and the exact rights that should be afforded to the city, the fact that Obama supports the ability for the city to do as its residents please has been made pretty crystal clear. The insertion of the word “federal” in the budget as it relates to the legalization of marijuana in D.C., as small as it may seem, is just the most recent example.

There’s no way to make any sort of clear prediction what will happen with the D.C. effort to legalize recreational marijuana–there are just too many moving parts right now. If Obama’s budget remains as is, and prohibits federal but not local funds from being used, recreational marijuana could soon be a fixture in D.C. The ball is now in Congress’s court.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Obama’s Budget Could Help D.C. Implement Legalized Marijuana appeared first on Law Street.

While you were grinding away last week, you might have missed these three great articles. The #1 story of the week came from Anneliese Mahoney with her take on Fox News guest Steven Emerson’s totally fabricated “facts” about Muslim residents of Birmingham, England; Alexis Evans made her debut with the #2 article of the week–a smart takedown of rapper 2 Chainz debate with TV host Nancy Grace over marijuana policy; and the #3 article of the week came from Morgan McMurray’s coverage of anti-Muslim sentiment on Twitter. ICYMI, check out the best of the week from Law Street.

#1 No Surprise: Fox News Just Makes Up Facts Now

We all know that Fox News interprets the second part of its name very loosely, but it hit a new low this weekend when it allowed guest Steven Emerson to blatantly make stuff up. Read the full article here.

#2 2 Chainz vs. Nancy Grace: Rapper Wins Debate Over Legalizing Pot

Is this real life? HLN viewers were gifted TV comedic gold the other night in the form of a marijuana debate between the always controversial Nancy Grace and “Fed Watching” rapper 2 Chainz. Grace, whose Wikipedia controversy section alone is cause enough for pause, brought 2 Chainz, who was arrested in 2013 for possessing a weed grinder, on her show to discuss the legalization of marijuana. Funnily enough, it was 2 Chainz who upstaged Grace with actual valid points while she rebutted by showing him irrelevant videos of parents forcing toddlers to smoke pot. Read the full article here.

#3 J.K. Rowling Has Perfect Response to Anti-Muslim Tweets

We are now nearly two weeks into the new year and have already had a heavy dose of tragedy. Unless you have been cut off from internet and television over the past few days, you’ve heard about the Charlie Hebdo shootings. Regardless of what your opinion is of that publication, the murder of those people was an act of terror and an infringement on their rights as humans and French citizens. Read the full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

It’s still the holiday season, and during this time of the year it’s easy to forget to check the news. Luckily, Law Street has you covered with this week’s edition of “In Case You Missed It.” Our top story last week covered the ongoing legal battle between Colorado, Nebraska, and Oklahoma over Colorado’s legalization of recreational marijuana, written by Anneliese Mahoney. Our number two post, by Lexine DeLuc,a should help any Serial fans out there with their withdrawals–it’s a great collection of parodies inspired by the hit podcast. Finally, rounding out the list was a story from blogger Katherine Fabian on how to spot fake handbags during your holiday gift shopping. ICYMI: Check out what you missed on Law Street last week.

#1 Nebraska and Oklahoma Sue Colorado Over Marijuana Legalization

Colorado voted to legalize recreational marijuana in 2012, and officially started selling it in the beginning of this year. Now, almost a year later, Colorado is experiencing some backlash for its choice to legalize. Two of Colorado’s neighbors–Nebraska and Oklahoma–are suing the state because of the impact of legal marijuana within their borders. Read the full article here.

#2 Five Parodies to Get You Through Serial Withdrawal

Serial‘s first season has ended and if you’re feeling a little separation anxiety, here are the top five parodies to help fill that void. The list includes selections from Saturday Night Live, Funny or Die, SubmissionsOnlyTV, and even a few parodies with multiple episodes. Read the full article here.

#3 Holiday Gift Guide: How to Authenticate a Designer Handbag

It’s almost 2015 and there is now a plethora of consignment sites to get your second-hand designer goods. But as great as sites like Ebay, Amazon, and the new Alibaba are, sometimes sellers aren’t always honest when they claim their items are authentic. So to make sure that you don’t get duped (like my poor brother did when he ordered those fake Nikes from China) I’ve put together a handy guide on how to spot a fake. Read the full article here.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Colorado voted to legalize recreational marijuana in 2012, and officially started selling it in the beginning of this year. Now, almost a year later, Colorado is experiencing some backlash for its choice to legalize. Two of Colorado’s neighbors–Nebraska and Oklahoma–are suing the state because of the impact of legal marijuana within their borders.

Nebraska and Oklahoma have filed a lawsuit petitioning the Supreme Court to declare Colorado’s legalization of marijuana unconstitutional. Leading the charge are Nebraska and Oklahoma’s Attorneys General: John Bruning and E. Scott Pruitt.

The reason that they’re bringing it before the court is that marijuana is still illegal under federal law. Nebraska and Oklahoma’s constitutional argument has to do with the supremacy clause, which essentially says that federal law supersedes state law. Still it’s going to be a tough argument to make, given that Nebraska and Oklahoma are trying to make changes to what goes on within another state. Cases that center on disputes between states are pretty rare–although they do definitely fall within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Since 1960, only 140 such cases have been brought in front of the Supreme Court, and they’ve refused to hear about half of those. The court has not yet said whether or not they’ll consider this one.

While Nebraska and Oklahoma are making a constitutional argument, there are more practical reasons why they don’t want Colorado to have legalized weed anymore. Both states share borders with Colorado, and weed keeps creeping over them. Both states are claiming that this illegal influx is making it difficult to enforce their individual anti-marijuana polices, as well as putting stress on their law enforcement personnel. That’s understandable–there is some evidence to indicate that weed is coming out of Colorado and into other states. As the New York Daily News pointed out:

But the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area wrote in a recent report that the amount of Colorado pot seized on highways increased from an annual average of 2,763 pounds between 2005 and 2008 to a yearly average of 3,690 pounds from 2009 to 2013. The weed was headed for at least 40 different states.

That being said, there’s no evidence to suggest that the increase is directly tied to Colorado’s decision to legalize weed. After all, during the majority of the years included in that report, weed wasn’t even legal in Colorado. As Morgan Fox from the Marijuana Policy Project put it,

Marijuana was widely available in Nebraska and Oklahoma well before Colorado made it legal. It would continue to be available even if Colorado were to all of sudden make it illegal again.

Colorado has every intention of fighting the lawsuit–Attorney General John Suthers has even said that it’s without merit.  While it’s still uncertain whether or not the justices will hear this particular case, it’s an interesting look at the ways in which the ability of different states to make new laws affects their neighbors.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Nebraska and Oklahoma Sue Colorado Over Marijuana Legalization appeared first on Law Street.

The midterms are finally over (thank God/the universe/Oprah) so now we can all go back to real life. Just kidding — it’s practically presidential election time. Your attention span and patience are ready for that, right? Well before you get into that, take a look at some of the top stores from Law Street last week that you might have missed in all the excitement. It was a clean sweep for writer Anneliese Mahoney who wrote all three of the top articles on Law Street last week. Number one is Mahoney’s take on Taylor Swift’s latest album and her decision to pull all her work from popular streaming music site Spotify; number two is an in-depth look at the three states with major marijuana legislation on last Tuesday’s ballots; and number three was a shout out who is generally accepted as the country’s youngest new elected official, Saira Blair of West Virginia. ICYMI, take a look at Law Street’s Best of the Week.

#1: Taylor Swift and Spotify: Never Ever, Ever Getting Back Together?

Taylor Swift made waves this week when she pulled all of her music from the popular streaming site Spotify. The 24-year-old singer-songwriter’s newest album, “1989,” was never put on the site, and her older music can no longer be found there. Read full article here.

#2: States to Watch Today: Marijuana on the Ballot in Oregon, Alaska, and DC

It’s been a truly whirlwind few years for marijuana legalization. In 2012, voters in Washington and Colorado voted to legalize marijuana use in those states. Others continue to decriminalize marijuana and allow its use for medical purposes. Today Oregon, Alaska, and the District of Columbia will vote on whether or not to legalize marijuana. How do these laws stack up? Read full article here.

#3: Saira Blair Youngest Elected Official in America: Snaps for Her

Saira Blair is an 18-year-old West Virginia University freshman majoring in economics. She’s also believed to be the youngest elected lawmaker in the United States. At 17, Blair actually beat a 66-year-old Republican incumbent in a primary, and on Tuesday she beat a 44-year-old Attorney, Democrat Layne Diehl. She will represent a district of just under 20,000 people located in the West Virginia panhandle, close to Maryland, as one of 100 members of the Virginia House of Delegates. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

It’s official. Two more states — Oregon and Alaska — have joined Colorado and Washington in legalizing marijuana.

Oregon’s Measure 91 had a convincing victory, winning approximately 54 percent of the vote. Like Washington and Colorado, Oregon will now allow regulated and taxed sales of marijuana to adults. Stores will probably come sometime in 2016, a timeline consistent with those that Colorado and Washington set for themselves previously.

Ballot Measure 2 passed in Alaska by a margin of roughly 52-48 percent. In 90 days it will become the law of the state, and the state will create mechanisms to regulate the use and sale of legalized recreational marijuana. Alaska has long had a lax view on marijuana laws — a 1975 court decision legalized very small amounts in the home, although it was incredibly narrow and not really followed. In addition, Alaskans have tried a few times to get legal marijuana on the ballot, voting on the issue in 2000 and 2004. While both measures obviously failed, Alaska has certainly had a storied and complicated history with marijuana legalization.

And then, of course, there’s D.C. Our nation’s capital legalized recreational marijuana use, although not the sale of marijuana. There’s confusion over what this actually means, though. Congress technically has oversight over the District, and it can take measures to basically make sure that nothing ever comes out of the passage of this initiative. D.C.’s ability to actually govern itself and the people who live within its borders is notoriously limited. No one can do anything to stop the 735,000 people who live in Alaska from legalizing marijuana, but D.C.’s 650,000 are prohibited by officials they didn’t even elect. That’s why there’s a big question mark next to D.C. — no one really knows what will happen here.

As fascinating as the wins were for the future of marijuana legalization, it’s also interesting to look at what they mean for the overall scheme of American politics. Democrats lost last night on pretty much every level. Some marijuana legalization was one of the very few things that Democrats support that made it through. But what’s important to remember about marijuana legalization is that it’s not so much a Democratic value, it’s also a very Libertarian issue. There are reasons for both Democrats and Libertarians to support marijuana legalization, which may have been one of the reasons that it passed. It’s a strange phenomenon, as 538‘s Ben Casselman tweeted:

So voters want a higher minimum wage, legal pot, abortion access and GOP representation. Ok then.

— Ben Casselman (@bencasselman) November 5, 2014

So, the success of marijuana legalization in an election where so many other Democratic measures failed could mean a few things. It could mean that the Libertarian wing of the Republican party is really becoming sort of a dark horse among Millennials who are frustrated with the way that Democrats have been running the country, but aren’t willing to align with the Republican base or the Tea Party on most social issues. Or it could just mean that Oregon, Alaska, and the District of Columbia really enjoy getting high and don’t mind the increase in taxes that comes with the legalization of marijuana. Either way, it will be interesting to see if anything at all comes of the measure in D.C., as well as which states will be next to hop on the marijuana legalization bus.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Oregon and Alaska Legalize Marijuana appeared first on Law Street.

As per usual, it’s Friday, so it’s time to scroll through a slideshow of all the weird crimes that have happened. I’ve been told it’s an excellent way to procrastinate your way to five o’clock, so enjoy this list of the top weird arrests of the week!

[SlideDeck2 id=27142 ress=1]

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Rama via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

The Hershey Company has settled a lawsuit and simultaneously protected millions of little children across the country from becoming future cannabis users.

The maker of the legendary chocolate Kiss, Peppermint Patty, and (my personal favorite) Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup settled a suit against marijuana candy manufacturer TinctureBelle LLC. Filed this summer, the suit was in response to TinctureBelle’s “medicated gourmet edibles,” many of which boast names allegedly mimicking those of the Hershey Company’s treats.

TinctureBelle is clever, I’ll give them that. Some of its product names included “Hashees,” “Ganga Joy,” and “Hashheath.” Who doesn’t enjoy a good pun? Well, Hershey. The Pennsylvania-based company wasn’t laughing when it sued the Colorado-based company for trademark infringement.

The purpose of a trademark is to avoid confusion among consumers between two products. Hershey argued that similarities in product names would do just that and expressed concern over maintaining their wholesome reputation as a company whose biggest fans are children.

“The Hershey Company’s trademarks are iconic and among our company’s most important assets,” explained Hershey’s spokesman Jeff Beckman. “They are recognized by consumers around the world, and our company has spent as many as 120 years building the trust and equity in these iconic brands. Consumers depend on our brand names to represent a level of quality and dependability. These entities have used Hershey’s trademarks, without authorization, to trade on Hershey’s goodwill and reputation, and to draw greater attention to their products; these unauthorized uses of Hershey’s trademarks also make the products more appealing to children.”

TinctureBelle must now refrain from using names that infringe on Hershey products. According to the Denver Business Journal, this includes the destruction of “all remaining specimens of each product, including without limitation cartons, containers, packaging, wrappers, labels, displays and any other material.”

TinctureBelle owner Char Mayes released a statement asserting that “the lawsuit from Hershey came as a huge surprise to us, because we changed our entire label line approximately six months ago, long before these allegations surfaced.”

With one Google search of TinctureBelle’s products, you will find that the packaging does resemble that of Hershey’s delicious treats. It’s pretty obvious.

TinctureBelle now begins the walk of shame with this settlement. It has agreed to disable an Internet site that had been designed to raise money for the legal battle against Hershey. It promised not to register trademark for the names involved in the suit and will have to pay $25,000 per trademark breach of the settlement going forward.

It seems as though Hershey’s legal department is actually quite busy lately. TinctureBelle isn’t the only company in its path of legal destruction. In June it filed a suit against Conscious Care Cooperative over a similar marijuana-based candy issue. And in September, the Hershey Company filed a lawsuit against LBB Imports LCC over trademark infringement of foreign candy.

Meanwhile, Hershey is playing defense against Mars, which accused the candy company of copying its red-colored packaging.

October’s Halloween holiday can mean many things — spookiness and fear, high candy sales, and now salty executives caught up in some sweet trademark hell.

—

Alexandra Badalamenti (@AlexBadalamenti) is a Jersey girl and soon-to-be graduate of Fordham University in Lincoln Center. She plans to enroll in law school next year to study Entertainment Law. On any given day, you’ll find her with big blonde hair, high heels, tall Nashville dreams, and holding a newspaper or venti latte.

Featured image courtesy of [slgckgc via Flikr]

The post Hershey’s Settles Trademark Suit With Hashees Marijuana Edibles Maker appeared first on Law Street.

The national attitude towards pot has been evolving for some time now. Marijuana has now officially been decriminalized in a number of states, and even legalized in two: Oregon and Washington. But even as our national view towards marijuana changes, our misperceptions don’t necessarily follow suit. This split has led to a couple funny stories making the national news this week.

One directly relates to those aforementioned stereotypes. A video in Ankeny, Iowa has been making its rounds on the internet. In it, a police officer tries to search a driver’s car, because apparently, people who play disc golf also smoke weed.

Basically, the driver was stopped for an equipment violation, and the officer warns the driver about headlight use. Then he saw something horrifying and totally weed-related in the car. It wasn’t drugs, it wasn’t paraphernalia, it was…a disc golf bag!

The officer goes on to interrogate the stopped driver about the relationship between disc golf and pot. After that exchange goes back and forth for a few minutes, the officer says, “you understand you’re free to go and everything but you wouldn’t have a problem with me looking through your car?” The man, of course, replies no, because that’s both unreasonable and illegal. The officer then tries to imply that because he won’t let his car be searched, the driver in question does have weed in the car. Throughout the entire exchange both men involved stayed relatively calm and pleasant, despite their clear disagreement and frustration. Most importantly, the driver was right to refuse the car search–according to Drake Law Professor Robert Rigg:

The Iowa Supreme Court has held that under the Iowa constitution you can’t convert an equipment violation stop into a general search. and any consent that would have been given would have been invalid in any event.

The video footage really is worth a full listen, if for hilarity purposes only:

In a completely separate incident, but definitely equally amusing story, a man in Georgia had his garden raided last week because he was growing something almost as deadly as disc golf–okra. Police were using helicopters to survey for marijuana, when they saw what they thought was pot in the Atlanta man’s garden. They showed up at his door, heavily armed and with a K-9 unit. They eventually discovered that the plants were not marijuana, apologized, and left.

It turned out to be okra, which like marijuana is a green plant, with leaves. Unlike marijuana, okra is really delicious when deep fried, and a popular vegetable in many dishes in the southern United States.

Obviously, these are both totally silly stories. But they also are telling, at least in the sense that in these two cases, police resources were used for what ended up being kind of ridiculous incidences. Yes, marijuana use should not be encouraged in places where it is illegal, but there’s also something to be said for making mountains out of molehills. Interrogating a man for carrying a bag of frisbees, or bringing a K-9 unit to deal with a man who was just growing veggies seems like a bit of overkill. As our nation changes its views on marijuana, seemingly state by state, it seems more and more likely that these kinds of disconnects and misperceptions will happen. So the moral of these stories: hide your frisbees and okra, they may not be worth the trouble.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Taber Andrew Bain via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Frisbees and Okra: The New Gateway Drugs appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

The Berkley City Council in California has unanimously approved an ordinance requiring pot dispensaries donate 2 percent of their product to “patients” making under $32,000 a year. A single person is eligible for this “welfare weed” if they make $32,000 or under, but if that person has a family, the family income has to be $46,000 or under. This ordinance will go into effect in August 2015, but I imagine there will be some pushback over the next year about whether this should actually go into effect or not. I mean really, allowing free weed to those already on welfare? We all might as well quit our jobs or take on low-paying jobs and wait for our handouts. This is getting a little bit ridiculous. How many people in Berkley actually need free weed!?!

There are only three licensed dispensaries in the Berkley city limits and one of those dispensaries, House of Compassion, claims they already had:

[A] program in place that allocated a pound of marijuana for giveaway each week. The pound is broken up into 3.5-gram parcels and distributed on Mondays to anyone who can prove that they are on welfare (using an EBT card or other form of proof) and have been certified to use medical marijuana.

So why the need to create an ordinance if one location already has this program and there are only three dispensaries in the city? I don’t feel right about the reasoning behind this ordinance or the idea that marijuana should be free to anyone. And to be honest, I don’t think it should be legalized.

I don’t believe that every medical marijuana cardholder is someone who is genuinely sick or needing it for medicinal purposes. Back in 2011, the top three reasons physicians gave for recommending medical marijuana were “back/spine/neck pain” at 31 percent, “sleep disorders” at 16 percent and “anxiety/depression” at 13 percent. That is a total of 60 percent. SIXTY PERCENT! Now, I understand that many of these patients probably went through a very frustrating period of trial and error with other medical remedies, like pills, and nothing worked. But realistically how many of these “patients” were telling the truth? I understand, for the most part, the benefits of medical marijuana for some, but not everyone that has an ailment. I get the need for medical marijuana for people diagnosed with cancer or HIV/AIDS–those are diseases that can really take a toll on your body. But the “I need pot because I’m depressed” thing doesn’t sit well with me. Anyone can claim they are depressed or anxious or have certain levels of pain when in reality they don’t. Symptoms can be faked and I know people who have done so, which is why I am so cynical about the whole thing.

My biggest issue with the Berkley City Council is that they basically have said that if you need pot and are on welfare you might as well get it for free. They are allowing the lazy to be even lazier.

In Texas, the Texas Senate passed a bill last year that approved drug testing of welfare applicants so I can’t imagine the ideals of the Berkley City Council will breach the Texas boarder anytime soon. Which is great. Legalizing marijuana is probably one of the most reckless things a state can do. I love the fact that the Texas Senate allows for drug testing and if someone fails that drug test three times, no more welfare for them! “Taxpayer money should not be used to subsidize someone’s drug habit,” read a statement made by Texas State Sen. Jane Nelson, (R-Flower Mound.) I could not agree more!

I’ve seen the functioning pothead who will smoke a blunt everyday but still be able to go to work and act like a contributing member of society. I’ve seen the pothead who will sit at home, smoke out of their glass pipe in front of the computer and play mindless video games all day long, contributing nothing to their own lives or to society. I also recently had a friend tell me that she wished her husband would stop smoking pot but she recognizes that if he doesn’t smoke his four or five blunts throughout the day he turns into a completely different person, so she accepts his decision to smoke weed everyday, all day long. Dependence. Addiction. Altered mood. These are things that marijuana does to a person and it isn’t something that we should condone.

Marijuana’s second hand smoke is said to be very dangerous to children and pregnant women. Obviously there isn’t a whole lot of testing that has been done on the subject because of the dangers but there have been a few and the results appear to be compelling. According to studies, just like any other illicit drug, marijuana and secondhand marijuana smoke can cause premature labor, low birth weights and even neurological damage. There are people reckless enough out there that will disregard warnings and expose their loved ones to the second hand effects of marijuana. This short, but very interesting and to the point, article really brings to light what can happen to young children that are exposed to it in the womb or through second hand smoke.

Now I am not a believer in the “marijuana is a gateway drug to other drugs” idea–I think it is completely inaccurate–but I do think that allowing our country to accept an illegal drug like marijuana simply opens the door to other illegal drugs like opiates. At one point opiates were used like Tylenol is today. We should not revert back to the days of not knowing just to appease the drug users of the world; drugs are illegal for a reason. They do more harm than good.

—

Allison Dawson (@AllyD528) Born in Germany, raised in Mississippi and Texas. Graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University. Currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative.

Featured Image Courtesy of [Ian Sane via Flickr]

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Welfare Weed – Let the Lazy Be Lazier appeared first on Law Street.

When it comes to alcohol, the laws regulating when someone is “over the limit” are pretty easy to remember. For drivers over 21, the legal blood alcohol content (BAC) limit in all 50 states is .08. For most of us, that means roughly one drink per hour. But as some states legalize recreational use of marijuana, and others allow its use for medical purposes, defining driving under the influence is becoming increasingly difficult.

One of the big problems is that we don’t quite know how badly marijuana affects driving. Experts point out that it’s obviously bad to drive when any senses are impaired — but we still allow people to have a drink before they drive, because a safe threshold has been determined. That threshold hasn’t really been identified for marijuana use yet.

Marijuana users are definitely impaired. Reaction times for example, are usually slower. But unlike those who have had alcohol, people under the influence of marijuana are usually more aware of that impairment. They are more likely to be cautious and compensate for their dulled senses. Currently, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is working on a study to figure out how exactly smoking marijuana can affect driving. In states that do allow marijuana, whether or not the legalization has led to more fatal crashes is virtually impossible to determine. Some studies claim that it has, others say that there’s no correlation. With such a small sample population, as well as so many other contributing factors to automobile accidents, it’s just too soon to tell what effect marijuana use has on driving conditions as a whole.

The states that have legalized marijuana, or allow it for medical purposes, have attempted to institute some parameters. For example, Colorado has set the DUI limit for marijuana intoxication at 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood. Some people worry, however, that it’s too early to appropriately determine such limits, and that until we can do so, a limit like Colorado’s is arbitrary. The Marijuana Policy Project stated:

The inability to accurately measure marijuana impairment is why both the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the National Institute on Drug Abuse have stated that marijuana impairment testing via blood sampling is unreliable.

The main complaint stems from the fact that there’s no good way to easily test marijuana intoxication. When someone is pulled over and suspected of driving while drunk, there are small breathalyzers that can be used to determine BAC. No comparative tool has been invented for marijuana intoxication at this point. There is apparently a very preliminary marijuana breathalyzer being created by a Canadian police officer; he has named it the “Cannabix.” It’s still in the very preliminary stages, and scientists aren’t sure about the efficiency or accuracy of a breath-based marijuana test.

As more states move toward the legalization of marijuana — currently there are serious pushes in Alaska, Massachusetts, Oregon, New York, and Washington D.C. — the question of marijuana DUIs needs an answer. Zero tolerance policies seem tough, especially with the now relatively common use of medical marijuana. But how much marijuana in your blood is too much? Scientists will have to tell us — hopefully the new National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study will provide us with some answers.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Marijuana DUIs: How Much Weed is Too Much to Drive? appeared first on Law Street.

The NFL’s drug enforcement policy is making news again, this time because the Cleveland Browns’ only reason for existing star receiver, Josh Gordon, failed another drug test for allegedly smoking marijuana. The Browns are now likely to be without Gordon for the entire 2014-2015 season because the League’s Policy and Program for Substance Abuse (a cleverly couched title for a lengthy drug rulebook) imposes a one-year banishment from the league as the minimum penalty for stage three infractions.  Much like a judicial body, the NFL and a few other leagues have devised a lengthy program to curb drug use. Unlike a judicial body, however, the NFL is not a tax-payer funded institution entrusted to balance the punishment and rehabilitation of society. So why do they try? It probably has to do with image. Drug-using players make for poor role models, which is why the issue remains uncontentious between player unions and ownership (at least compared to wages). But with public opinion changing and player drug-use actually elevating, it’s probably time to relax the rules with regard to weed.

The League should remove marijuana from its drug policy list of controlled substances because the public doesn’t care if athletes smoke weed. A majority of Americans now support efforts to legalize marijuana, and 18 states have decriminalized non-medical marijuana possession. Will Sports Illustrated for Kids soon be posting pictures of Johnny Manziel on its cover smoking a joint? Probably not, but it’s already pretty clear that not all pictures of athletes exude professionalism.

Athletes who use marijuana also don’t hurt their game. Several athletes have admitted to smoking marijuana, even those who rely on lung capacity. If weed cost them a competitive edge and consequently money, why would they continue to smoke?

League drug policies aren’t curbing drug use either. In 2000, marijuana use among NBA players was reported to be small. Now, reports have used the word ubiquitous to describe the prevalence of smoking pot. The drug’s popularity is likely what prompted Arizona Cardinals cornerback Antonio Cromartie to exclaim that penalizing the drug serves no punitive function. Besides, leagues that haven’t penalized marijuana use, such as the NHL, have remained competitive and are not yet overrun with Jeffrey Lebowskis on ice.

Clearly, it’s high time (couldn’t resist!) to change the rules.

—

Andrew Blancato (@BigDogBlancato) holds a J.D. from New York Law School, and is a graduate of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. When he’s not writing, he is either clerking at a trial court in Connecticut, or obsessing over Boston sports.

Featured image courtesy of [Erik Drost via Flickr]

Andrew Blancato

The post Enough with the Draconian Rules on Pot, Man appeared first on Law Street.

In December 2012, Colorado voters made history by approving Amendment 64, legalizing the use and possession of marijuana for anyone over the age of 21. Not long after, Washington voters followed suit, passing Initiative 502 in a state election and effectively legalizing recreational use of the drug.

Although Washingtonians will have to wait until roughly April 2014, pot can officially be sold in specially licensed stores in Colorado as of January 1, 2014. Now that you can legally buy, sell, and smoke marijuana in certain states, there are still questions that need answering.

First off, what exactly does legal mean?

In Colorado…

• Residents, of at least 21 years of age, can buy up to an ounce of marijuana at a time. If you aren’t a Colorado resident, the maximum amount that can be purchased drops to a quarter-ounce.
• Marijuana purchased in Colorado cannot cross state lines.
• The drug can be sold commercially – but only by specially licensed stores.
• It is illegal to consume marijuana openly or publicly. “Retail marijuana” is intended for private, personal use in locations not open to the public.
• The drug cannot be consumed in the vicinity of licensed stores, bars, and restaurants. Consumption in public transportation, cars, limos and taxis is also illegal.
• It is illegal to drive under the influence of marijuana. Anyone with 5 nanograms or more in their blood while driving can be arrested for a DUI, which could result in fines or jail time.

In Washington, although possession of marijuana is already legal, other significant parts of Initiative 502, namely selling marijuana commercially, will not go into effect for a few months. Like Colorado, however, some restrictions are already in place…

• Marijuana is prohibited in public settings.
• Drivers are prohibited from having more than 5 nanograms in their blood, an amount supposedly comparable to .08 blood alcohol content, while driving.
• Washington State universities can set their own rules regarding marijuana use. In an effort to avoid losing federal funding, University of Washington and Washington State University currently prohibit use and possession of pot on campus grounds.
• To deter underage use of the drug, Washington will adopt public health strategies similar to successful anti-tobacco campaigns. Specifically, retail outlets will not be allowed within 1,000 feet of schools and marijuana advertising will be tightly regulated.

Is legalization of marijuana technically unconstitutional?

Technically, the answer is yes.

Known as the “supremacy clause,” Article VI Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution establishes federal law as the “supreme law of the land” – hence the name. Seeing as marijuana remains illegal under the Controlled Substances Act, a federal law, the recent legalization of the drug in Colorado and Washington provides an interesting example of the interplay between state and federal laws. Attorney General Eric Holder has said the Department of Justice is taking a “trust but verify approach to the state laws.” In addition, Deputy Attorney General James Cole issued a memo to prosecutors across the U.S. 

The Department’s guidance in this memorandum rests on its expectation that states and local governments that have enacted laws authorizing marijuana-related conduct will implement strong and effective regulatory and enforcement systems that will address the threat those state laws could pose to public safety, public health and other law enforcement interests. 

Still, for those worried about (technically) violating federal laws, Alison Holcomb, author of I-502 in Washington and drug policy director for the Washington State ACLU, says not to worry.

“Federal law enforcement resources tend to be focused on major organized crime,” Holcomb said in an interview with CBS News. “It is very, very rare that marijuana use is subjected to federal enforcement, unless users are on federal lands like national parks. By and large, the DEA has much better things to do than go after the marijuana users.”

Can I lose my job for using marijuana?

Although it has yet to become a problem in Washington, Colorado’s recent legalization has created a dilemma for businesses and their employees. While Amendment 64 legalized weed, it also gave employers the right to drug test their employees and subsequently fire them if they test positive. Simply put, the new law does not “affect the ability of employers to have policies restricting the use of marijuana by employees.” 

Last April, the Court of Appeals in Colorado upheld the firing of Brandon Coats, a Dish Network employee who was let go after he tested positive for marijuana during a random drug test. Coats, a quadriplegic who has used a wheelchair since age 16, uses medicinal marijuana to control his muscle spasms. Coats sued Dish Network, arguing that his use of the drug was legal and that he was never impaired while at work.

The Colorado Court of Appeals ultimately decided Colorado’s Lawful Off-Duty Activities Statute, which prohibits employers from firing employees for participating in legal activities during their free time, does not include marijuana use. Because marijuana remains illegal under federal law, the judges ruled that the protections of the statute do not apply. Colorado’s Supreme Court announced it will review the case.

With the outcome of Coats’ case still uncertain, one can’t help but wonder: If smoking marijuana can result in a person losing his or her job, is it really legal?

In an interview with Buzzfeed, Harry Levine, a sociology professor at Queens College and operator of the website marijuana-arrests.com, said the conundrum is the result of clashes between state and federal law. “Everyone’s attention is focused on the shiny new post-prohibition legal marijuana industry, and how regulated, interesting, and cool it is,” Levine said, “but over here behind door number one is the still-existing structures of nationwide drug prohibition.” 

Can I fly with my marijuana?

Again, since federal law regarding marijuana remains unchanged, the drug will not be allowed on airplanes – even if you’re flying out of Colorado or Washington. On the “air side” of an airport, which begins at the security checkpoint, federal law reigns supreme. When it comes to possession of weed before going through security, airports have differing policies. The Aspen/Pitkin County Airport, for example, offers travelers “amnesty boxes” – a place where marijuana can be stashed or disposed of without legal consequences. At Denver’s Airport however, weed is banned entirely, even in the areas before security.

Because state law forbids any facility from setting any further regulations, airports in Washington are unable to ban the legal amount of cannabis.

What does legalization mean for prior offenders and those currently in prison for weed crimes?

Fair or not, it does not change a thing.

From 2006 to 2010, there have been more than 50,000 marijuana-related arrests in the state of Colorado. For those still serving time in prison, the new legalization will do nothing to free them or reduce their sentencing. In addition, those who have already served time will not have their records expunged.

The reasoning behind this is simple. Since the crimes were committed when possession or distribution of marijuana was against the law, the charges stick. According to Matthew Fleischer, an investigative journalist and contributor to TakePart.com, “whether or not the old law was unpopular or unjust is immaterial.”

Unfortunately for anyone sitting in prison for weed crimes, the United States does not guarantee “retroactive ameliorative relief” in sentencing. Although it’s a mouthful, the term simply means letting convicts out of prison after a law changes.

The U.S. is one of only 22 countries that fail to guarantee this relief. In an interview with TakePart, Amanda Solter, Project Director of the Human Rights and Criminal Sentencing Reform Project for the University of San Francisco School of Law, elaborated further. “The only other countries that do this are places like Myanmar, Oman, Pakistan, South Sudan, and a handful of countries in the Caribbean,” she said and added, “even Russia provides this right.”

Is marijuana legalization a continuing trend?

Most likely.

Brandy Zadrozny, a researcher and reporter for The Daily Beast, provides excellent insight regarding the future of legalization in her informative “Guide to State Pot Laws.”

According to Zadrozny, the National Conference of State Legislatures revealed that nine states –Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Vermont – and the District of Columbia have introduced some form of marijuana legislation. Alaska, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin are likely to follow suit.

For the most part, state legislative action regarding marijuana legalization depends heavily on grassroots (no pun intended) support within the individual state. As Zadrozny cleverly puts it, “the data seems to support that if you smoke it, the laws will come.”

Everything considered, experts say Alaska will be the next state to join Colorado and Washington’s exclusive club.

[CNN] [CNTraveler] [The Daily Beast] [CBS News] [ABC News] [Take Part] [BuzzFeed] [Huffington Post] [Colorado State Legislature] [Washington State LCB] [U.S. Archives]

—

Matt DiCenso 

Featured image courtesy of [rafael-castillo via Flickr]

Matt DiCenso

Matt DiCenso is a graduate of The George Washington University. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Let’s Be Blunt: What Marijuana Legalization Actually Means appeared first on Law Street.

The law often does not have the same consequences for all people. This doesn’t necessarily mean that a given law is racist. Or even that a given officer tasked with enforcing the law is a racist individual. What it does mean is that though justice is supposed to be blind, the fallible human beings whose duty it is to carry out the law are not. This is never more true than when it comes to arrests for marijuana. This topic has been in the news recently in the wake of Colorado making marijuana consumption legal.

What I am here to talk about is the cold, hard truth about the state of marijuana use — and more importantly, arrests — in the rest of the nation where recreational marijuana use is still forbidden. Particularly what I’d like to comment on is the raw, and honestly quite refreshing take MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes had on the subject in response to a column recently written by David Brooks. I’ll let Chris do the talking and then see you after the jump.