{"id":73786,"date":"2024-04-05T13:16:13","date_gmt":"2024-04-05T21:16:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2024\/04\/05\/doj-says-state-marijuana-legalization-boosts-tourism-in-court-filing-seeking-dismissal-of-industry-lawsuit\/"},"modified":"2024-04-06T00:45:31","modified_gmt":"2024-04-06T08:45:31","slug":"doj-says-state-marijuana-legalization-boosts-tourism-in-court-filing-seeking-dismissal-of-industry-lawsuit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2024\/04\/05\/doj-says-state-marijuana-legalization-boosts-tourism-in-court-filing-seeking-dismissal-of-industry-lawsuit\/","title":{"rendered":"DOJ Says State Marijuana Legalization Boosts Tourism In Court Filing Seeking Dismissal Of Industry Lawsuit"},"content":{"rendered":"<\/p>\n

The Justice Department is again asking a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit from major marijuana companies seeking to block enforcement of prohibition against state-legal activities<\/a>\u2014in part because the government says cannabis legalization attracts out-of-state tourism, empowering it to intervene under the Constitution.<\/p>\n

In a filing with the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Western Division on Friday, DOJ contested claims from the cannabis corporations that federal policy is at odds with the government\u2019s enforcement practices, and it also argued that the plaintiffs lack standing to raise the lawsuit in the first place.<\/p>\n

\u201cPlaintiffs argue that federal marijuana policy no longer serves a goal of eradicating the marijuana trade, yet even if that is true, curtailing the marijuana trade is a legitimate objective regardless of whether the government pursues that objective to the point of eradication,\u201d the Justice Department said.<\/p>\n

\u201cPlaintiffs also cannot show that any way in which federal marijuana policy is irrational, when they allege that federal policy focuses law enforcement resources on marijuana activities that most implicate vital federal interests such as preventing violence and protecting public safety,\u201d it added.<\/p>\n

The underlying suit against the federal government is being led by multi-state operator Verano Holdings Corp.<\/a> and the Massachusetts-based cannabis businesses Canna Provisions and Wiseacre Farm, along with Treevit CEO Gyasi Sellers. They\u2019re represented by the law firms Boies Schiller and Flexner LLP and Lesser, Newman, Aleo and Nasser LLP.<\/p>\n

Litigator David Boies\u2014whose list of prior clients includes the Justice Department, former Vice President Al Gore and plaintiffs in the case that led to the invalidation of California\u2019s ban on same-sex marriage\u2014is leading the suit.<\/p>\n

DOJ said in the latest filing that the plaintiffs lack jurisdiction in the suit partly because they \u201ccannot establish a credible threat of future enforcement\u201d of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), \u201cwhen they allege that the Department of Justice has a policy not to prosecute their alleged conduct.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cBecause they allege that the Department of Justice adheres to a policy of not prosecuting those who engage in Plaintiffs\u2019 conduct, they cannot establish a credible threat of future enforcement,\u201d the filing says.<\/p>\n

DOJ makes several notable admissions in this latest document, however. For example, it contests the idea that plaintiffs are harmed under prohibition because it has resulted in the reluctance of banks to work with their intrastate businesses, pointing out that the department has not \u201ctaken to coerce any of the third parties who have declined to transact with Plaintiffs.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cAnd they do not and cannot dispute that the Complaint alleges that some third parties have decided to transact with Plaintiffs, while others have declined to do,\u201d it says.<\/p>\n

The department also asserts that the lower court does not have juridiction to undermine a 2005 Supreme Court decision, Gonzales v. Raich<\/em>, in which justices held that state-level cannabis laws do not protect people from federal prosecution because of Congress\u2019s interest in preventing illegal marijuana from entering interstate commerce.<\/p>\n

\u201cRaich\u2019s<\/em> constitutional holding is controlling here because the Supreme Court is the only court with the power to overrule its holding in Raich, which would be necessary to sustain Plaintiffs\u2019 Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause claim,\u201d the filing says.<\/p>\n

\u201cEven if Raich\u2019s<\/em> ultimate holding were not directly controlling here, the CSA\u2019s application to Plaintiffs falls well within Congress\u2019s authority under the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause. Plaintiffs do not and cannot dispute that the Supreme Court\u2019s \u2018case law\u2019 under these clauses \u2018firmly establishes Congress\u2019 power to regulate purely local activities that are part of an economic \u2018class of activities\u2019 that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce.\u201d<\/p>\n

Part of DOJ\u2019s reasoning here is that it claims \u201cit is rational to conclude that the regulated marijuana industry in Massachusetts fuels a different kind of marijuana-related interstate commerce: marijuana tourism.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThat is especially so because Massachusetts marijuana businesses gross hundreds of millions of dollars in sales each year, and dispensaries such as Canna Provisions cater to out-of-state customers,\u201d it states.<\/p>\n

In other words, while the plaintiffs\u2019 claim is that the Constitution\u2019s Commerce Clause should preclude DOJ from interfering in state-legal activity because it is centrally regulated within a state\u2019s borders, legalization attracts cannabis tourism from people from states without legal programs who would prefer to buy from regulated storefronts.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs the Supreme Court held decades ago, Congress has the authority to regulate businesses that cater to tourists from out of state, even if the businesses\u2019 transactions occur wholly in-state,\u201d DOJ said in the new filing.<\/p>\n

It also argued that this \u201crational basis also exists to conclude that, despite what Plaintiffs describe as \u2018strict controls\u2019 in Massachusetts\u2019 system, some portion of the marijuana produced in Massachusetts will be diverted into the illicit market. Experience has shown that even where states impose controls on regulated marijuana, some diversion occurs.\u201d<\/p>\n

The department further disputed the plaintiffs\u2019 position that a congressional rider preventing the use of DOJ funds to interfere in state medical cannabis programs call into question the propriety of ongoing federal prohibition.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese laws rationally serve the purposes of avoiding friction between the federal government and state governments and allowing the states to develop a body of experience in dealing with medical marijuana that can inform future decisions by federal policymakers and policymakers in other states about whether to enact further changes in marijuana policy,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n

Similarly, cited an Obama-era memo generally directing federal prosecutors not to interfere with state marijuana laws, which was later rescinded during the Trump administration, saying the \u201calleged policy to focus law enforcement resources on important federal interests is manifestly rational on its face.\u201d<\/p>\n

This all comes in the background of a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) review into marijuana scheduling under the CSA. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has recommended moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III.<\/p>\n

And while the Biden administration has maintained that people should not be criminalized over possession or use of marijuana, DOJ has continued to fight reform efforts in courts, including this current case on broad prohibition, as well as litigation challenging the ban on cannabis consumers\u2019 gun rights.<\/p>\n

Read the Justice Department\u2019s latest filing<\/a> in the marijuana industry lawsuit against prohibition below:\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

\n

German Officials Under Pressure To Unveil Marijuana Legalization\u2019s Second Step Focused On Commercial Sales<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

The post DOJ Says State Marijuana Legalization Boosts Tourism In Court Filing Seeking Dismissal Of Industry Lawsuit<\/a> appeared first on Marijuana Moment<\/a>.<\/p>\n


\n
\nRead More: DOJ Says State Marijuana Legalization Boosts Tourism In Court Filing Seeking Dismissal Of Industry Lawsuit<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Justice Department is again asking a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit from major marijuana companies seeking to block enforcement of prohibition against state-legal activities\u2014in part because the government says cannabis legalization attracts out-of-state tourism, empowering it to intervene under the Constitution. In a filing with the U.S. DistrictContinue Reading<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":458,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"false","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[18,81],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73786"}],"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\/458"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=73786"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73786\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":73787,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73786\/revisions\/73787"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73786"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}