General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWOW.....Native American reservations now free to legalize marijuana
The Justice Department said Thursday it will no longer prosecute federal laws regulating the growing or selling of marijuana on reservations, even when state law bans the drug.
Timothy Purdon, the U.S. attorney for North Dakota and the chairman of the attorney generals subcommittee on Native American issues, explained to the Los Angeles Times that federal prosecutors will not enforce federal pot laws as long as reservations meet the same guidelines as states that have opted for legalization. He also said the federal government will continue to support any marijuana bans passed by tribal councils, even when the state allows recreational use.
In other words: The government will let tribal governments decide what to do about pot.
More at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/12/12/native-american-reservations-now-free-to-legalize-marijuana/
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)I suddenly have a new interest in going to the casino.
marle35
(172 posts)Will depend on what tribes decide, obviously. Wonder what the chances of that happening is, and if some will face pressure from state governments not to legalize?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Native American culture views all plant life as sacred, I can't imagine that any tribe would enforce laws against a plant on its own members. There will probably some tribes that choose not to sell it to people outside the tribe, but considering the revenue it would bring in I would bet most tribes would want to legalize for all. I know that if I were on a tribal council I would be pushing hard to start a growing operation as soon as humanly possible.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Cha
(297,525 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)One being the way the winds clearly are blowing- that the clock is ticking on marijuana prohibition... and two being, I suspect that it would be awfully hard from a legal standpoint to justify the rights of tribal authorities to defy state laws legalizing cannabis, if they didn't consistently argue for tribal autonomy in both directions.
On a larger note, I'm not sure if doing the sensible, tenable thing especially in regards to a decades-old failed and stupid policy-- qualifies in my mind as "nice", but I certainly recognize that the performance of the DOJ in Obama's 2nd Term around this issue could have been a lot worse and counter-productive than it has been. A lot worse. They've accommodated a reality; that pot is moving towards legal and regulated status in at least part of this nation- which I'm sure a lot of hard-line career government drug warriors resisted hand and foot.
So yes, I enthusiastically support this move. 'Course there are a lot of reflexive Obama-bashers on this board, I'm not one of them. I think History will judge the guy pretty well overall.
Cha
(297,525 posts)Morgan Freeman so famously said..
And, I know you're not "one of them" and I thank you for that.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)dembotoz
(16,826 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)own stricter laws. There is nothing here to indicate that tribes can choose to have looser laws that the local laws.
Its not really a wow.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)It really does look like this will effectively legalize marijuana on any reservation that chooses to legalize.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)That means they have to follow the same sorts of guidelines as in states like Colorado and Washington where it is legal. The sentence you highlighted does not say they have to follow the guidelines of states where it is illegal, they only have to follow the guidelines of states where it is legal. In other words they can't sell to minors and they will have limits on how much people can buy, but it is still legal for adults.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)But a tribe in new york cannot suddenly decide to adopt colorado law.
But a tribe in colorado can choose to enforce prohibitions not enforced in the state.
Really this is only getting reservations in line with their own state and does not allow the tribes to legalize anything. It's already legal.
Another example is a tribe in california cannot start selling marijuana unless it's medical marijuana.
not so wow
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)It certainly does not say that in the paragraph you posted earlier. The article posted in the OP is quite clear, and the excerpt from the article I posted is even more explicit, this will likely create pockets of legalization across the country. There is nowhere in the article that says this is limited to Colorado and Washington, if you want to insist it is limited to those states then provide a link.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)They do have different tax codes.
The Supreme Court held, as the Cabazon band argued, that because California State law did not prohibit gambling as a criminal act and in fact encouraged it via the state lottery they must be deemed regulatory in nature. As such, the authority to regulate gaming activities on tribal lands was found to fall outside those powers granted by the Public Law 280.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Cabazon_Band_of_Mission_Indians
It's clear the local state criminal laws supersede any tribal authority.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)As it stands now however the federal government will not be enforcing marijuana laws on Indian reservations any more. It is possible states might try to undermine tribal sovereignty but they will have to fight that battle in court.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)It's very clear.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)I am sure your expertise in tribal sovereignty laws will impress them.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)It is usually either federal or tribal jurisdiction, depending, incredibly enough, on the race of the people involved:
http://www.tribal-institute.org/lists/jurisdiction.htm
It looks like the state only have jurisdiction over some crimes on the reservation when all the parties involved ARE NOT Indians.
I follow this stuff closely. I'm reading this as the federal government saying its okay to grow pot on Indian land if the tribe allows it. They will be left alone if they follow the DOJ guide lines for the legal marijuana states--no kids, no violence, no trafficking to outside areas, etc. What the state law of the state they are in is doesn't matter.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)The State of California contended that the Bands high-stakes bingo and poker games violated state law and requested that the Court recognize its statute governing the operation of bingo games. Riverside County additionally sought legal recognition of its ordinances regulating bingo play and prohibiting the operation of poker and other card games. California argued that under Public Law 280 (1953) Congress had granted six states Alaska, California, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, and Wisconsin criminal jurisdiction over Native American tribal lands within the states borders.If Californias regulatory laws prohibited gambling on a criminal basis, then it is likely Public Law 280 would have given the State of California the authority to enforce them on tribal lands. However, if as the Cabazon Band argued, Californias laws on gambling were civil regulatory laws, then the tribal lands would not in fact fall under the lawful jurisdiction of the state.
The Supreme Court held, as the Cabazon band argued, that because California State law did not prohibit gambling as a criminal act and in fact encouraged it via the state lottery they must be deemed regulatory in nature. As such, the authority to regulate gaming activities on tribal lands was found to fall outside those powers granted by the Public Law 280.
The Cabazon decision of 1987 had lasting implications regarding the sovereignty of Native American tribes in the United States. The ruling established a broader definition of tribal sovereignty and set that precedent that if the few states that with some lawful jurisdiction over tribal lands could not impose state regulations on reservation gaming, and then no state could have such a right. Indian gaming could thus only be called into question in states where gambling was deemed criminal by state law.
Assuming it hasn't changed since this supreme court decision would give California jurisdiction cause California treats mj criminally.
Logical
(22,457 posts)If you think the Feds saying they will not interfere with the Native Americans selling pot then you are totally uninformed about the previous 50 years.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)There is nothing in practice that allows any tribal lands to have a criminal code that is separate from the state in which they reside. The only exceptions relate to taxes.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Its a pretty basic question and the answer is no.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)There's another catch.
The Mohegan and Mashantucket tribes entered into agreements with the state this year certifying tribal police and making them responsible for enforcing state laws within their territories, said Mike Lawlor, under secretary for Criminal Justice Policy and Planning in the state Office of Policy and Management.
Before the agreement was signed, tribal officers could only arrest tribal members. Additionally, the tribes were paying to have state police present on their property to enforce Connecticut laws, Lawlor said.
"So, the laws that govern Connecticut, the criminal laws, govern the tribal reservation and the tribal police departments are obligated to enforce those laws, and that would certainly include marijuana," Lawlor said.
If a tribe wanted to grow marijuana, the tribe could terminate its agreement with the state, Lawlor said.
The Justice Department's position raises concerns, said Cromwell police Chief Anthony Salvatore, legislative chairman for the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association.
"The Connecticut Police Chiefs Association is concerned regarding this latest development and sees the potential of a number of issues that need to be clarified first," Salvatore said.
For example, it's unclear what role tribal officers would have if a tribe were to pursue marijuana as a business opportunity, Salvatore said. Secondly, how would this affect Connecticut's medical marijuana dispensaries and producers, he said. And many other concerns stem from there, including how state police might uphold laws on tribal lands, Salvatore said.
http://www.courant.com/health/hc-casino-mairjuana-tribes-announcement-20141211-story.html
I'm for this as much as the next guy but if you think a tribe in oklahoma is gonna start selling weed and the oklahoma state police are going to sit around and allow it your wrong.
The only thing mentioned is the feds will not prosecute, which led to a lot of hyperbolic headlines.
Logical
(22,457 posts)that bet?
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)I'll place money there will be no weed officially sold by tribes in Oklahoma in the next year. It's an easy bet.
California has the highest native population followed by Oklahoma, Arizona, New Mexico and Washington.
In california they'll be selling "medical marijuana", In AZ they will be selling "medical marijuana". Washington they will be selling state tax-less legal weed. Not sure about New Mexico and in Oklahoma they will be going to jail in state prisons for selling the deamon bud.
New York tribes will not be selling weed unless something changes with NY law. Even their cigarette sales are regulated by the state.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)The U.S. Justice Department is giving Native American tribes authority to legalize marijuana on their reservations, telling federal prosecutors the issue needs to be handled on a "government-to-government basis."
The shift is not expected to immediately change how law enforcement in Riverside County deals with marijuana on any of the 12 reservations here. And it's too early to know if local tribes will take the opportunity to legalize the drug on their reservations.
"We don't enforce federal law, we enforce state law, so any change in the federal law isn't going to affect us necessarily," said Capt. Ray Wood, commander of the Riverside County Sheriff's Department's Hemet Station and head of the department's Tribal Liaison Unit.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/12/doj-tribes-marijuana/20297075/
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)In which case it's a pretty big deal.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)H. Cromwell
(151 posts)considered a part of the "reservation"?
The refreshment girls could offer drinks and joints?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)marijuana was legal in that state.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)It's all very clear.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)own laws on marijuana now. This is a great step.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)Because I was confused and convinced by several earlier arguments in the thread, I thought I'd post this to further muddy the waters
http://www.tribal-institute.org/lists/jurisdiction.htm
This would be a fascinating scholarly legal review article to read (Honey? Are you paying attention to this? This is far more interesting than polygamy!)