Federal law still says marijuana is an illegal drug, so don’t break out the Cheetos or Goldfish too quickly.

A statement by Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper about the state’s legalization of recreational marijuana. The law would allow individuals to carry up to an ounce of pot and/or grow up to six plants.

Emily Bazelon, Slate. Don’t Touch Their Stash!

FJP: Call this part PSA to our Colorado friends and part example of a great explainer on how state rights and the Justice Department play on this issue.

Via Slate:

This is not a tale of the federal government following the lead of the states. It’s a tale of the Justice Department asserting its authority against the state’s voters and state sovereignty. The federal government has this authority because of the 2005 Supreme Court decision that essentially ended the march of federalism—the legal doctrine that the court’s conservatives previously invoked to limit Congress’s powers to make laws that affect commerce among the states. You may vaguely remember this one from the huge fight over Obamacare. In the 2005 case, Gonzales v. Raich, Angel Raich was a sick woman in California who said medical marijuana was the only way she could combat excruciating, life-threatening pain. She argued that in light of the state’s 1996 legalization of medical marijuana, the Justice Department couldn’t enforce the Controlled Substances Act against her—in other words, the feds couldn’t take away her pot. Raich lost 6-3, with conservative Justice Antonin Scalia joining the liberal-centrist wing of the court. When it came to a choice between a federal crackdown on pot smokers and a state-led push to leave them alone, Scalia lost his appetite for dismissing Congress and federal prosecutors in favor of the states.

Read on.

Bonus: The New York Times with a six minute “Op-Doc Video" about Chris Williams, a Montana man who faces a mandatory 80-year minimum sentence for growing pot. He did so after Montana legalized medical marijuana. As the Times op ed notes: “[A] coherent system of justice must explain why one defendant is punished more harshly than the next. It must explain why a farmer who grows marijuana in compliance with state law should be punished much more harshly than some pedophiles and killers. If we cannot explain this disparity, we should fight to change it.”

  1. werefuckingdoneprofessionally reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  2. karalynne47 reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  3. theonecalledbiz reblogged this from theamericanbear
  4. philosophicallust reblogged this from reginaabyssi
  5. liberalwithguts reblogged this from theamericanbear
  6. inkdefense reblogged this from theamericanbear
  7. reginaabyssi reblogged this from theamericanbear
  8. jasminedragon reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  9. bencourts reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  10. honeychiles-kitchen reblogged this from pod313
  11. lolcalnews reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  12. pop-rocks-blowjob reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  13. pod313 reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  14. libatywonder reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  15. cynthiahasatumblr reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  16. futurejournalismproject posted this