Legal question, sort of

[TarnishedPenny]

I’ve been to the USA a number of times recently, enjoyed myself by and large. I do have one question for US citizens however.

Without getting into whether cannabis should or should not be illegal, I’m a bit puzzled by an apparent conflict in state vs federal laws. I understand the semi-independence of the states in some areas, but would think that federal law would be trump. Still, after (with some effort once or twice) convincing the (federal) customs folks that we aren’t about to threaten your fair country with cannabis, we invariably drive by a weed shop or six just down the road from the border. If the feds are actually serious, why aren’t the appropriate federal agents banging on doors? Not criticizing or mocking, just curious.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I don’t know if it is law or just policy, but at least in the states I have lived in that have legalized recreational cannabis, federal laws against sales or possession are not enforced.

What are enforced by the feds are regulations prohibiting businesses dealing cannabis from getting federally insured loans, mortgages and things like that. That’s the reason no one has yet created a marijuana franchise business. When it’s legalized nationally, somebody will, and these small pot shops will disappear like video stores.

 

[alohadave]

Marijuana is illegal at the federal level. It's a Scedule 1 drug (most restrictive classification).

The US Attorney General has a policy to not pursue recreational use if states decriminalize it. They will still go after large volume trafficking and importing.

Some states have allowed use for medical reasons with a prescription, and some have legalized it allowing for recreational use.

 

[MrPixel]

It's a mixed bag. The Feds are basically looking the other way in those states that have legalized Mary Jane. They have limited resources, and they'd rather go after fentanyl, meth, and the other really bad stuff. HOWever, do not "import" a personal stash - you will be at minimum be detained and your weed confiscated. You can't even legally cross state lines with it, as every state has it's own rules that frequently conflict. For instance, in my state you can't even have "adult use cannabis" in your car in an unsealed container. You can take it home from the pot shop unopened, but it has to stay home once you get into it.

MB has the gist of it - because of the Fed rules, banks won't touch businesses dealing in ganja. No credit cards, debit cards, or cheques. Cash only. So between the grass and THC-infused product everywhere and the thousands in cash, fumé shops are literal fortresses, and even your driving into the parking lot is digitally recorded. Given the proliferation of facial recognition and its combination with AI, and sneaky little things like auto license plate readers*, your presence in such an establishment is likely to make it to a prospective employer, who may or may not (probably not) be okay with your locoweed usage, legal or no.

* - Just the other day, on our way to the hardware store I noticed a new plate reader - they're subtle - had been setup across the street from a popular skunk dispensary. These are state installations administered by the highway police. Assholes.

 

[Lifestyle66]

I’ve been to the USA a number of times recently, enjoyed myself by and large. I do have one question for US citizens however.

Without getting into whether cannabis should or should not be illegal, I’m a bit puzzled by an apparent conflict in state vs federal laws. I understand the semi-independence of the states in some areas, but would think that federal law would be trump. Still, after (with some effort once or twice) convincing the (federal) customs folks that we aren’t about to threaten your fair country with cannabis, we invariably drive by a weed shop or six just down the road from the border. If the feds are actually serious, why aren’t the appropriate federal agents banging on doors? Not criticizing or mocking, just curious.

You sort of answered the questions with the federal agents "banging on doors" to enforce the law. There just aren't enough federal agents to do that nation-wide. The enforcement of various laws is done in a stratified method, and the feds often require the assistance of state and local law enforcement to get their job done. And when the states legalized it, those state and locals just won't enforce that federal law.

HOWEVER, those federal laws still apply to anyone going onto federal property, such as to the National Parks, military bases, or into federal buildings. You can be arrested for carrying "legally purchased" marijuana from a cannabis store in Colorado and taking it onto Ft Carson, Colorado.

Also, you'll notice that when dealing with those cannabis stores, they don't take credit cards, and only deal in cash. That's because federal laws apply to interstate bank transfers, and the Feds could lock a store's bank assets for violations of Federal law.

 

[Lifestyle66]

...
MB has the gist of it - because of the Fed rules, banks won't touch businesses dealing in ganja. No credit cards, debit cards, or cheques. Cash only.

They deal in cash, not because the banks WON'T touch their money, but because if that money goes into the bank or via credit card transactions, the Feds CAN take it.

Banks all deal through the interstate Federal banking system, and transactions which violate other Federal laws can cause the accounts to be locked and confiscated.

 

[Carnevil9]

It's a matter of "picking your battles." The states legalize medical and recreational use in violation of federal law, which technically overrules state laws. But the Feds only have so many resources, so they focus on the bigger problems.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I'm not a lawyer and I don't know specifically how everything is exactly structured but what I was taught in school (in Canada) is that in Canada, criminal law is a federal code, and civil law is left to each province. That means that if two people commit murder at opposite ends of the country, they are subject to the same laws, same process and same penalties, whereas if you live with your partner, common law rights, marriage and divorce and custody and all that varies depending on what province you're in. Also, from how I was taught in school this is not the case in the US where criminal law is also controlled at the state level. Murder has different definitions in different states (for example there is one state Virginia maybe? that requires a body for a murder charge) and has different processes and wildly different penalties (death penalty, life in prison, parole etc).

So drugs being controlled by the criminal code are a state-by-state concern. As for US federal jurisdiction, I can only guess that it has to do with customs and immigration enforcement which can't do anything if nothing crosses the US border, and so long as nothing crosses state lines the FBI is not called. Again, these are my guesses.

 

[TheLobster]

AFAIK it’s sort of a misnomer to say that marihuana is “legal” in certain states. You are still committing a federal misdemeanor/felony/etc. if you purchase or possess it, but this crime simply isn’t enforced by the feds. It might still endanger your immigration status, for example, although that impact is somewhat blunted by thr fact that states with depenalized weed typically have various sanctuary laws.

In theory, a spiteful federal government may one day choose to pursue all those “legal” drug criminals. In practice, legalization on federal level seems likely after the next election since both presidential candidates are presumably inclined to pursue it (Trump had said so more or less explicitly).

 

[Voboy]

Marijuana is illegal at the federal level. It's a Scedule 1 drug (most restrictive classification).

The US Attorney General has a policy to not pursue recreational use if states decriminalize it. They will still go after large volume trafficking and importing.

Some states have allowed use for medical reasons with a prescription, and some have legalized it allowing for recreational use.

This.

OP, a Federal agent working at an FBI or BATF field office in Colorado or Massachusetts, if passing a cannabis dispensary, might be within his legal rights to pull over, bust the place, and arrest the proprietor for distributing a Schedule 1 substance in violation of federal law.

That same agent would also be immediately called onto the carpet by his supervisor; he would lose any goodwill he had acquired among his coworkers, he would be assigned to boring, bullshit details by said superior, he would be formally reprimanded for violating the AG's policy, and he might well be canned.

There is currently a massive disconnect between Federal policy on marijuana and public opinion of marijuana, and that public opinion is largely supported by the States (and their courts). An arrest such as the one I've just described would force that disconnect into a federal court, which would be massively embarrassing for the US Attorney who'd have to prosecute that case (while admitting that long-term federal policy has not supported such prosecutions). This, in turn, would trigger a series of court decisions that might lead to a constitutional challenge to the Feds' ability to schedule controlled substances across the board.

At worst, the Feds would lose their regulatory authority. At best, they'd win a pyrrhic victory that would make everybody mock them. Nobody wants any of that, because the whole edifice could come crashing down. Which is why our overzealous young Massachusetts FBI agent would receive nothing but abuse, for opening up such a can of worms.

Put more colloquially, for the Feds, the juice is not worth the squeeze. Think of pot laws like you'd think of some state sodomy statutes: sure they're on the books. But enforcing them would just make everything more painful.

 

[Lifestyle66]

I knew a young cop, a new police officer on a low-paid police force in a suburb of a major city.

He related the story of how he KNEW there was pot and possibly other drugs being sold from the back door of one store in the town. He had watched the store during his shift and the suspicious activity going in and out of the door indicted illegal activity. He was enthusiastic and ambitious and went to his police chief and asked for permission to conduct an undercover purchase to bust them.

The chief of police denied his request, saying write up your report and pass it up through channels to the DEA.

I pointed out to the new cop that the chief was looking out for his force and the town's best interests. If that new cop was killed in that drug bust transaction, the town taxpayers would be at a loss of the officer and paying for funeral and other expenses. The death of an officer would also make recruiting new officers more difficult, possibly costing higher salaries to fill the vacancies. So, basically, the chief was making a cost-benefit business decision to send the law enforcement task to a higher-paid level, because he could, and he reduced his own department's risks.

Law enforcement in the U.S. is basically a tiered business, with different levels handling different cases. Police and agents at all levels are paid to enforce the law ... at the level which benefits their constituents and agencies. Those individuals who learn and know that get promoted and get ahead. Those who don't learn are too enthusiastic trying to enforce ALL LAWS and end up being charged with murdering a guy for counterfeiting, something that could have been passed up the chain!

So, when it comes to cannabis use in the U.S., many states and local LEAs are recognizing that "it's not worth my time." The Federal agencies are just slow learners.

 

[NotWise]

Recreational cannabis is legal in my state. Constitutionally, I don't think Federal law applies unless the trade involves interstate commerce. As a result, all cannabis sold here is also grown and processed here under State regulations. You also can't transport it even for personal use across state lines.

I heard that a US Customs station on Interstate 25 was confiscating marijuana transported north from the border area. I think their theory is that transporting it on an Interstate Highway constitutes a Federal violation. Cases like that are so far under the US Attorney's radar that it doesn't make any sense for Customs to do that, whether their theory could be proven or not.

 

[Voboy]

If the feds are actually serious, why aren’t the appropriate federal agents banging on doors?

This is what it seems to boil down to, OP, based on most of these responses.

The feds are not actually serious, on an institutional level. For that matter, so aren't many other levels of law enforcement.

 

[XerXesXu]

The Constitution confers the right to regulate interstate trade on the Federal government. Criminal law is a state right. Unless the jurisdiction of more than one state is involved, federal jurisdiction cannot be invoked.