State Police won't participate in any raids on marijuana dispensaries open under state law

By adamg on Fri, 01/12/2018 - 9:39am

NBC Boston reports that if the feds decide to go after the dispensaries that have opened since voters approved them simply because they sell marijuana, they'll have to go it alone.

Topics:

Business

Free tagging:

Medical marijuana

Marijuana

Ad:

Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

they don't have the numbers, either

By anon on Fri, 01/12/2018 - 11:23am.

Per Wikipedia, the DEA has 21 field offices and ~4500 field officers. The field office headquartered in Boston serves MA, NH, VT, CT, and ME.

That means the DEA can be expected to have approximately 215 field officers to serve the five states of New England. They have more employees here, but most of them are not field personnel.

To put that in context, BPD has 2100 officers and the state police have 2300. The DEA flat out doesn't have the bodies to really crack down, and somewhere, whatever the DEA equivalent of a sergeant or quartermaster is knows this perfectly well.

Per Printz v. U.S.(1997), federal agencies cannot compel state law enforcement agencies to enact federal law if they don't want to; and here, they don't want to.

They don't need to crack down.

By Bob Leponge on Fri, 01/12/2018 - 3:04pm.

The DEA flat out doesn't have the bodies to really crack down

They don't need to crack down. The point of Sessions' directive is to scare off the investors.

Republicans: "we are business

By Kinopio on Fri, 01/12/2018 - 4:57pm.

Republicans: "we are business friendly!*"

*businesses must be owned by rich white men who donate millions to the pockets of republican politicians. we will attack other businesses.

supremacy clause

By ccjogrc on Mon, 01/15/2018 - 11:08am.

All Police are subordinate to the executive all can be charged under federal laws. The cop on the streets duty is to arrest, and they do not they can be charged in both State and federal court. It's about the rule of law, not the subject matter!
Article. VI.

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

So?

By adamg on Mon, 01/15/2018 - 5:23pm.

Nobody's arguing federal law isn't "supreme," but that doesn't mean that local authorities have to go ahead and enforce it. If Jeff Sessions wants to shut down marijuana dispensaries, nothing says State Police have to do it for him.

federa enforcement

By ccjogrc on Mon, 01/15/2018 - 9:56pm.

So we can at the local level refuse abortions, same-sex marriage, etc. One should be reminded that the People of California voted against Same-sex marriage, it was overruled by the Federal; court. The Locals and the State are required to enforce it despite their vote against it. There is a Federal Law, in addition, jurisdictions (State-Federal) are concurrent Under Art IV of the Ma. Declaration of Rights. It is the same as Marijuana or immigration, and Ma. like California must obey the law

So a failure to enforce is malfeasance as it manifests as a Rights violation!.