MurshDawg
Active Member
I like how this WHOLE issue is just not even being talked about. What's up with that?
Tops for Toys
- Thread starter RottenBoy
- Start date
apothecarist
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure how you can go about making changes to a voter initiative, don't you have to take it back to the ballot? but that's definitely a way to score some rep with patients out there, for sure.
apothecarist
Well-Known Member
who ever does can tell the "godfather" of mmj in az, al sobol to stick that in his pipe and smoke it.
AZCS Bryan
Active Member
Whether or not you support us I want to say thank you to everybody who has donated! Still have till the 23rd!
[HR][/HR]
[HR][/HR]
azcaregiver
Member
I'm definitely a supporter of repealing the 25 mile bs.
phxfire
New Member
Trust me BRO I was there... And Contributed.....uh oh was someone just called out on BS
all the crap is one thing, but to say you have made a contribution when its not true, especially when it involves kids, is just downright disgusting. That slight glimmer of respect just flew out the window.
I have nothing BAD to say.. Other than a few of us being treated like SHIT on the forum.... And getting Bashed by followers... That is ALL...
I am a MAN of my word and I did contribute to the cause...
I believe these guys are fighting for the cause even though I disagree with a few things... But we can all Agree to Disagree...
@Bill
The issue most want addressed is the 25 mule rule.. Where is the Support?? Maybe a petition? Is it because AZCS plans to be a dispensary? If so, how does your business model enable you to transition into a dispensary? Curious.. I could care less about your grow setup... Though free clones are always great..
All BS aside!
Whether or not you support us I want to say thank you to everybody who has donated! Still have till the 23rd!
[HR][/HR]
good of u to give.......................
Bill Hayes
Active Member
Glad you brought it up
Don't forget we are the Mom and Pops in this industry, not a big money group which most of us are against. I was the one that made the comment, on Facebook, to Carolyn Short.
"If the feds come into my facility with a search warrant, I will be sure to ask them if the warrant includes everyone affiliated with us, such as AZDHS and Will Humble and of course Jan Brewer" (not a fan of this woman), "because they gave me a "permit" to do business and I should be protected by my local and state police enforcement agencies." "if they don't assist me in my defense and the defense of my State and federally afforded constitutional rights, I will file a claim against them for not protecting my constitutional rights and for damages."
Thus the state was thrown into turmoil when Carolyn Short ( voice people up the hill would listen to) started blabbing her mouth about the potential for prosecution of state employees and officials.
Her blabbing became the lawsuit so many are now familiar with. We will in fact get a judicial decision, as to whether a state employee can be prosecuted by the federal government for implementing a State law that contradicts federal Law? I did this because another unrelated case decision was just upheld by SCOTUS stating an "individual" could challenge federal law based on state's rights claims based on individual state laws. This could potentially force the reclassification of marijuana from a schedule 1 narcotic to something more appropriate if anything at all.
We did the same thing with Al Sobol and the 2811 club. We used them to get them to file a legal action for us so we can get the result with out lengthy legal fees. The compassion club case, which the clubs WILL win by the way. The lawsuit against the state, to force them to open the dispensary portion of the program, might have had a hand in that as well.
Sooooo, did we do anything to help out with that pesky 25 mile rule? You could say that.
Or you could say that we (I) single-handedly stopped the dispensary portion of the program effectively nullifying the 25 mile rule. Then we opened the states first compassion club (ACC) in order to get the genie out of the bottle, cause now that she's out and 18,000+ patients have the opportunity to grow and or go to a cannabis club and get meds, hire a caregiver, OPTIONS, people have options, a choice, freedom to some extent minus the dispensary portion of the program.
"You want to be the leaders? Man up and do what's right instead of what's profitable and help repeal the 25 mile rule, please."
Man up? Did you NOT see me smoking a fat joint in the New Times, did you NOT see MY DHS card in full for everyone to see in the New Times? Did you NOT see me at the Gilbert P&Z meeting putting a stop to the restrictions they were attempting to enact against caregivers? I have all these videos available for you if you'd like them btw.
"do what's right"
You mean like have a patient appreciation bbq and a canned food drive where we donate all the proceeds to Kids Cafe Program and the West Side Food Bank because we just did that last week, we are on to the Toy Drive now
"instead of what's profitable"
You mean like operate a non-profit with bylaws that state the very same thing we suggested to DHS PRIOR to the rule making process, that we would donate any monies gained at the end of the fiscal year to the cities in which we operate.
You mean like give cities control of the zoning rather than the state cause our hands were all over that one as well. In fact you can see AZCS hands all over the rule making process in our forums where the screen shots are archived along side our posts on the DHS YouTube channel prior to the closing of that channel by DHS.
We are the pinnacle of the mmj program in AZ because that's what we said we would be. We promised things and have kept our promises to both the state and the people of the state of Arizona. We sponsor patients with free smokables, free concentrates, free Phoenix Tears, patients that can't afford things we assist, from vapes to meds, you name it. We sponsor or assist EVERY patient under the age of 18 in Arizona, and they came to us.
AZCS does not advertise, we got to be who we are by busting our asses and working hard so when we take offense (as do our members) that people are running their mouths and spreading lies about us maybe now you'll have a little more actual and factual insight as to just who and what AZCS is and does.
We spent over $22,000 this month on cultivation equipment for a second facility, show me ANYONE else in the industry that is doing a fraction of what we're doing, please.
and FYI the reason we have received over 2000 applications for employment is because the staff makes more than the administration of the Collective and associated Co-Op's, feel free to ask any of them. We profit less than anyone because our promise was to create jobs and that we have done. We also promised that we would cap our own salaries for X amount of time at X dollars (this info is out there if you look) something NO ONE ELSE has even considered doing.
anything else you guys wanna talk about??
helpful links:
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=211878168853206
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=210135055694184
another great one...
this money topic is gettin old folks lol
[h=2]How much money will AZCS make? You asked so we'll answer.[/h]
by Ceo Azcs on Wednesday, January 12, 2011 at 8:57pm
There has been much concern expressed by the public regarding the amount of money that medication will cost as well as the amount of money the operators of the non profit dispensary will be making.
We have submitted the actual cost to produce medicinal cannabis to azdhs and several other media outlets in an attempt to educate those in the dark as well as keep those in the industry honest.
We have maintained a very high level of transparency throughout the implementation of the Arizona medical marijuana program and will continue to do so as it moves ahead. We hope to once again set an industry standard by implementing an other industry challenge.
Tonight or first thing in the morning depending on how long it takes to accomplish, we will be releasing a small incite into our business plan. This incite is directly related to the topic at hand. How much money will we make?
phxfire
New Member
Glad you brought it up
Don't forget we are the Mom and Pops in this industry, not a big money group which most of us are against. I was the one that made the comment, on Facebook, to Carolyn Short.
"If the feds come into my facility with a search warrant, I will be sure to ask them if the warrant includes everyone affiliated with us, such as AZDHS and Will Humble and of course Jan Brewer" (not a fan of this woman), "because they gave me a "permit" to do business and I should be protected by my local and state police enforcement agencies." "if they don't assist me in my defense and the defense of my State and federally afforded constitutional rights, I will file a claim against them for not protecting my constitutional rights and for damages."
Thus the state was thrown into turmoil when Carolyn Short ( voice people up the hill would listen to) started blabbing her mouth about the potential for prosecution of state employees and officials.
Her blabbing became the lawsuit so many are now familiar with. We will in fact get a judicial decision, as to whether a state employee can be prosecuted by the federal government for implementing a State law that contradicts federal Law? I did this because another unrelated case decision was just upheld by SCOTUS stating an "individual" could challenge federal law based on state's rights claims based on individual state laws. This could potentially force the reclassification of marijuana from a schedule 1 narcotic to something more appropriate if anything at all.
We did the same thing with Al Sobol and the 2811 club. We used them to get them to file a legal action for us so we can get the result with out lengthy legal fees. The compassion club case, which the clubs WILL win by the way. The lawsuit against the state, to force them to open the dispensary portion of the program, might have had a hand in that as well.
Sooooo, did we do anything to help out with that pesky 25 mile rule? You could say that.
Or you could say that we (I) single-handedly stopped the dispensary portion of the program effectively nullifying the 25 mile rule. Then we opened the states first compassion club (ACC) in order to get the genie out of the bottle, cause now that she's out and 18,000+ patients have the opportunity to grow and or go to a cannabis club and get meds, hire a caregiver, OPTIONS, people have options, a choice, freedom to some extent minus the dispensary portion of the program.
"You want to be the leaders? Man up and do what's right instead of what's profitable and help repeal the 25 mile rule, please."
Man up? Did you NOT see me smoking a fat joint in the New Times, did you NOT see MY DHS card in full for everyone to see in the New Times? Did you NOT see me at the Gilbert P&Z meeting putting a stop to the restrictions they were attempting to enact against caregivers? I have all these videos available for you if you'd like them btw.
"do what's right"
You mean like have a patient appreciation bbq and a canned food drive where we donate all the proceeds to Kids Cafe Program and the West Side Food Bank because we just did that last week, we are on to the Toy Drive now
"instead of what's profitable"
You mean like operate a non-profit with bylaws that state the very same thing we suggested to DHS PRIOR to the rule making process, that we would donate any monies gained at the end of the fiscal year to the cities in which we operate.
You mean like give cities control of the zoning rather than the state cause our hands were all over that one as well. In fact you can see AZCS hands all over the rule making process in our forums where the screen shots are archived along side our posts on the DHS YouTube channel prior to the closing of that channel by DHS.
We are the pinnacle of the mmj program in AZ because that's what we said we would be. We promised things and have kept our promises to both the state and the people of the state of Arizona. We sponsor patients with free smokables, free concentrates, free Phoenix Tears, patients that can't afford things we assist, from vapes to meds, you name it. We sponsor or assist EVERY patient under the age of 18 in Arizona, and they came to us.
AZCS does not advertise, we got to be who we are by busting our asses and working hard so when we take offense (as do our members) that people are running their mouths and spreading lies about us maybe now you'll have a little more actual and factual insight as to just who and what AZCS is and does.
We spent over $22,000 this month on cultivation equipment for a second facility, show me ANYONE else in the industry that is doing a fraction of what we're doing, please.
and FYI the reason we have received over 2000 applications for employment is because the staff makes more than the administration of the Collective and associated Co-Op's, feel free to ask any of them. We profit less than anyone because our promise was to create jobs and that we have done. We also promised that we would cap our own salaries for X amount of time at X dollars (this info is out there if you look) something NO ONE ELSE has even considered doing.
anything else you guys wanna talk about??
OK
But what are you doing about the 25 mile rule?
Where does AZCS stand?
Bill Hayes
Active Member
Read the above, in full.
Bill Hayes
Active Member
and then in case you haven't been paying attention...
[h=1]Judge to state: Pick a side in marijuana conflict[/h] 31 comments by Mary K. Reinhart - Dec. 12, 2011 05:13 PM
The Arizona Republic
U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton tore apart the state's medical-marijuana lawsuit Monday, saying Arizona has to pick a side in the conflict over state and federal law.
Bolton stopped short of dismissing the case, saying she would issue a ruling later. But she told assistant attorney general Lori Davis she would throw it out unless the state decides whether or not to support its own law.
"That's how lawsuits work," Bolton said. "The plaintiff takes a position."
Gov. Jan Brewer has asked the federal court to clarify whether U.S. drug laws override the voter-approved state law and, if not, whether state workers are immune from federal prosecution if they fully implement Proposition 203.
The lawsuit, filed in May, stalled the state's medical marijuana dispensary permit process. More than 16,300 people now have state-issued ID cards allowing them to use medical pot for certain debilitating health conditions, but would-be dispensary owners are on hold.
In pointed questioning of Davis, Bolton said the Attorney General's Office needs to do its job and give advice to state agencies, not leave it up to a judge.
"I'm used to having the plaintiff opposed to the defendant," the judge said. "You've got to advocate for one or the other, and you're not advocating for either."
Does the state believe federal laws forbidding the sale and use of marijuana trump the state's medical marijuana law? Or does the state take the position, along with medical-pot advocates, that the federal law doesn't apply?
"You're going to have to pick at some point," Bolton said. "I won't make you do it today, in front of this audience."
Davis said the state is in an "impossible position," caught between federal drug laws that ban marijuana use and a voter-approved law that allows it. State employees could be prosecuted for doing their job if they implement the law, she said.
Bolton pointed out that they already are implementing the law, in part, by issuing thousands of permits allowing Arizonans to use and grow medical marijuana.
The judge said it's not enough to acknowledge that state and federal laws conflict. "That's just stating the obvious," she said.
Monday's hearing was on a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union. The U.S. Justice Department, a defendant in the case, also has filed to have the case dismissed.
Brewer and Attorney General Tom Horne said the lawsuit was prompted by federal prosecutors, including former Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke, signaling a crackdown against the medical-marijuana industry. They said their chief concern was protecting state employees, though Burke and other U.S. attorneys said their focus was on large-scale trafficking, not patients or public employees who were complying with state laws.
But critics say it was a way to stop, or at least delay, marijuana dispensaries without angering voters, who approved the law in 2010.
ACLU Attorney Ezekiel Edwards said the lawsuit was premature and without basis. Federal prosecutors have never prosecuted a public worker for implementing medical marijuana laws and have not threatened to do so.
"It is not the federal court's job to sit in the abstract and give advice on a state law," Edwards said.
Davis said she's hopeful that the judge will agree to resolve the conflict, but conceded that it was unlikely. Short of an outright dismissal, Bolton could allow the state to amend its complaint, Davis said after the hearing.
Attorney General Tom Horne said he's waiting to see what Brewer wants to do. It was her choice, he said, not to take a position in the lawsuit.
Brewer spokesman Matthew Benson said the governor will wait for Bolton's ruling before deciding how to proceed.
Edwards said there is a simple solution: The state can fully implement the law and begin the dispensary-permit process.
In the meantime, he said, "all this does is obstruct the will of the voters and keep medicine from sick people."
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/12/12/20111212judge-state-pick-side-marijuana-conflict.html#ixzz1gNQr2TKV
To answer the question, YES we will potentially operate 5 dispensaries here in Arizona IF the applications are ever released by the State. As I said, a judge is finally going to answer the question, as long as its asked correctly this could potentially change the game as you know it. Should the judge agree the states have the right to violate Fed law based on a voter approved initiative passing (prop 203) then fed law will have to be changed OR every state will have the ability to implement a program that violates Fed law and the Fed's hands will be tied. Should the judge say that state employees could be prosecuted we have a VERY interesting situation on our hands don't we. The state employees will have to implement the law and could be named in a RICO suit if they do OR they could be sued by those of us looking to open a dispensary that are being denied our legal right to do so.
The last time a case similar got so much attention from our nation it was one regarding the prohibition of alcohol. We all know what happened there. Jan Brewer was turned back into a puppet for the people when she filed the lawsuit for us and got it into the federal Spotlight. As much as I can't stand her mug she could potentially be the face that get marijuana rescheduled or possibly legalized for personal consumption purposes similar to alcohol without all the damaging side effects to your body and society
We shalll see
[h=1]Judge to state: Pick a side in marijuana conflict[/h] 31 comments by Mary K. Reinhart - Dec. 12, 2011 05:13 PM
The Arizona Republic
U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton tore apart the state's medical-marijuana lawsuit Monday, saying Arizona has to pick a side in the conflict over state and federal law.
Bolton stopped short of dismissing the case, saying she would issue a ruling later. But she told assistant attorney general Lori Davis she would throw it out unless the state decides whether or not to support its own law.
"That's how lawsuits work," Bolton said. "The plaintiff takes a position."
Gov. Jan Brewer has asked the federal court to clarify whether U.S. drug laws override the voter-approved state law and, if not, whether state workers are immune from federal prosecution if they fully implement Proposition 203.
The lawsuit, filed in May, stalled the state's medical marijuana dispensary permit process. More than 16,300 people now have state-issued ID cards allowing them to use medical pot for certain debilitating health conditions, but would-be dispensary owners are on hold.
In pointed questioning of Davis, Bolton said the Attorney General's Office needs to do its job and give advice to state agencies, not leave it up to a judge.
"I'm used to having the plaintiff opposed to the defendant," the judge said. "You've got to advocate for one or the other, and you're not advocating for either."
Does the state believe federal laws forbidding the sale and use of marijuana trump the state's medical marijuana law? Or does the state take the position, along with medical-pot advocates, that the federal law doesn't apply?
"You're going to have to pick at some point," Bolton said. "I won't make you do it today, in front of this audience."
Davis said the state is in an "impossible position," caught between federal drug laws that ban marijuana use and a voter-approved law that allows it. State employees could be prosecuted for doing their job if they implement the law, she said.
Bolton pointed out that they already are implementing the law, in part, by issuing thousands of permits allowing Arizonans to use and grow medical marijuana.
The judge said it's not enough to acknowledge that state and federal laws conflict. "That's just stating the obvious," she said.
Monday's hearing was on a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union. The U.S. Justice Department, a defendant in the case, also has filed to have the case dismissed.
Brewer and Attorney General Tom Horne said the lawsuit was prompted by federal prosecutors, including former Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke, signaling a crackdown against the medical-marijuana industry. They said their chief concern was protecting state employees, though Burke and other U.S. attorneys said their focus was on large-scale trafficking, not patients or public employees who were complying with state laws.
But critics say it was a way to stop, or at least delay, marijuana dispensaries without angering voters, who approved the law in 2010.
ACLU Attorney Ezekiel Edwards said the lawsuit was premature and without basis. Federal prosecutors have never prosecuted a public worker for implementing medical marijuana laws and have not threatened to do so.
"It is not the federal court's job to sit in the abstract and give advice on a state law," Edwards said.
Davis said she's hopeful that the judge will agree to resolve the conflict, but conceded that it was unlikely. Short of an outright dismissal, Bolton could allow the state to amend its complaint, Davis said after the hearing.
Attorney General Tom Horne said he's waiting to see what Brewer wants to do. It was her choice, he said, not to take a position in the lawsuit.
Brewer spokesman Matthew Benson said the governor will wait for Bolton's ruling before deciding how to proceed.
Edwards said there is a simple solution: The state can fully implement the law and begin the dispensary-permit process.
In the meantime, he said, "all this does is obstruct the will of the voters and keep medicine from sick people."
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/12/12/20111212judge-state-pick-side-marijuana-conflict.html#ixzz1gNQr2TKV
To answer the question, YES we will potentially operate 5 dispensaries here in Arizona IF the applications are ever released by the State. As I said, a judge is finally going to answer the question, as long as its asked correctly this could potentially change the game as you know it. Should the judge agree the states have the right to violate Fed law based on a voter approved initiative passing (prop 203) then fed law will have to be changed OR every state will have the ability to implement a program that violates Fed law and the Fed's hands will be tied. Should the judge say that state employees could be prosecuted we have a VERY interesting situation on our hands don't we. The state employees will have to implement the law and could be named in a RICO suit if they do OR they could be sued by those of us looking to open a dispensary that are being denied our legal right to do so.
The last time a case similar got so much attention from our nation it was one regarding the prohibition of alcohol. We all know what happened there. Jan Brewer was turned back into a puppet for the people when she filed the lawsuit for us and got it into the federal Spotlight. As much as I can't stand her mug she could potentially be the face that get marijuana rescheduled or possibly legalized for personal consumption purposes similar to alcohol without all the damaging side effects to your body and society
We shalll see
phxfire
New Member
Never Mindand then in case you haven't been paying attention...
Judge to state: Pick a side in marijuana conflict
31 comments by Mary K. Reinhart - Dec. 12, 2011 05:13 PM
The Arizona Republic
U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton tore apart the state's medical-marijuana lawsuit Monday, saying Arizona has to pick a side in the conflict over state and federal law.
Bolton stopped short of dismissing the case, saying she would issue a ruling later. But she told assistant attorney general Lori Davis she would throw it out unless the state decides whether or not to support its own law.
"That's how lawsuits work," Bolton said. "The plaintiff takes a position."
Gov. Jan Brewer has asked the federal court to clarify whether U.S. drug laws override the voter-approved state law and, if not, whether state workers are immune from federal prosecution if they fully implement Proposition 203.
The lawsuit, filed in May, stalled the state's medical marijuana dispensary permit process. More than 16,300 people now have state-issued ID cards allowing them to use medical pot for certain debilitating health conditions, but would-be dispensary owners are on hold.
In pointed questioning of Davis, Bolton said the Attorney General's Office needs to do its job and give advice to state agencies, not leave it up to a judge.
"I'm used to having the plaintiff opposed to the defendant," the judge said. "You've got to advocate for one or the other, and you're not advocating for either."
Does the state believe federal laws forbidding the sale and use of marijuana trump the state's medical marijuana law? Or does the state take the position, along with medical-pot advocates, that the federal law doesn't apply?
"You're going to have to pick at some point," Bolton said. "I won't make you do it today, in front of this audience."
Davis said the state is in an "impossible position," caught between federal drug laws that ban marijuana use and a voter-approved law that allows it. State employees could be prosecuted for doing their job if they implement the law, she said.
Bolton pointed out that they already are implementing the law, in part, by issuing thousands of permits allowing Arizonans to use and grow medical marijuana.
The judge said it's not enough to acknowledge that state and federal laws conflict. "That's just stating the obvious," she said.
Monday's hearing was on a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union. The U.S. Justice Department, a defendant in the case, also has filed to have the case dismissed.
Brewer and Attorney General Tom Horne said the lawsuit was prompted by federal prosecutors, including former Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke, signaling a crackdown against the medical-marijuana industry. They said their chief concern was protecting state employees, though Burke and other U.S. attorneys said their focus was on large-scale trafficking, not patients or public employees who were complying with state laws.
But critics say it was a way to stop, or at least delay, marijuana dispensaries without angering voters, who approved the law in 2010.
ACLU Attorney Ezekiel Edwards said the lawsuit was premature and without basis. Federal prosecutors have never prosecuted a public worker for implementing medical marijuana laws and have not threatened to do so.
"It is not the federal court's job to sit in the abstract and give advice on a state law," Edwards said.
Davis said she's hopeful that the judge will agree to resolve the conflict, but conceded that it was unlikely. Short of an outright dismissal, Bolton could allow the state to amend its complaint, Davis said after the hearing.
Attorney General Tom Horne said he's waiting to see what Brewer wants to do. It was her choice, he said, not to take a position in the lawsuit.
Brewer spokesman Matthew Benson said the governor will wait for Bolton's ruling before deciding how to proceed.
Edwards said there is a simple solution: The state can fully implement the law and begin the dispensary-permit process.
In the meantime, he said, "all this does is obstruct the will of the voters and keep medicine from sick people."
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/12/12/20111212judge-state-pick-side-marijuana-conflict.html#ixzz1gNQr2TKV
To answer the question, YES we will potentially operate 5 dispensaries here in Arizona IF the applications are ever released by the State. As I said, a judge is finally going to answer the question, as long as its asked correctly this could potentially change the game as you know it. Should the judge agree the states have the right to violate Fed law based on a voter approved initiative passing (prop 203) then fed law will have to be changed OR every state will have the ability to implement a program that violates Fed law and the Fed's hands will be tied. Should the judge say that state employees could be prosecuted we have a VERY interesting situation on our hands don't we. The state employees will have to implement the law and could be named in a RICO suit if they do OR they could be sued by those of us looking to open a dispensary that are being denied our legal right to do so.
The last time a case similar got so much attention from our nation it was one regarding the prohibition of alcohol. We all know what happened there. Jan Brewer was turned back into a puppet for the people when she filed the lawsuit for us and got it into the federal Spotlight. As much as I can't stand her mug she could potentially be the face that get marijuana rescheduled or possibly legalized for personal consumption purposes similar to alcohol without all the damaging side effects to your body and society
We shalll see
phxfire
New Member
Lets see this permit.................
MurshDawg
Active Member
you can petition to have a voter approved referandum to amend the current law or you can petition the legislature to amend the law but a voter referandum is more likely. So, how about it, Bill?
MurshDawg
Active Member
So are their any plans to help repeal the 25 mile rule? I mean if you generate enough revenue to operate 5 dispensaries in AZ I would think, being that you are such a philanthropist, that you would fight to help make AMMA more safe and fair. I'm just sayin.and then in case you haven't been paying attention...
Judge to state: Pick a side in marijuana conflict
31 comments by Mary K. Reinhart - Dec. 12, 2011 05:13 PM
The Arizona Republic
U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton tore apart the state's medical-marijuana lawsuit Monday, saying Arizona has to pick a side in the conflict over state and federal law.
Bolton stopped short of dismissing the case, saying she would issue a ruling later. But she told assistant attorney general Lori Davis she would throw it out unless the state decides whether or not to support its own law.
"That's how lawsuits work," Bolton said. "The plaintiff takes a position."
Gov. Jan Brewer has asked the federal court to clarify whether U.S. drug laws override the voter-approved state law and, if not, whether state workers are immune from federal prosecution if they fully implement Proposition 203.
The lawsuit, filed in May, stalled the state's medical marijuana dispensary permit process. More than 16,300 people now have state-issued ID cards allowing them to use medical pot for certain debilitating health conditions, but would-be dispensary owners are on hold.
In pointed questioning of Davis, Bolton said the Attorney General's Office needs to do its job and give advice to state agencies, not leave it up to a judge.
"I'm used to having the plaintiff opposed to the defendant," the judge said. "You've got to advocate for one or the other, and you're not advocating for either."
Does the state believe federal laws forbidding the sale and use of marijuana trump the state's medical marijuana law? Or does the state take the position, along with medical-pot advocates, that the federal law doesn't apply?
"You're going to have to pick at some point," Bolton said. "I won't make you do it today, in front of this audience."
Davis said the state is in an "impossible position," caught between federal drug laws that ban marijuana use and a voter-approved law that allows it. State employees could be prosecuted for doing their job if they implement the law, she said.
Bolton pointed out that they already are implementing the law, in part, by issuing thousands of permits allowing Arizonans to use and grow medical marijuana.
The judge said it's not enough to acknowledge that state and federal laws conflict. "That's just stating the obvious," she said.
Monday's hearing was on a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union. The U.S. Justice Department, a defendant in the case, also has filed to have the case dismissed.
Brewer and Attorney General Tom Horne said the lawsuit was prompted by federal prosecutors, including former Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke, signaling a crackdown against the medical-marijuana industry. They said their chief concern was protecting state employees, though Burke and other U.S. attorneys said their focus was on large-scale trafficking, not patients or public employees who were complying with state laws.
But critics say it was a way to stop, or at least delay, marijuana dispensaries without angering voters, who approved the law in 2010.
ACLU Attorney Ezekiel Edwards said the lawsuit was premature and without basis. Federal prosecutors have never prosecuted a public worker for implementing medical marijuana laws and have not threatened to do so.
"It is not the federal court's job to sit in the abstract and give advice on a state law," Edwards said.
Davis said she's hopeful that the judge will agree to resolve the conflict, but conceded that it was unlikely. Short of an outright dismissal, Bolton could allow the state to amend its complaint, Davis said after the hearing.
Attorney General Tom Horne said he's waiting to see what Brewer wants to do. It was her choice, he said, not to take a position in the lawsuit.
Brewer spokesman Matthew Benson said the governor will wait for Bolton's ruling before deciding how to proceed.
Edwards said there is a simple solution: The state can fully implement the law and begin the dispensary-permit process.
In the meantime, he said, "all this does is obstruct the will of the voters and keep medicine from sick people."
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/12/12/20111212judge-state-pick-side-marijuana-conflict.html#ixzz1gNQr2TKV
To answer the question, YES we will potentially operate 5 dispensaries here in Arizona IF the applications are ever released by the State. As I said, a judge is finally going to answer the question, as long as its asked correctly this could potentially change the game as you know it. Should the judge agree the states have the right to violate Fed law based on a voter approved initiative passing (prop 203) then fed law will have to be changed OR every state will have the ability to implement a program that violates Fed law and the Fed's hands will be tied. Should the judge say that state employees could be prosecuted we have a VERY interesting situation on our hands don't we. The state employees will have to implement the law and could be named in a RICO suit if they do OR they could be sued by those of us looking to open a dispensary that are being denied our legal right to do so.
The last time a case similar got so much attention from our nation it was one regarding the prohibition of alcohol. We all know what happened there. Jan Brewer was turned back into a puppet for the people when she filed the lawsuit for us and got it into the federal Spotlight. As much as I can't stand her mug she could potentially be the face that get marijuana rescheduled or possibly legalized for personal consumption purposes similar to alcohol without all the damaging side effects to your body and society
We shalll see
with your logic all you have done is delay the inevitable. you say that the state will be forced to open the dispensary portion of the law but no provisions to change the 25 mile restriction has even been discussed. in your entire lengthy statement above no where did you say anything about changing the 25 mile restriction. all you said is you made a facebook comment and that made the state halt the entire program. i think you are giving yourself too much credit in this respect. Until you publicly back a change in the 25 mile restriction, your interests in operating will always be questioned and you will get negative publicity from the caregiver community.
With all the resources and relationships your organization has at their disposal, if you are truly about options as you preached above then stand behind patients rights and publicly denounce and request for change in the 25 mile restriction. this will increase your standing in the mmj community and help you build a bigger patient base. if patients grow their own, most will want clones and seeds and medicine to tide them over between harvests. if you show that you support patients rights then more patients would use your services. this is a beneficial business decision for your collective not to mention the positive implications this would have on individual patients. until you do this all your talk about being for the patients is bullshit.
BeaverHuntr
Well-Known Member
I endorse this...
RottenBoy
Active Member
Changing the 25 mile rule doesn't help patients persay... it helps growers/caregivers make money off patients.. Most patients who utilize a co-op/dispensary.. are already unable to grow for themselves..
Again this isnt EVERYONE... cause i myself would like to be able to grow forever... But I don't think its something that will happen.
But to say that if they don't stand behind YOUR beliefs... then they are not being helpful to the community.. well that's just bullshit. They have done more for the mj community in 1 week, then most people have done their entire lives...
So quit bitchin to the people who are actually helping, and start bitching to your local government.
apothecarist
Well-Known Member
Um, that 25 mile rule does in fact hurt patients. a LOT. For multiple reasons.