« "Sentencing Policy Adjudication and Empiricism" with a focus on federal child porn sentencing | Main | Comments on Steubenville outcomes: "Juvenile Court is supposed to be better than this" »

March 17, 2013

New Hampshire perhaps poised to become twentieth US jurisdiction to legalize medical marijuana

As reported in this new AP article, headlined "House to vote on medical marijuana bill," there is reason to believe New Hampshire could soom become the next state to legalize medical marijuana. Here are the details:

New Hampshire may take a step closer to legalizing medical marijuana this week, with a House vote scheduled on a proposal that would sanction five dispensaries and allow patients or caregivers to grow up to three adult plants.

An amended version of the bill restricting out-of-state patients from purchasing or growing marijuana in New Hampshire and tightening other language was overwhelmingly approved by a House committee.

The New Hampshire Legislature has previously passed three medical marijuana bills, all vetoed by former Gov. John Lynch. Gov. Maggie Hassan has endorsed a tightly regulated medical marijuana law, but raised concerns about this bill’s home-grow option.

Because eighteen states and DC already have already legalized medical marijuana, the next state to legalize marijuana will be the 20th jurisdiction to do so. This even-number milestone may not be that significant, but I do think it will be especially (and constitutionally?) important if (when?) more than half of all US jurisdictions have legalized marijuana in some manner.

March 17, 2013 at 06:58 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e2017ee9755757970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New Hampshire perhaps poised to become twentieth US jurisdiction to legalize medical marijuana:

Comments

The USSC has not shown must interest in striking down on "unusual" grounds or such non-capital penalties. The counting suggested by the OP is relevant under current doctrine, but realistically, will it really matter?

Posted by: Joe | Mar 18, 2013 12:45:31 PM

edit: yes, there is the recent non-capital cases involving minors, but I think my point holds generally for adults without some sort of special circumstance. And, medical need doesn't seem like one they are willing to recognize.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-151.ZS.html

One can hope ...

Posted by: Joe | Mar 18, 2013 12:47:59 PM

I wish my state would be the 21st... I have chronic back pain (muscular, not nerve-based) for which there appears to be no orthopedic/surgical solution. It's not disabling, but it is severe at times. I've tried marijuana (while spending time in a med marijuana state), and it helped! I know that "back pain" is the classic pretext used by hedonistic ganja hounds to get their weed, but it is actually also both a real problem for some of us and a problem that can actually be helped by marijuana. I guess I'll just have to wait and see if my state jumps on the bandwagon.

Posted by: anon | Mar 19, 2013 2:24:44 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