Despite being disappointed with the language of the bill, it appears that Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer is not upset enough to veto the final version of S.B. 423, which would destroy the burgeoning medical marijuana industry, force patients to go to the illicit market, and make it extremely difficult for patients to qualify for the program.

On April 30, Gov. Schweitzer announced that while he was not pleased that the legislature had ignored most of the amendments he suggested when he first sent the bill back to them, he felt that it would be better to pass S.B. 423 than leave the status quo. He said he will let the bill become law without signing or vetoing it. He still has time to change his mind, however.

Under S.B. 423, larger marijuana-growing operations and all dispensaries must shut down by July 1. Patients will have to grow their own or obtain it for free from a provider who can grow for up to three people. In addition, doctors who certify 25 patients will have to pay for an investigation into their practices.

Patients and Families United plans to launch a statewide referendum campaign soon and will need help from far and wide. If enough signatures are gathered with the required geographic distribution, S.B. 423 might be prevented from taking effect prior to putting it before voters in November 2012.

Gov. Schweitzer should be commended for vetoing the bill to completely repeal the medical marijuana law and for attempting to get the legislature to amend the current bill in a reasonable fashion. He shouldn’t give up now. S.B. 423 is bad for patients, doctors, and businesses. It will put many Montanans out of work and many more sick people back in pain. And instead of creating a regulated, controlled system for distribution, it will have the opposite effect from what the legislators intended, specifically driving patients into the hands of illicit drug dealers.

Governor Brian Schweitzer stood up for the voters, medical marijuana patients, and their caregivers Wednesday when he declared his intent to issue an amendatory veto for SB 423. This bill would have drastically hindered the ability of seriously ill patients to become qualified for the program and would have eliminated the bustling legitimate medical marijuana industry, forcing patients to grow their own or resort to the illicit market. Schweitzer said he will send the bill back with amendments that allow strictly licensed commercial growing and distribution, as well as protect the privacy of patients.

The governor stated that the bill, as written and passed by the House and Senate, is unconstitutional. He also expressed disappointment in the legislature for wasting nearly the entire session trying to thwart the will of Montana voters by passing bills that are nothing but repeal in disguise.

From Missoulian:

Schweitzer said he doesn’t believe the bill will survive a legal challenge.

“I’m kind of disgusted right now,” he said…

… Schweitzer criticized the Legislature for managing to “squander away” most of the 90-day legislative session before sending him the bill. He said lawmakers already know it’s unconstitutional, which is why they put a “severability clause” in it, saying if a court strikes down part of the bill, the rest stands. Severability clauses are common in complex bills.

“Why don’t you just pass something that works, that’s constitutional and that can survive the test of time?” he asked.

If the legislature does not transmit the bill in time for an amendatory veto, Gov. Schweitzer will be forced to either veto it outright or allow it to become law. From his statements, it’s not hard to guess which way he’s leaning.

In addition, it appears that the governor of Montana did not overreact to recent statements from U.S. Attorneys in Washington that the federal government could prosecute medical marijuana businesses and state employees involved in licensing them. Unlike Gov. Gregoire, he probably looked at the absence of such prosecutions in states like Rhode Island, Maine, Colorado, and New Mexico, all of which have state-licensed dispensaries. Just because the Department of Justice says they can go after marijuana businesses does not mean that they will, and the experiences of these states suggest that they are not likely to do so, particularly in states that have clear regulations allowing dispensaries.

Let’s all reach out and thank Governor Schweitzer for treating medical marijuana in a rational, principled, and compassionate manner. If he keeps standing up for the will of the people of Montana, his re-election is “guar-an-dang-teed!”

Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer breaks out the "veto brand" on bad bills. - Associated Press photo

I’m starting to sound like a broken record. Yesterday, the DEA, assisted by local law enforcement, raided several Michigan medical marijuana businesses and arrested the owners. No information has been released since the investigation is ongoing.

This sounds awfully familiar. Last month, federal authorities cracked down on medical marijuana facilities in Montana and California. According to all available information, those raided were in compliance with state law and were legitimate businesses.

It seems that the DEA is going to continue taking an active role in investigating and prosecuting medical marijuana patients and caregivers, regardless of Justice Department direction to the contrary. While they are legally allowed to enforce federal law in states where medical marijuana is permitted, the current policy directs them to only do so if state law is being broken.

I’m left wondering why the DEA is involved if the people and organizations being targeted are operating within state law. If these “criminals” are not following state law, why is it necessary to call in the feds? One would think local law enforcement is perfectly capable of enforcing their own state’s laws and wouldn’t want anyone nosing in on their jurisdiction. Could it be that some law enforcement and certain politicians see this as a way to impose extreme penalties on a group of people with whom they have personal and ideological problems?

Or is the DEA simply taking it upon themselves to interpret state law, storming in when someone is operating within a legal gray area?

Either way, the DEA has no business going after medical marijuana businesses in the states. This is a state issue that is best dealt with through debate and regulation, not with assault weapons and battering rams.

Please sign this petition asking President Obama to keep his promise and end the raids.

First, the good news: California attorney general candidate Steve Cooley conceded the election to his opponent, Kamala Harris. While Harris may not be the most outspoken supporter of Prop 215 or medical marijuana patients, she is sure to be a better option. Cooley’s history of antagonism toward the medical marijuana field and complicity with federal law enforcement as district attorney of Los Angeles would have meant trouble for the state’s more than 350K registered patients. Disaster averted!

Unfortunately, the marijuana-hostile legal and civic environment that Cooley helped create in Southern California resulted in Los Angeles and Orange County supervisors voting to ban medical marijuana dispensaries in all unincorporated areas. Rather than use the tools at their disposal to deal with illegal dispensaries, the supervisors elected to effectively deny patients in those areas access to their medicine unless they feel like a nice long drive (assuming they are able to travel, or even get out of bed).

L.A. County patients can take one small comfort, though. It appears that higher politics has left Cooley feeling a little burned out, judging from a statement he released suggesting that this is his last term in office:

“I will complete my third term and finish my career as a professional prosecutor in the office where it began over 37 years ago,” he said.

Good riddance.

Federal raids on state-legal medical marijuana entities have continued under the Obama administration, despite repeated assurances that they would end.

But there has been one noticeable difference from how the raids were carried out under the Bush administration: officials are no longer publicizing them. Mike Riggs has the story in the Daily Caller:

[T]he DOJ has demonstrated one marked change now that it’s under Democratic control: The department has stopped publicizing medical marijuana raids, both by requesting that more cases be sealed under court order and by refusing to distribute press releases.

Late last week, DEA and FBI agents raided five medical marijuana dispensaries in Nevada. In July, DEA agents raided the home of 65-year-old Mendocino County, California, grower Joy Greenfield and confiscated plants, money, and her computer. Also in July, DEA agents raided the home of a couple in Michigan who were licensed by the state to use marijuana, as well as three medical marijuana dispensaries in San Diego. In January and  February of this year, the DEA raided two medical marijuana research labs in Colorado.

In all of the above cases, the DEA and the U.S. Attorneys’ offices issued no press releases and held no press conferences. The websites for DEA and the U.S. Attorneys’ offices in Detroit, Denver, Northern California, and Los Angeles (which also handles cases in Nevada) make no mention of the above dispensary raids, but do feature news releases for raids, arrests, and investigations involving harder drugs, as well marijuana trafficking, which is illegal in all states.

[…] But even if there hasn’t been any official change, Garrison Courtney, the head of communications for the DEA from 2005-2009, confirmed that his office regularly publicized dispensary busts. “When I was chief of public affairs, if it was a good case and a good bust, we put it out. There were some of the medical marijuana shops that had a ton of cash, a ton of weed, or a ton of guns, and we put it out. There wasn’t any policy against that.”

And yet, in the case of the Michigan couple, guns were found, but no press release was ever issued by the DEA or the U.S. Attorney.

Courtney added that “if you look at the DEA website, there are a lot of [Bush-era] news releases from San Francisco and Los Angeles. We were pretty aggressive in talking about the different dispensaries and the fact that they were operating in violation of federal law.”

Is this a case of officials trying to cover up their broken promises?