What Would Federal Cannabis Legalization Look Like?

SANTA YSABEL, CA: A sign indicates the way to the Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel’s Santa Ysabel Smoke… [+] Shop and Dispensary, which is surrounded by greenhouses. Mark Rightmire/MediaNews Group/Orange County/Flickr Become a Getty Images member.
Getty Images/MediaNews Group
Despite the fact that cannabis is permitted for medical or adult use in 36 states and four territories, marijuana remains a prohibited Schedule I drug on the federal level. States have set their own courses for controlling cannabis in reaction to these various political frameworks, and the business has become one of the most dynamic sectors in the United States today. The debate over federal legalization is heating up, and Americans are on the lookout for what it would look like in its first iteration. On the one hand, the ambiguous legal status of cannabis in the United States makes legislation difficult for state and municipal governments, and it frequently places excessive hardship on patients and customers. Federal legalization, on the other hand, might destabilize existing state frameworks and leave local and tribal concerns unanswered.
Our nation’s capital has had one of the more difficult legalization journeys. The regulated cannabis sector in Washington, D.C. is a microcosm of how the federal government’s involvement in legalization affects cannabis policy. When the District of Columbia passed an adult-use legalization referendum in 2014, Congress included language in its Appropriations bill that effectively prevented the District from establishing its own legal cannabis market. Congress was able to do so because, as a federal territory, D.C. receives funding from the federal budget, which is within Congress’ jurisdiction.
The District of Columbia’s partnership with the federal government adds ambiguity to its cannabis framework that is absent from state-run programs. President Biden recently tightened the restrictions to prevent the state from legalizing adult-use cannabis commerce. In practice, this implies that D.C. is unable to fully tax and regulate the program that was passed by the voters. Instead, a gap in federal policy pushes it to function in a perplexing “gifting economy,” leaving consumers to figure out what is safe to consume and which businesses and brands to trust.
In Washington, D.C., federal legalization might make local monitoring easier. It may also allow states – including D.C. – to create their own regulatory frameworks, as well as provide the District with more congressional assistance during the budgeting process. Officials believe that the District is losing up to $20 million in revenue each year.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR YOU
For Native American tribes that have legalized cannabis in states such as California, North Carolina, South Dakota, and Washington, federal legalization could help clear up some of the confusion. The Wilkinson memo, released by the US Department of Justice in 2014, asks for the protection of cannabis enterprises on tribal grounds from federal prosecution in the same way that states are. It is not, however, an enforceable statute, and it does not completely address how tribal lands should be included in existing state frameworks.
Tribal nations in states like California are afraid that participating in the regulatory licensing program may imply a loss of sovereignty. In South Dakota, the Oglala Sioux nation legalized adult-use cannabis on its reservation and is now establishing restrictions, even as the state is fighting to overturn its voter-approved adult-use cannabis program.
Legalization has piqued people’s interest in how cannabis is trafficked between states and internationally. As soon as you leave dry land, state regulations become more complicated. And because interstate trade is prohibited, it is illegal to transport cannabis goods, even between states where it is permitted.
In other words, any U.S. site that must be reached by air or water – such as Alaska, Hawaii, or even the ferry from Massachusetts to Martha’s Vineyard – exposes patients and consumers to federal punishment. Governor David Ige of Hawaii blocked a bill in 2019 that would have allowed patients to transfer their medical cannabis across islands. The border between the United States and Canada is overseen by US Customs and Border Control, which has stated that it is “the nation’s first line of defense in blocking the illegal importation of narcotics, including marijuana.”
The policy divide will continue to hinder legalized state programs until the federal government takes a firm stance on cannabis. In the meanwhile, it will be intriguing to watch the numerous interests and complexities that must be taken into account as federal cannabis legalization unfolds./nRead More