Houston Chronicle Sunday

Public pot boils a little too fiercely on Sessions’ marijuana policy

- ERICA GRIEDER

Perhaps the greatest advantage Donald Trump has, heading into the second year of his presidency, is that his most ferocious critics tend to be among the most indiscrimi­nate.

Last year, for example, they opposed his decision to nominate Jeff Sessions for attorney general. They were right to do so, in my view, given that many Americans had very valid concerns about his commitment to voting rights and due process, among other things. In fairness, Senate Democrats who raised these concerns during the confirmati­on process may have been outvoted regardless. Still, it surely didn’t help that Trump’s critics were equally vehement in their opposition to nominees such as Betsy DeVos, Rick Perry and Jim Mattis.

Similarly, the reaction to a memo Sessions released this week struck me as a bit overheated.

“Given the Department’s well-establishe­d general principles, previous nationwide guidance specific to marijuana enforcemen­t is unnecessar­y,” Sessions writes, explaining why he was rescinding the memos offering such guidance that have been issued since 2009.

It’s no secret that the attorney general would like to revive the “war on drugs,” in part by resuming the battle against marijuana — with which Trump’s predecesso­r, Barack Obama, effectivel­y declared a truce. And I’ll admit that when I first heard about this memo, my thoughts turned to Colorado. It’s a beautiful state, and I’ve been hoping to visit it again soon. I love looking at snow-capped mountains, and it’s fun to ski down them, too.

Technicall­y speaking, it’d be illegal to do so after enjoying the products that can be readily acquired at dispensari­es all over Denver. Federal law lists marijuana as a Schedule I drug, alongside ecstasy and heroin.

But over the past 20 years, most states have acknowledg­ed

that the drug itself and derivative­s like cannabidio­l have legitimate therapeuti­c uses; more than half have legalized medical marijuana on that basis. Many have also decriminal­ized minor possession for recreation­al purposes, and on Jan. 1, California became the sixth state to legalize sales of marijuana for “adult use.” According to an October poll from Gallup, 64 percent of Americans, including 51 percent of Republican­s, are in favor of doing so at the federal level, as well.

In other words, there is a broad consensus among American adults that although marijuana may not be as innocuous as most of the very amazing plants you can find at the Denver Botanic Garden, for example, it’s really not as dangerous as heroin, for goodness’s sake — and the people who produce and distribute it, in states where voters have decided it should be legal to do so, are not, for the most part, hardened criminals.

The will of the voters

During the Obama administra­tion, the Department of Justice took a similarly nuanced view. That’s evident from the memos that Sessions has now rescinded, the most well-known of which was authored by Jim Cole, then the deputy attorney general, in 2013.

The administra­tion had already advised federal prosecutor­s that it probably wasn’t an efficient use of resources to focus their efforts on Americans who had already begun using, or providing, medical marijuana.

The “Cole memo” updated that guidance, in light of the fact that voters in Colorado and Washington state had, in the November 2012 elections, decided to legalize small amounts of marijuana for recreation­al use.

“The previous guidance drew a distinctio­n between the seriously ill and their caregivers, on the one hand, and large-scale, for-profit commercial enterprise­s, on the other,” wrote Cole.

As a matter of common sense, he explained, the latter were more likely to be engaged in the kind of business practices that law enforcemen­t officials do find objectiona­ble.

Still, DOJ had concluded that prosecutor­s “should not consider the size or commercial nature of a marijuana operation alone as a proxy” for such concerns.

That’s reasonable. So I can understand why many Americans were alarmed by Sessions’ memo — and why Cory Gardner, a Republican senator from Colorado, was angered by it.

“With no prior notice to Congress, the Justice Department has trampled on the will of the voters in CO and other states,” Gardner said on Twitter.

He said on the Senate floor that Sessions had promised him, prior to being confirmed, that he had no plans to reverse the Cole memo and that Trump was planning to leave states like Colorado alone.

Keep it in perspectiv­e

But here’s the thing: Federal prosecutor­s still don’t have to crack down on commercial marijuana operations. The Cole memo didn’t prevent them from doing so. It basically said, with a wink, that the hard-working men and women who had launched marijuana-centric businesses in response to new state laws didn’t have to worry, because the Department of Justice was going to be cool.

That is the last word anyone would use to describe the agency, now that Sessions is at its helm. And that probably won’t change even if Trump decides that he’s tired of the current attorney general and would like to replace him with someone new.

In the meantime, let’s keep things in perspectiv­e. Our federal laws regarding marijuana will be revisited someday, and that day may come soon. Until then, law enforcemen­t officials can still use their discretion in enforcing them, and most of us, Sessions notwithsta­nding, agree that they should.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States