North Dakota\u2019s decision to drop penalties for possession of personal quantities of cannabis to an infraction won little media attention back in May. And activists in the state, who pushed for last year\u2019s defeated legalization initiative, say most of what coverage there was got it wrong.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The few headlines \u2014 for instance, in\u00a0Vox<\/a>,\u00a0US News & World Report<\/a>, the public policy website\u00a0Governing<\/a>, and even the usually authoritative\u00a0Marijuana Moment<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 said that North Dakota had \u201cdecriminalized\u201d cannabis. But David Stewart Owen, chair of\u00a0Legalize ND<\/a>, tells Cannabis Now that isn\u2019t quite accurate. He attributes this inaccuracy to an idiosyncrasy of state law.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s not true decrim,\u201d Owen says. \u201cUnder decrim, you no longer bear the burden of a criminal record for nonlegal activity. We got it from a Class B misdemeanor with a $1,000 fine and 30 days in jail to an infraction with a fine of $1,000 maximum (realistically, $500). But it\u2019s still on your criminal record.\u201d That\u2019s because under North Dakota law, an infraction is a criminal offense, even if it doesn\u2019t carry a jail term.\u00a0<\/p>\n Owen traces the confusion to widespread ignorance about North Dakota\u2019s uncharacteristic law, and to a misunderstanding of the announcement about the new measure from the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.<\/p>\n \u201cNORML tagged it \u2018decriminalization,\u2019 and everyone went with the tag, not the text,\u201d he says. \u201cThey posted it in the decrim category because they don\u2019t have one for \u2018weird-*ss infraction law.’\u201d<\/p>\n The actual (and accurate)\u00a0NORML headline<\/a>\u00a0was, \u201cNorth Dakota: Governor Signs Law Reducing Marijuana Possession Penalties.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWe call it a reduction in penalty, or \u2018baby decrim,’\u201d Owen says wryly. \u201cWe also call it a step in the right direction.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Owen, a University of North Dakota major in political science and molecular biology, says he took great pains to clear up the confusion. \u201cI did a media tour across the state to get the correct information out. I spent 16 hours on the road, doing TV and radio appearances in Fargo, Bismarck, Minot and Grand Forks in a 24-hour period.\u201d But few national outlets revisited the story.<\/p>\n \u201cThe national media doesn\u2019t care about North Dakota,\u201d Owen says flatly.\u00a0<\/p>\n The limited legislative victory came after GOP House Majority Caucus Leader Shannon Roers Jones of Fargo emerged as an ally in the statehouse in Bismarck. This happened as Legalize ND was mulling its next move after the\u00a0defeat of Measure 3<\/a>, the legalization initiative that was on the ballot in November.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cAt end of the Measure 3 campaign, she said she would not support legalization but would support decrim,\u201d Owen relates. \u201cWe worked together to craft a decrim bill.\u201d <\/p>\n That is, an actual decrim bill that would have imposed a civil fine of $500 for under an ounce or up to five plants.\u00a0<\/p>\n The decrim measure\u00a0failed on the House floor<\/a>\u00a0in February, and was re-introduced as a rider to another bill. But when it went to the joint committee to reconcile House and Senate versions, the penalty was jacked up to an infraction. That\u2019s the version that was passed and then\u00a0signed into law<\/a>\u00a0(with no fanfare) by Gov. Doug Burgum on May 8. The bill had passed with a veto-proof majority, so even if Burgum had failed to sign, it still would have automatically taken effect.<\/p>\n \u201cWe wanted true decrim with plant grow, while the opposition wanted to raise the penalty \u2014 which the bill does for over a pound,\u201d Owen says.<\/p>\n Instead, up to a half ounce is now an infraction and the criminal penalties for cultivation of any quantity remain unchanged. Seizure of cannabis by police was permitted under both versions.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Further progress came on July 10, when a second bill was passed that\u00a0puts in place a pardon system<\/a>\u00a0for low-level marijuana offenders if they\u2019ve stayed on the good side of the law for five years. This is also a compromise measure, answering the growing\u00a0demands for expungement<\/a>\u00a0of cannabis convictions without\u00a0actually<\/em> expunging.<\/p>\n The conviction will remain on the record (should a prospective employer or landlord choose to check) but it will now say \u201cpardoned by governor.\u201d<\/p>\n Even to get this compromise measure passed was an \u201cuphill fight and a half,\u201d Owen says. Measure 3\u00a0would have mandated<\/a>\u00a0true expungement.<\/p>\n Still, it is a significant victory and some 170,000 North Dakotans will be eligible for pardon. By Owen\u2019s math, that\u2019s one in every four adults in the state.\u00a0<\/p>\n Legalize ND still, of course, has its eyes set on legalization, and a\u00a0new initiative is in the works<\/a>\u00a0that activists hope will be on next year\u2019s ballot. The text has been drafted and is currently being reviewed by legislative counsel, made available by a sympathetic state senator who Owen preferred not to name.\u00a0<\/p>\n Under state law, the text must be officially approved by a sponsorship committee. In this case, that committee includes a city commissioner from Fargo, John Strand; the former chair of state Libertarian Party, Steve Potter; and a prominent hemp farmer, as well as Legalize ND founder, Eric Olson. Once the text is approved by the sponsorship committee, it will be submitted<\/a> to the office of the\u00a0Secretary of State\u00a0in Bismarck to\u00a0be approved for signature circulation. Then, activists will have until July 2020 to collect 13,452 signatures \u2014 2% of the state population. If that happens, it will go before the voters in the general election in November.\u00a0<\/p>\n If passed, possession of up to two ounces would be legal 30 days after that; dispensaries would be phased in over time. There would be no provision for home cultivation, which Owen says is \u201copposed by a significant plurality.\u201d He cites that as a reason for the failure of Measure 3, which actually\u00a0would have allowed unlimited cultivation<\/a>.<\/p>\n A separate initiative, which would actually change the state constitution to legalize cannabis (rather than doing it by statute, as the Legalize ND effort would), was\u00a0submitted<\/a>\u00a0to the secretary of state on July 12.<\/p>\n Either effort will certainly face stiff opposition. Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem\u00a0donated his own money<\/a>\u00a0to the campaign against Measure 3, and\u00a0also opposed<\/a>\u00a0the successful Measure 5, which legalized medical marijuana in the state in 2016. Yet by the figures of his own office, three in every 10 adults in the state have a criminal record for cannabis.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThis is destroying the next generation of North Dakotans,\u201d Owen says. \u201cA criminal conviction means no student loans, so that means no college, and good luck finding housing.\u201d <\/p>\n Odds for work are also diminished. Major employers won\u2019t take you if you have a criminal record, according to Owen \u2014 and it remains to be seen if this will change once the pardons are granted.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n According to Owen, the good news is that there\u2019s growing bipartisan support for change, a particularly critical factor in a deep red state like North Dakota. <\/p>\n \u201cCannabis not seen as a Democrat-Republican issue,\u201d Owen says. \u201cI get along with Republicans.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n TELL US<\/strong>, have you ever been turned down for a job because of past cannabis usage?<\/p>\n The post After Quasi-Decriminalization, North Dakota Activists Relaunch Legalization Bid<\/a> appeared first on Cannabis Now<\/a>.<\/p>\n
North Dakota\u2019s decision to drop penalties for possession of personal quantities of cannabis to an infraction won little media attention back in May. And activists in the state, who pushed for last year\u2019s defeated legalization initiative, say most of what coverage there was got it wrong.\u00a0 The few headlines \u2014Continue Reading<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":190,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"false","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[50,3947,94,809,5387,5432,6263,5433,146,596,81],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36994"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/190"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=36994"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36994\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":36995,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36994\/revisions\/36995"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36994"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=36994"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=36994"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}What Really Happened<\/h4>\n
Pardons, But Not Expungement<\/h4>\n
2020 Initiative Effort\u00a0<\/strong><\/h4>\n
\n
\nRead More: After Quasi-Decriminalization, North Dakota Activists Relaunch Legalization Bid<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"