Welcome to the digital.law repository at the University of Washington

Unrealistic Expectations: The Federal Government’s Unachievable Mandate for State Cannabis Regulation

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Sweeney, Rebecca
dc.date.accessioned 2019-01-07T18:35:44Z
dc.date.available 2019-01-07T18:35:44Z
dc.date.issued 2018-12
dc.identifier.citation 93 Wash. L. Rev. 2175 (2018) en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0043-0617
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1773.1/1857
dc.description Volume 93, no.4, December 2018 en_US
dc.description.abstract Abstract: The states that have legalized cannabis maintain a complicated relationship with the federal government. Since the Ogden Memorandum was issued in 2009, the federal government has left regulation of cannabis to the discretion of the states. That policy has recently shifted. In 2018, former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a new memorandum that rescinded guidance for states about how to structure the legalization of cannabis. The federal government’s current position is now ideologically aligned with that of states like Nebraska and Oklahoma. These states chose not to legalize cannabis and instead adhere to the Controlled Substances Act’s classification of cannabis as a Schedule I substance. In 2015, Nebraska and Oklahoma unsuccessfully petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for permission to sue Colorado because its cannabis was leaking outside the state’s borders. Nebraska and Oklahoma insisted that Colorado’s legalization scheme compromises the drug policies of Nebraska, Oklahoma, and other neighboring states. Because the U.S. Department of Justice rescinded its previous guidance and Congress continues to stay silent regarding the tension between state laws, the judicial branch has a new opportunity to validate the concerns of Nebraska and Oklahoma. Therefore, it is even more important for states that legalize cannabis to prevent cannabis from leaking outside their borders. To prevent diversion of cannabis outside its state’s borders, the Washington State Legislature has created a regulatory licensing system. But despite Washington’s tightly regulated system, the federal government remains concerned about the legalized cannabis industry. Neither Washington nor Colorado has successfully prevented all cannabis diversion. The Cole Memorandum articulated an unrealistic standard for states’ reduction in diversion: total elimination. At the very least, Washington and Colorado’s regulatory procedures should be compared to those of other states without legalization. Ultimately, the federal government should conclusively determine whether states are able to legalize cannabis without the overhanging threat of federal intervention on the basis of diversion. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher Seattle: Washington Law Review, University of Washington School of Law en_US
dc.subject Comment en_US
dc.title Unrealistic Expectations: The Federal Government’s Unachievable Mandate for State Cannabis Regulation en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.rights.holder Copyright 2018 by Washington Law Review Association. en_US

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search digital.law

Advanced Search


My Account