Drug WarRant

Maia Szalavitz has a great article at Vice: Why Is it Still Illegal to Visit the US if You Admit to Using Drugs?

I’m sure we’ve all heard the stories of people being denied access to the U.S. for merely admitting they used drugs, even though our current President has done as much. It’s a stupid and outdated customs inquiry.

Here’s a part of the article I really enjoyed:

VICE asked the Office of National Drug Control Policy (better known as the drug czar’s office) for comment on Shelly’s case and the law in this area. Drug Czar Michael Botticelli is a recovering alcoholic: His admission to occasional marijuana and cocaine use as well would mean that he himself would not be allowed entry into the country because of his past—were he not already an American citizen.

Since he has spoken widely about fighting the stigma associated with addiction and because he advocates reducing barriers to rehabilitation, I was curious about Botticelli’s views on this practice, which seems to punish both honesty and recovery. But his office declined to comment. [emphasis added]

So many stories like this one.

Magistrate Snatches Newborn From Mother Who Used Cannabis Tea for Pain Relief

Before she gave birth to her daughter, Nova, at Cleveland’s Fairview Hospital on September 26, Hollie Sanford used cannabis tea to relieve severe sciatic nerve pain. Her research convinced her marijuana was a safer choice than the painkillers she had been prescribed, and she may be right about that. […]

But Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court Magistrate Eleanore Hilow, who ordered Nova’s separation from her parents because the baby and her mother tested positive for a marijuana metabolite at the hospital, does not seem interested in what science shows about cannabis and pregnancy.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that Hilow rejected the recommendation of county social workers, who are usually the bad guys in cases like this. […]

“There is no need to remove this child from her parents in order to protect her,” an assistant county prosecutor wrote in an October 23 motion. “At this time, removal would only serve to disrupt the bond the child would develop with her parents during this important period in her life…Rather than protecting the child, removal may be more harmful to her both in the present and in the future.”

Hilow was unmoved by that argument.

We often hear people say “not that many are in prison for possessing marijuana” as if that’s a counter to the need for legalization.

And yet, people like this are harmed every day, in so many ways, simply because of marijuana’s illegal status.

That means that we must take every step we can to challenge and change the laws.

from this article in the Washington Post:

Indicating that he actually wants to win, Trump also softened his tone yesterday on marijuana legalization. It’s another issue on which he has shifted his position to be more in sync with the Republican base. Trump said states should be allowed to legalize marijuana if they chose to do so, per Jenna Johnson, while reaffirming that he supports making medical marijuana available to very sick patients.

Reason notes, though, that Sanders still has the best position on this issue:

Where Bernie Sanders Differs With Republicans on Marijuana
Repealing the national ban is a logical implication of federalism.

On the face of it, saying the federal government should not interfere with legalization is not as bold as calling for the repeal of the national ban on marijuana, as Democratic presidential contender Bernie Sanders did this week. But a federalist approach to marijuana, which is what most of the Republican candidates have endorsed, should amount to the same thing. “The time is long overdue for us to remove the federal prohibition on marijuana,” Sanders said during his appearance at George Mason University on Wednesday. “States should have the right to regulate marijuana the same way that state and local laws now govern the sale of alcohol and tobacco….It is time for the federal government to allow states to go forward as they best choose.”

That is the federalist position, and Sanders correctly concludes that it requires removing marijuana from the list of congressionally prohibited substances. Mere prosecutorial forbearance, which is what the Obama administration has offered so far, is no substitute for a statutory change because it can be reversed at any moment by this adminstration or the next, exposing state-licensed marijuana businesses to the risk of raids, felony charges, prison, and property forfeiture. Furthermore, as long as marijuana remains a Schedule I drug, those businesses, which still qualify as criminal enterprises under federal law, will be unable to use the banking system or deduct business expenses on their tax returns.

As has been noted in comments here, legalization is probably inevitable at this stage eventually (although assuming so and relaxing our efforts is not an option). And in years past, I have indicated on this blog that I didn’t think it mattered a whole lot who was President – after all, our political leaders follow, not lead. At that time, our biggest efforts had to be focused on the people – getting them to push for legalization.

Well, we may now be at that point. And removing the federal-state conflict would be incredibly helpful. Completely taking marijuana out of the Controlled Substances list would simplify legalization efforts immensely, and make it possible to craft working legalization models without a cloud hanging over them.

As a side note, this issue right now also helps point out the problem with labels and candidates (and our polarized political system).

Theoretically, it’s a no-brainer that small-government conservatives should have been pushing all along for states rights in this area. And yet, the truly federalist position first comes from the Democratic Socialist. Explain that.

Sanders will propose nixing marijuana from federal list of dangerous drugs

Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders will announce his support Wednesday for removing marijuana from a list of the most dangerous drugs outlawed by the federal government — a move that would free states to legalize it without impediments from Washington.

OK, Republican candidates. Here’s your chance. Set yourself apart from the pack and announce your support for legalization.

Many years ago, I first discovered Salon.com because of the powerful series of articles by Daniel Forbes exposing the government’s efforts to subvert popular culture with anti-drug advertisements. It was partly because of that that I decided to start my blog originally at SalonBlogs. Recent years have not been so great there, with a lot of heavily partisan reporting tending to dominate.

But this is a very good article about the repercussions of the controversial U.N. report: Censored UN paper calling for decriminalization marks beginning of the end of drug war as we knew it by Daniel Denvir.

Recently, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime quietly circulated a remarkable document not only calling “decriminalising drug use and possession for personal consumption…consistent with international drug control conventions” but stating that doing so “may be required to meet obligations under international human rights law.”

The paper’s language was sober but its critique of drug criminalization devastating, noting that a law-and-order approach to drug use “contributed to public health problems and induced negative consequences for safety, security, and human rights,” pointing to the limitation on access to clean needles and the resulting spread of HIV and hepatitis C, overdoses, vulnerability to physical and sexual abuse and, of course, incarceration, which disproportionately impacts poor and minority people. […]

Whether the paper gets released or not, however, is immaterial to its striking conclusions, which are carefully grounded in international law: the UN’s global drug war arm conceded not only that criminalization was a mistake but also that it violates human rights.

A lot happening right now, and a fairly good recap of that by Tony Newman: What a Week! Everyone’s Hopping on the ‘No More Drug War’ Train

New Gallup Poll: 58 Percent Support for Legalizing Marijuana…

130 Leading Law Enforcement Leaders Join Call to End Mass Incarceration…

New Canadian Prime Minster Plans to Legalize Marijuana…

Federal Ruling Protects Medical Marijuana Dispensaries That Follow State Law…

Leaked United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Paper Calls for Decriminalizing Drug Use and Possession…

Obama Announces Criminal Justice Reform Tour…

Steve Rolles at Transform has an outstanding update and analysis of the situation regarding the “leak” of the UNODC paper recommending decriminalization worldwide, and it’s withdrawal due to pressure.

The truth behind the UNODC’s leaked decriminalisation paper

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime has responded to the ‘leak’ of its briefing paper calling for the decriminalisation of drug possession for personal use. Before considering this response, it’s important to be clear this wasn’t really a ‘leak’ in the classic sense. The document was to be presented by the UNODC at the International Harm Reduction Conference in Kuala Lumpur, and an embargoed copy had already gone to select media (the norm for such publication events). When it was then pulled at the last minute, the BBC, which had already filmed a news segment on it, decided to release it anyway. Richard Branson was filmed for the segment as a member of the Global Commission on Drug Policy, and was sufficiently annoyed when the UNODC backtracked, that he broke the story himself on his blog.

The UNODC response claims that the briefing is not a final or formal document, and does not amount to a statement of its policy position. It also rejects the allegation that the briefing was stopped from being launched as a result of political pressure. This does, however, feel distinctly like an organisation backtracking under pressure (even if that is something, of course, they would never own up to). It would certainly not be the first time member state presssure has led to supression of a controversial UN drugs paper. Its impossible to know what pressure might have been applied, but this report from New York Times at least strongly suggests that it was the US (as widely suspected) that derailed the publication (ironically having found out about it via a New York Times approach for comment).

Firstly, while the agency now says its decriminalisation paper “cannot be read as a statement of UNODC policy”, the paper itself explicitly says “This document clarifies the position of the UNODC”, before going on to deliver its damning critique of criminalisation and its recommendation to decriminalise personal drug possession and low-level drug dealing offences, all carefully referenced to the relevant UN statements, evidence and international law.

[…]

But whatever has gone on behind the scenes, the UNODC are now answerable to a document that is very much in the public domain. If they are suggesting there are flaws in the analysis, or that they don’t agree with any of it, then they will need to say why. They won’t be able to because it’s a legally and empirically bulletproof briefing that largely echoes statements they and other UN agencies have previously made. The UNODC, when challenged, will stand by the content of this document – because they have to.

They wrote it, and it is 100% correct.

You may legitimately ask why we should care what an outdated agency like the UNODC does or says. But the truth is that their support of the drug war has provided political cover for the actions of oppressive countries around the world. Even here in the U.S., mentions of our “obligations” to U.N. drug control treaties have been used to cavalierly dismiss discussions regarding drug policy reform.

Interesting election results in Canada. With 170 seats needed for a majority, the Liberal Party of Canada leads with 139 seats, Conservative Party with 76, and New Democratic Party with 12. Both the Liberal Party and New Democratic Party candidates have pledged to support legalization of marijuana. The way things are shaping up, this could result one way or another in the ouster of Harper, and implementation of marijuana legalization.

Tom Angell notes:

“While U.S. states led the way by becoming the first places in the world to legalize and regulate marijuana in 2012, it looks like Canada could soon leapfrog ahead of us and become the first country in North America to legalize cannabis nationwide. If that happens, it’s not only good news for Canadians who will be able to purchase marijuana from legal and regulated storefronts instead of being treated like criminals. It’s also likely to give reform efforts in the U.S. a bit of a boost — not that we really needed it, but a little friendly competition is always a good motivator. And legalization in Canada is also a first step to all kinds of interesting implications, like the prospect of President Obama’s successor discussing international marijuana trade issues with his or her Canadian counterpart in the not-too-distant future. It’s no longer a pipe dream to imagine a day when consumers and growers in Washington State and British Columbia, for example, could be ordering each other’s wares on the Internet for cross-border shipment.”

Nice thought.

Update: They are now projecting a Liberal Party majority. Trudeau pledges to work on pot legalization policy ‘right away’ if elected

This could be huge.

UN to call on governments around the world to decriminalise all drugs, says Richard Branson

The UN may be about to call on the governments of all countries to end the “war on drugs” and decriminilise the use and possession of all illegal substances.

In an extraordinary post on his Virgin website, Richard Branson said he had been showed a report by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) which dramatically changed the organisation’s stance on drug control.

He said the “as-yet unreleased statement” had been sent to some of the world’s media under embargo, but the businessman has gone public with it early for fear the UN will “bow to pressure by not going ahead with this important move”.

The UN was preparing to declare “unequivocally that criminalisation is harmful unnecessary and disproportionate”, Branson wrote. A document changing the UN stance on drug control was supposed to be released at a conference in Malaysia on Sunday, he said, but that has now been delayed.

“As I’m writing this I am hearing that at least one government is putting an inordinate amount of pressure on the UNODC,” he said. “Let us hope the UNODC, a global organisation that is part of the UN and supposed to do what is right for the people of the world, does not do a remarkable volte-face at the last possible moment and bow to pressure by not going ahead with this important move. The war on drugs has done too much damage to too many people already.”

Here’s the press release from Branson.

In tonight’s debate, Sanders was asked if he would vote to legalize marijuana in the state of Nevada in 2016.

“I suspect I would vote yes,” Sanders said. “I am seeing in this country too many lives being destroyed for nonviolent offenses.” Then he added the United States needs to “rethink this war on drugs.”

Kevin Sabet tweeted:

Not letting @BernieSanders off the hook on the marijuana issue.It’s well known he isn’t a marijuana enthusiast;we’ll get to the bottom of it

which prompted Tom Angell to retort:

LOL. Now Sanders is officially on notice that a losing movement with no political support is coming after him. #oooh https://t.co/2a6xgggYXf