Wednesday, February 18, 2004

Federal Government sued by ACLU, Marijuana Policy Project, Change the Climate and Drug Policy Alliance A couple of months ago, I discussed the idiotic and constitutionally challenged Oklahoma Representative Ernest Istook who didn't like the fact that Change the Climate was running ads on the Metro calling for the legalization of marijuana. So he pushed for a last-minute provision on the omnibus spending bill that would prevent any transit system from accepting ads that promoted changing the laws regarding marijuana. And it passed. And was signed into law. Now this is so completely and absolutely a violation of the constitution that it's almost funny, yet it became law. Fortunately, we have a number of active Drug Policy Reform organizations and none of them are taking this lightly. The day the law went into effect, four of these organizations attempted to purchase space for this ad in the DC transit system: [caption] One in three adult Americans have tried marijuana and federal marijuana laws can imprison every one of them just for simple possession. These laws are unfair and abuse our criminal justice system. Prosecuting and jailing these Americans wastes valuable resources better spent keeping violent criminals off our streets. As it is, hundreds of thousands of citizens have already been imprisoned - many of them non-violent, otherwise law-abiding and many of them stripped of their right to vote, their property, their jobs and their college grants. Let's adopt common sense and fairness and enact more realistic marijuana laws. And let's save the jails for real criminals. Get involved today. As expected, the ad was rejected due to the new provision from Congress. So today, the following distinguished organizations jointly announced a lawsuit against the federal government and the DC transit system (the links go to the organizations' pages about the lawsuit): ACLU Marijuana Policy Project Drug Policy Alliance Change the Climate The suit is called ACLU v. Mineta. Remember that name -- I guarantee you'll be hearing a unanimous verdict and it won't be in favor of the feds. This is a no-brainer. In fact, reading the Memorandum of Plaintiffs in Support of Their Motion for Preliminary Injunction (pdf), you can almost detect undercurrents of glee in the coalition's case: The material facts are not in dispute and the constitutional infirmities raised by Section 177 are neither complex nor subtle. Section 177 is unconstitutional, both on its face and as enforced by WMATA, a state actor. The attorneys for the coalition are going to have fun with this one. (Remember though that lawsuits aren't cheap -- consider donating to one or more of the organizations.) Violation of Oath I have often felt that Congress has gotten off without any sanctions despite violating their oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Particularly when you consider that the First Amendment states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. It doesn't say: "Congress shall make unconstitutional laws in order to make a political statement and then let the courts straighten it out." Now this unfortunately happens all the time, but rarely has there been a case this blatant. Just in case there was any doubt in your mind that these Congressmen actually intended the provision to silence the free speech rights of citizens, check out the statement that they arrogantly printed in the conferees report: The conferees note with displeasure that public service advertising space in Washington, DC's Metropolitan Area Transit Authority rail stations and buses has been used to advocate changing the nation's laws regarding marijuana usage. WMATA has provided $46,250 worth of space to these types of ads; therefore, as a warning to other transit agencies, the conferees have deleted funding totaling $92,500 from projects and activities for WMATA in this bill... ...the conferees remain concerned that the opportunity exists nationwide for transit properties to run similar advertising. Therefore the confererence agreement includes a provision (Section 177) that prohibits Federal transit grantees from obligating or expending funds that would otherwise be available in the Act, if the grantee is involved directly or indirectly with any activity, including displaying or permitting to be displayed advertisements on its land, equipment, or in its facilities, that promote the legalization or medical use of substances listed in schedule 1 of section 202 of the Controlled Substance Act. Istook, and the other conferees involved, should be impeached and removed from office. 10:30:22 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

More lies from Deputy Czar Andrea. Via Vice Squad: Andrea Barthwell is at it again in this OpEd in yesterday's Chicago Tribune. Andrea is one of our Drug Czar's Deputy Directors. Naturally, shortly after a medical marijuana bill is introduced in the state legislature, the feds have to step in and try to apply some pressure -- as usual by lying. First, she brings up and completely distorts, as an example of excess, a medical marijuana awards event in Oregon and then notes: With marijuana awards making a mockery of medicine, drug use and addiction, it is no wonder we have a hard time teaching kids how dangerous drugs really are and creating an environment of prohibition. "creating an environment of prohibition"??? What is that and why would we possibly want it? Isn't an environment of prohibition when citizens are less and less likely to cooperate with police because of rightly perceived excesses in tactics and sentences? Isn't an environment of prohibition when people end up dead like this? Isn't an environment of prohibition where students are, without suspicion, made to pee in a cup for the government and lie down on the floor while dogs sniff them? Environment of prohibition? WTF? She continues with the usual: Smoking marijuana impairs attention, memory, and dexterity, and increases the risk of traffic accidents. Repeated use can lead to respiratory disease and permanent cognitive impairment. Marijuana use is addictive. False. All of these specific points have been debunked before and elsewhere on this site, and what do any of them have to do with medical marijuana? According to the DEA's own chief administrative law judge Francis L. Young, marijuana is "one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man." Andrea again shills for the pharmaceutical companies: There is a variety of existing, scientifically proven options available to patients in need of pain relief. Among these is the FDA-approved medicine Marinol. But smoked marijuana advocates refuse to acknowledge Marinol as a viable option. Interestingly enough, the only property that Marinol lacks is the capacity to create a "high." Again false. One of the problems with Marinol is its strong "high" that is harder to control with oral medicine. Patients complain that by the time the high reaches them it's too late to adjust the dosage, whereas with smoked marijuana, the dosage can be easily regulated. She ends: The biggest threat to creating an effective environment of prohibition is the active campaign of legalizers to blur the line between dangerous, illegal drugs and medicine. There's that "environment of prohibition" again. And the lie of classifying marijuana as "dangerous." And don't forget. We pay her salary. 10:08:06 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Odds and Ends LastOneSpeaks points us to the transcript of an incredible speech on the floor of the House this week by Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, regarding the DEA's meddling with pain management. Finally, I wish to express my hope that Mr. Limbaugh's case will encourage his many fans and listeners to consider how their support for the federal war on drugs is inconsistent with their support of individual liberty and constitutional government. LastOneSpeaks also notes that Narco News is back in town, redesigned and with a group format that should prove interesting. (And I am also quite thankful for the visual re-design and skin change option - red and yellow text on black background was in for about 5 minutes when the internet first discovered color; now it's just painful.) Check it out. There's no better source of information on the Latin American Drug War. An Illinois school district has decided not to drug test its students. "There would have to be a clear and present [drug] problem," Stinson added. Although some of their other policies are still too extreme, it's nice to see a school that has avoided the lock-step buy-in to the drug testing regime. 9:22:12 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []