We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is in the news for two reasons
today: he's testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee
on his possible links to Russia and a letter he wrote to Congress
indicating his disapproval of the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment
has surfaced.
Last month we
reported that Congress extended the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment.
No sooner was this extension passed, but Sessions wrote
to Congress seeking its repeal. As many readers know, the
Amendment prohibits the Justice Department from using federal funds
to prevent states from implementing their own medical marijuana
laws. It is, in essence, a victory for states' rights, in
the sense that they can decide whether to make medical marijuana
legal, without fear of federal government interference.
Yesterday massroots.com, and today The Washington Post reported that in May,
Sessions wrote to Congress stating that "it would be unwise
for Congress to restrict the discretion of the Department [of
Justice] to fund particular prosecutions, particularly in the midst
of an historic drug epidemic and potentially long term uptick in
violent crime."
Of course, the "historic drug epidemic" to which
Sessions refers has nothing to do with cannabis, but involves
opiates, and, according to the Washington Post, a growing body of
research shows that opiate overdoses decrease in states in which
medical marijuana is legal. Sessions also wrote that
"[t]he Department must be in a position to use all laws
available to combat the transnational drug organizations and
dangerous traffickers who threaten American lives." It
is difficult to understand how Rohrabacher-Farr prevents the
federal government from enforcing the Controlled Substances Act
against those engaged in trafficking in drugs across state
lines.
Sessions' position is contrary to that of the President who
expressed support for medical marijuana laws during his campaign.
However, over the past several months there have been a
number of mixed signals from the Administration regarding
enforcement of the federal prohibition on the possession and sale
of cannabis. These mixed signals have created tremendous
uncertainty in all segments of the cannabis industry, but it is
hard to believe that the Administration really intends to disrupt
what has become a multi-billion dollar industry.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
In an interesting, but non-precedential, decision from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v TWI Pharmaceuticals, Inc et al), the Court affirmed a decision from the U.S. District Court of New Jersey.
The bulk of the award, more than $7 million in punitive damages, went to a female anesthesiologist who was allegedly choked and pushed up against the wall in a locker room by a surgeon.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has issued an alert to retail investors in the cannabis industry following a number of recent enforcement actions.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Investment In Substance Use Disorder & Opioid Addiction Treatment Centers (Video)
