« SCOTUS limits reach of confrontation clause in Michigan v. Bryant | Main | Second Circuit affirms conviction and sentence of creator of morphed child porn »

February 28, 2011

"A Critical Appraisal of the Department of Justice’s New Approach to Medical Marijuana"

The title of this post is the title of this new paper by Rob Mikos now available via SSRN.  Here is the abstract:

The Obama Administration has embarked upon a much-heralded shift in federal policy toward medical marijuana. Eschewing the hard-ball tactics favored by earlier Administrations, Attorney General Eric Holder announced in October 2009 that the Department of Justice (DOJ) would stop enforcing the federal marijuana ban against persons who comply with state medical marijuana laws. Given the significance of the medical marijuana issue in both criminal law and federalism circles, this Article sets out to provide the first in-depth analysis of the changes wrought by the DOJ’s new Non Enforcement Policy (NEP).

In a nutshell, it suggests that early enthusiasm for the NEP is misguided; on close inspection, the NEP represents at most a very modest change in federal policy.  First, the NEP won’t necessarily stop federal agents from pursuing criminal prosecutions of marijuana dispensaries. In a twist of irony, the non-enforcement policy itself is not enforceable.  It doesn’t create any legal rights a court could invoke to dismiss a criminal case. And the DOJ itself will have a difficult time ensuring that federal prosecutors comply with the agency’s stated policy. Second, even assuming the NEP would block criminal prosecutions, federal law could still obstruct state medical marijuana programs by imposing -- or enabling others to impose -- a wide range of civil and private sanctions on medical marijuana users and their suppliers.  The problem is the NEP doesn’t repeal the federal ban on marijuana.  Marijuana technically remains illegal under federal law, and the possession, cultivation, or distribution of the drug trigger a host of civil sanctions not addressed by the NEP. For example, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) can deny federal housing subsidies to medical marijuana users, and pharmaceutical companies could potentially bring civil RICO actions against marijuana dispensaries. What is more, the federal ban arguably preempts states from shielding marijuana users and dispensaries from sanctions imposed by private parties.  For example, employers can likely skirt liability under state law for discriminating against employees who use marijuana for medical purposes.  Metaphorically, the federal ban is a hydra, only one head of which has been severed by the NEP (and one that could too easily be regrown). The labor of ending federal prohibition is not yet complete.

February 28, 2011 at 01:36 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e2014e8665fc3a970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "A Critical Appraisal of the Department of Justice’s New Approach to Medical Marijuana":

Comments

One needs to analyze this thoroughly...different people may have different opinions about it...

Posted by: New York accident attorneys | Mar 4, 2011 12:41:16 AM

At least now that they release this there is more guidelines on NEP. But there is still much confusion between state and federal law enforcing I am still lost. :(

Posted by: Brenda Soona | Jun 30, 2011 12:01:28 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB