House of Representatives moves to protect Medical Marijuana

The text of the omnibus spending bill approved by the House includes the following remarkable passages (pages 213-214):

“Sec. 538. None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, to prevent such States from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.

“Sec. 539. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used in contravention of section 7606 (“Legitimacy of Industrial Hemp Research”) of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Public Law 113–79) by the Department of Justice or the Drug Enforcement Administration.”

Via Tom Angell of Marijuana Majority who suggests:

“Congressional leaders seem to have finally gotten the message that a supermajority of Americans wants states to be able to implement sensible marijuana reforms without federal interference. This legislation greatly reduces the chances that costly and senseless DEA raids will come between seriously ill patients and the doctor-recommended medicine they need for relief. Now that Congress has created political space by taking this important legislative step, there are no remaining excuses for the Obama administration not to exercise its executive power to reschedule marijuana immediately. The attorney general can begin that process today with the stroke of a pen.”

Now, this is still just the House, and still just a first step, but for this kind of language to actually get passed in the U.S. Congress… pretty amazing.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to House of Representatives moves to protect Medical Marijuana

    • claygooding says:

      According to the DOJ Congress cannot stop the legalization because it costs nothing to stop arresting people however they can stop them from regulating a market for legal marijuana,,it leaves DC with legal marijuana and street gangs and criminals making the money,,hopefully the GOP brainfart will pass.

      I am sure the GOP and some Dems pushing this didn’t see or attend the hearing when the DOJ explained the stupidity of having legal marijuana and no way to buy any.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      That’s a Reuters article which was found by Yahoo! Yahoo! had nothing to do with its creation. Yahoo! is a search engine, not a content provider. Unless you have evidence that Yahoo! alters the articles returned in a search or eliminates articles which it doesn’t like for some perfidious motive (think ONDCP) the credibility of the search engine/content aggregator is irrelevant.

  1. Dante says:

    My only thought:

    How will the DEA/Govt. circumvent this? How will they continue to do what they want to do (inflict mayhem/misery/murder and then lie about it) despite laws which prohibit those acts? How will they continue to get away with it?

    Easily. It’s not like the DEA/Govt. respects/obeys the law or anything. Our corrupt government is above the law, just look at all the non-prosecutions of cops who kill, or non-prosecutions of the torture regime. Look at all the flat-out lying, even under oath.

    Protect & Serve (themselves!)

  2. claygooding says:

    The question is why are they even trying to stop the DEA with this bill instead of just removing marijuana from Schedule 1 thus removing marijuana from the DEA’s scope of interest.

    Over 1/2 the US population has access to marijuana under a doctor’s care,,that is an accepted medical use for marijuana.

    • Tony Aroma says:

      Maybe Congress are trying to establish “accepted medical use.” That bill essentially says that medical use is accepted in a majority of the US. Could be this is step 1 in rescheduling.

  3. Duncan20903 says:


    Wouldn’t it have been more efficient for the language to list the two or three States which have chosen to be willfully ignorant?
    Well there’s no doubt that the prohibitionists are genuine USDA grade A assholes, but sometimes they are (unintentionally) humorous…

    The report found that there was an increase in patients coming to emergency departments with…public intoxication…tied to marijuana use.

    I swear to god doc, I was sitting in my house, minding my own business and getting stoned and then all of a sudden when I looked up I was sitting in the middle of the park getting dirty looks from the idiot prohibitionists!

  4. DdC says:

    Congress Axes D.C. Marijuana Legalization

    But the measure appeared to go much further, also rolling back a law approved by the council this year eliminating criminal penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana.

    The “rider,” which Republicans had indicated they would attach to the spending bill, prohibits federal and local funds from being used to “enact or carry out any law, rule, or regulation to legalize or otherwise reduce penalties associated with the possession, use, or distribution of any schedule I substance.”

    It is similar to language first introduced in an amendment to a spending bill earlier this year by Rep. Andy Harris, Maryland Republican, who has publicly opposed loosening marijuana laws because of the effect it would have on children’s health.

    D.C. Marijuana Law Blocked By Congress
    Congressional Budget Poised to Partially Block Pot
    Americans Want States With Legal MJ Protected

  5. Duncan20903 says:


    clay, if it isn’t illegal why would that leave it in the hands of criminals? I’m 4 miles from the DC line and lots of people around here commute from a lot further away to DC for work or business.

    I think that it’s profoundly interesting that so many people think that I-71 included regulated commerce. I guess that’s a sign of progress that it’s what the Ignorati expect. I would think that they would get someone to read the law to them or buy some text to speech software instead of just presuming. Perhaps being functionally illiterate means never having to know just how thoroughly you’ve embarrassed yourself.

    /snark off/ serious question—>> Presuming that there are costs for implementation, could a 3rd party agree to cover the costs?

    • darkcycle says:

      Maybe…but how to get around the issue that the decision to do that would have to be made by public officials? Who by doing so would violating the ban on public moneys by getting paid?

    • claygooding says:

      The rider states that DC cannot spend federal or local funds(taxes) on the implementation of the legalization initiative,,all Congress is stopping is a legal market being regulated which leaves the street gangs dancing in the streets,,and as long as no permit or license is required for adults to grow their own there is no cost of implementing that.

  6. darkcycle says:

    As regards D.C., how much does it cost to tell the cops to stop arresting people?
    Would the prohibition of the expenditure of public funds extend to the ink in the pen required to redact the sections of the law in question? The time of the person (s) charged with making the changes? Presumably.
    The law doesn’t make any allowances for regulated sales or taxation, but to implement it without ANY expenditure of public funds? That seems to freeze the status quo pretty effectively, since they continue to fund prohibition so completely.
    I suppose the justice fairy could just whisper in the ears of the DC police and tell them not to arrest people, but that isn’t very likely to work. I am afraid this will play out the way D.C.’s medical law did…not the way people want it to.

  7. DdC says:

    I thought we been there done that crap…

    Bob M Barr S Kills American Vote Linx

    Barr amendment is unconstitutional
    Last week, a federal judge ruled that the Barr amendment is unconstitutional, and ordered D.C. election officials to count and certify the vote, an order with which they happily complied.

    DC Vote blocked by Barr

    July 29, 1999:
    Barr proposes an amendment to the fiscal 2000 D.C. appropriations bill to prohibit the District from using any money to legalize or reduce the penalty for the possession, use or distribution of marijuana and other drugs. The House passes the bill, and Barr declares that the medical marijuana law will not take effect no matter how D.C. residents had voted.

    Sept. 20, 1999:
    D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics releases the vote total, showing the initiative passed by an overwhelming margin. Both sides begin girding for more battles in Congress.

  8. Here is a speech given on the floor of the Senate by Cory Booker on the urgent need to turn our legal system into a justice system.

  9. Mr_Alex says:

    Prohibitionists are starting to lose, its going to be hilarious for them to see their own lies being dismantled

Comments are closed.