So did the U.S. Supreme Court just give Obama the choice on the Colorado marijuana question?

From this Inquisitr source it looks like the U.S. Supreme Court has asked the Obama administration to give it guidance on deciding the question of continued marijuana legalization in Colorado. The case concerns the states of Nebraska and Oklahoma complaining that marijuana from Colorado is leaking across the border into their states. The administration's brief on the subject isn't due for a few months, but now, if this report is accurate and the source isn't taking dramatic license with a headline, it looks like it may be decisive. If so, President Obama and his administration must make a clear choice in the matter and, if past is prelude, the man will give it a thumbs up.

www.inquisitr.com...

So far, Obama has had a hands-off policy concerning marijuana and lets the states experiment as they choose, but now the Supreme Court is asking for some guidance.

Colorado, meanwhile, has asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit, saying the marijuana discussion is changing political views across the country and that the nation is in the middle of re-evaluating its stance on the issue.

Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, Washington state and the District of Columbia have all legalized the recreational use of marijuana and many other states have allowed its medical use or decriminalized it, including Nebraska.

We’ll have to wait and see what Obama says as a legal brief from the White House isn’t expected for some months, according to the Christian Science Monitor.

I wouldn't trust him to tell me the sun was up till I checked...

Don't hold your breath is my advice...prison lobby is pretty Fricking strong.

Edit to be clear, non-violent mj users have no business being in prison.

The fact is this...... Until marijuana is taken of the schedule 1 class of drugs, anyone can be arrested for possession under federal law. This includes medical marijuana as well. This needs to be done by congress, Obama and the executive branch are not in the business of making or changing law although he does have the discretion on what to enforce as evidenced by immigration issues.

a reply to: Irishhaf

So far he has kept a 'hands off' approach in letting the states decide, so the brief should reiterate that and tell the Supreme Court that this administration is for states rights on the issue, which should be enough to win it for Colorado. This case is a biggy in the question though, maybe the most important one, so hopefully the administration holds to its past comments and doesn't backslide. Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose, which is a phrase I've never understood but may apply to this case.

a reply to: Helious

I've notice anyone can get arrested for pretty much anything these days.

I've notice anyone can get arrested for pretty much anything these days.

a reply to: Ultralight

That's it! Put your hands around your back........

This sort of thing isn't particularly troublesome. The cat is out of the bag. There's no going back now. Too many people know the truth about marijuana now. Whether Obama does anything or not, the ball will keep rolling toward full legalization.

originally posted by: Helious
The fact is this...... Until marijuana is taken of the schedule 1 class of drugs, anyone can be arrested for possession under federal law. This includes medical marijuana as well. This needs to be done by congress, Obama and the executive branch are not in the business of making or changing law although he does have the discretion on what to enforce as evidenced by immigration issues.

That's it exactly. But, I'm ignorant as to who has the authority to change its Schedule 1 classification. The FDA? I just don't know.

Think about all this time and money being wasted day after day, week after week, month after month on this MJ flip flopping about, seriously america just legalize it already.

The fact that some states HAVE taken the plunge show its not only possible but in fact completely doable. Those states havnt melted down into anarchy. Some is now leaking over, hardly a shock - obama, wise up and say yes to all states.

Thats millions of dollars of taxable income from jobs and merchandise and less going to the cartels - not to mention all the crime that goes with it from trafficker to user.

I dont even like pot, but its clear to see that making this herb legal is the way to go, you can still sack people who turn up stoned for work the same you would for prescription pills, illegal drugs or alcohol - what are you afraid of? Less alcohol users?

a reply to: Aleister

Greetings and Salutations from a medically retired cop from Ca. what I'm about to type may be construed as "friendly advice" because although I'm verse in the law, I lost that matchbook w/the info on getting the actual sheepskin. I did work in a med-large Ca. that once led the league in homicides and I broke My back fighting a pit bull at a meth lab.

Here it is: Don't partake anywhere near/about where anyone else may see/smell You and NOT to go public until You actually see Your City's Mayor and Chief of Police partake and ONLY after coming to ATS™ to •CONFIRM• You weren't dreaming it.. *** Your Mileage May Vary ***

As was mentioned, the 'Corrections Business' is a $3B/yr. industry. I saw "The Establishment" incarcerate the Urban male (read: Black or 'Other') for 20-25 years during "The Crack War" while the sub-Urban male (read: white or affluent; voter) received Probation for using the same drug coc aine. The Urban male "rocked" it up and made 3x the $$$ so beating them at their own game.

Need proof? How is the usage of heroin doing in Your neck of the woods? In 2001 Afghanistan produced 7% of the World's opium, now it is 84%.. BigPHarma™ needs opiates for their over prescribed pain meds. (and I'm on them, too..)

It's ALL a racket!! Just see if Your County Jail is run by a private enterprise, probably CCA™ (Corrections Corp of America) Why do You think the "Thug Mentality" is pushed and pushed? Because now even You can buy the same prison denims as the country's top felons wear "on the yard"...

namaste

Proud member of LEAP.cc

a reply to: donktheclown

I have metal allergies but ok with fur...

This might be off topic but does the UN have a say? If not then when are they going to start revisiting this issue?

Cannabis extracts — marijuana, hashish and cannabis oil — are classified as narcotic drugs under both Schedules I and IV of the 1961 United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Art. 36 requests State Parties to “adopt such measures as will ensure that …possession… of drugs contrary to the provisions of this Convention… shall be punishable offences when committed intentionally...”. The active principles of cannabis, the cannabinoids THC and specifically dronabinol (delta-9-THC), are classified as psychotropic substances under Schedules I and II respectively of the 1971 United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Art 22 of this echoes the terms of the 1961 Convention above, stating that “each Party shall treat as a punishable offence, when committed intentionally, any action contrary to a law or regulation adopted in pursuance of its obligations under this Convention… “. Finally, the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic of 1988, Art. 3 requests establishment of a criminal offence for possession of drugs for the purposes of trafficking (Art. 3.1(a)(iii)), and for the possession for personal consumption (Art.3.2).  This latter has been the subject of a wide range of interpretations and analyses; see ELDD’s Legal Reports for example the EMCDDA thematic paper “Illicit drug use in the EU: legislative approaches”, section 1, and Chapter 7 of A Cannabis Reader, EMCDDA Monograph 8; Cannabis Control in Europe.

UN DRUG CONTROL

originally posted by: thektotheg
This sort of thing isn't particularly troublesome. The cat is out of the bag. There's no going back now. Too many people know the truth about marijuana now. Whether Obama does anything or not, the ball will keep rolling toward full legalization.

Do you know what the case before the Supreme Court is about? Nebraska and Oklahoma are asking the Supreme Court to end legal marijuana in Colorado. They're complaining that it's leaking over their border to a major extent. That is a problem, not a very nice thing to have happen to the neighboring states of a legal pot state. But the case is the decider: Will Colorado be allowed to continue its legalization of marijuana? And if the article I quoted is correct, and I haven't researched any other site on this, the entire thing may be decided not by the court, but by President Obama, who the court is now looking to for guidance.

It will be an interesting read when the Obama administration submits its brief, according to the Christian Science Monitor (if the linked-to article is correct), in a few months. That brief, that one legal paper, may be determinative in the legalization question in the United States. That's why this could be an important story. Maybe Obama will write it himself.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Maybe not in this case, as the U.S. Supreme Court didn't ask, as yet, for guidance from the U.N. They've asked it of the administration of the President of the United States - literally asking the president himself, "Dude, whatdayathink?". As for other countries and marijuana, you'd thinkthat by this time that a majority of the leaders and most of the important figures in almost every country in the world has played with marijuana. Some enjoy or enjoyed it a lot, others, having a bad experience or two, don't want anything to do with it again. But it's probably a good guess to say that many, if not most, of the world's elite have smoked, and Obama pretty much made fun of his own pot history at the Correspondent's Dinner in D.C. last week. So the rules made by the U.N. on this issue may have already outlived their reach. But on this one, involving the United States but, logically looked at, actually involving much of the free world, all anyone can do is watch and read. If what this article hints at is true, the Supreme Court punted on this one, put the ball into someone else's court, pitched Obama a slow one over the meat of the plate, just to see how he hits it back and returns it over the net.

You know it costs three times what the normal street value is. It's all about the money in the land of milk and honey.

a reply to: JimNasium

Star for you, thanks for educating all of us a bit more. You broke it fighting a pit bull in a meth lab?!!! Man, thank you for your service. I hope the pain meds are giving that thing some time to heal, at least heal as much as it can.

Can't talk about personal use on ATS, and wouldn't have that much to say, except not often. And some places are better than others, which is the topic of the thread, as the Colorado law hinges on the Supreme Court decision, which might effect Oregon and Washington. Shouldn't affect Alaska though, as no other state touches Alaska. As a former law enforcement member, do you favor legalization? And what would you suggest occur to stop much of what is leaking over the state lines and putting pressure on local law enforcement, which actually is probably overstretched financially.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
This might be off topic but does the UN have a say? If not then when are they going to start revisiting this issue?

Cannabis extracts — marijuana, hashish and cannabis oil — are classified as narcotic drugs under both Schedules I and IV of the 1961 United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Art. 36 requests State Parties to “adopt such measures as will ensure that …possession… of drugs contrary to the provisions of this Convention… shall be punishable offences when committed intentionally...”. The active principles of cannabis, the cannabinoids THC and specifically dronabinol (delta-9-THC), are classified as psychotropic substances under Schedules I and II respectively of the 1971 United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Art 22 of this echoes the terms of the 1961 Convention above, stating that “each Party shall treat as a punishable offence, when committed intentionally, any action contrary to a law or regulation adopted in pursuance of its obligations under this Convention… “. Finally, the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic of 1988, Art. 3 requests establishment of a criminal offence for possession of drugs for the purposes of trafficking (Art. 3.1(a)(iii)), and for the possession for personal consumption (Art.3.2).  This latter has been the subject of a wide range of interpretations and analyses; see ELDD’s Legal Reports for example the EMCDDA thematic paper “Illicit drug use in the EU: legislative approaches”, section 1, and Chapter 7 of A Cannabis Reader, EMCDDA Monograph 8; Cannabis Control in Europe.

UN DRUG CONTROL

The UN and all other nations are on the take from the USA it was part of their humanitary aid make MJ a crime and get free money from Uncle Sam. Don't do it and no aid for you...

originally posted by: guitarplayer

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
This might be off topic but does the UN have a say? If not then when are they going to start revisiting this issue?

Cannabis extracts — marijuana, hashish and cannabis oil — are classified as narcotic drugs under both Schedules I and IV of the 1961 United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Art. 36 requests State Parties to “adopt such measures as will ensure that …possession… of drugs contrary to the provisions of this Convention… shall be punishable offences when committed intentionally...”. The active principles of cannabis, the cannabinoids THC and specifically dronabinol (delta-9-THC), are classified as psychotropic substances under Schedules I and II respectively of the 1971 United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Art 22 of this echoes the terms of the 1961 Convention above, stating that “each Party shall treat as a punishable offence, when committed intentionally, any action contrary to a law or regulation adopted in pursuance of its obligations under this Convention… “. Finally, the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic of 1988, Art. 3 requests establishment of a criminal offence for possession of drugs for the purposes of trafficking (Art. 3.1(a)(iii)), and for the possession for personal consumption (Art.3.2).  This latter has been the subject of a wide range of interpretations and analyses; see ELDD’s Legal Reports for example the EMCDDA thematic paper “Illicit drug use in the EU: legislative approaches”, section 1, and Chapter 7 of A Cannabis Reader, EMCDDA Monograph 8; Cannabis Control in Europe.

UN DRUG CONTROL

The UN and all other nations are on the take from the USA it was part of their humanitary aid make MJ a crime and get free money from Uncle Sam. Don't do it and no aid for you...

In-ter-esting...

I have heard this I think. The cotton industry?

a reply to: Aleister

Are there any pro-pot democrats running for election?
Serious ones?

a reply to: Aleister

Yes, I'm aware. It doesn't matter. It's pretty plain to see. People may not inform themselves, but they freaking hate being lied to and made to feel silly. There's no going back. There isn't a ruling in this country that will keep marijuana from becoming legal.