Cool story, I disagree, it's legalized here in CA.
https://www.mpp.org/policy/federal/are-consumers-or-cannabis...
> There are some exceptions. In each fiscal year since 2015, Congress has included provisions in appropriations acts that prohibit the U.S. Department of Justice from using funds to prevent states from “implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.” In effect, Congress prevents the DOJ from enforcing federal law in medical marijuana states. Courts have held up the provisions, and federal prosecutions of state-licensed businesses effectively stopped when it went into effect. However, those same protections haven’t been extended to adult-use (recreational) program participants, who remain at risk.
(not legal advice, not an attorney, not your attorney)
Caveat to the caveat is that DOJ keeps pushing the limit on the medical marijuana prosecution prohibition, and that in California (and the rest of the Ninth Circuit), the controlling case law is that the prohibition only applies to strict compliance with state medical use rules, and that even minor technical violations (even in states that also allow non-medical use) allows federal prosecution (the First Circuit last year established a slightly different rule).
We have to figure out how to regulate it rather than making it illegal.
For instance, minors should be protected from it*, but medical marijuana must be available to minors with certain medical conditions.
And DUIs must be prevented. That includes employment forms for operating heavy equipment.
Those legalizing and those still fighting the racist drug war share some problems.
* and also protected from harmful law enforcement practices
Well it's completely* legal to smoke it at home.
https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/health-and-human-services/health....
* More or less
* completely, of course they can here and there and not vice versa. But this asymmetry doesn't render it illegal IMO.
Sanctuary cities have shown that the state/local governments partially override the federal government on an overall basis, though not so much directly in individual cases (though they are able to request, not demand, and get their way in a lot of individual cases).
No, they don’t.
Sanctuary cities are not sanctuaries from the federal law the “sanctuary” status references, merely ones where the city has prohibited public resources from being used to provide extra, nonmandatory, help to the feds.
“Not actively helping” isn’t “overriding”.