As reported by the AAJ in Trial Magazine, a recent ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court found that the US Department of Justice (DOJ) may not use government funding to prosecute for federal drug charges if plaintiffs are within their state’s legal bounds regarding medical marijuana.
This case began when ten people filed to appeal to the Ninth Circuit when charged with possession, conspiracy to manufacture, distribution of marijuana and other charges, despite being in states that have legalized certain uses of medical marijuana. The group of defendants argued that Chapter 542 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act expressly prevented the DOJ from using federal funds to prosecute them. The charges brought against the defendants were based on violations of Title 21 of the US Code.
The defense demonstrated that the Consolidated Appropriations Act was created to stop the DOJ from using funds to “prevent states from implementing their own state laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.” Furthermore,the Ninth Circuit found that the plaintiffs had standing for an appeal on the basis that “their potential convictions constituted concrete, particularized, and imminent injuries” as a result of the DOJ’s charges.
Results of the Hearing
The Ninth Circuit found that Chapter 542 of the Appropriations Act does, in fact, prevent the DOJ from using funds to prosecute people “who engaged in conduct [that]… fully complied with” state marijuana laws. However, the ruling did not specify the extent of prosecution that could be enacted on people who do not comply with state marijuana laws.
Marc Zilversmit, a San Francisco attorney who represented a number of plaintiffs in the case stated, “The Court left open the possibility to prosecute individuals for growing or selling marijuana when they are doing so outside of a state’s medical marijuana laws, such as selling across state lines or growing and selling for recreational use instead for legitimate medical marijuana patients.”
It is still unclear if the DOJ will challenge the ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court.
Leave a Comment