Jump to content

Legal history of cannabis in the United States

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Feedmecereal (talk | contribs) at 01:25, 20 January 2010 (→Pre-criminalization (1600s–1800s): NPOV, see talk). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Prohibitions of cannabis arose in many states from 1906 and onward. By the mid-1930s, cannabis was regulated in every state by laws instituted through The Uniform State Narcotic Act.[1]

In the 1970s, many places in the United States started to decriminalize cannabis. Most places that have decriminalized cannabis have one or more of civil fines, drug education, drug treatment in place of incarceration, criminal charges for possession of small amounts of cannabis, or have made various cannabis offenses the lowest priority for law enforcement. In the 1990s many places began to legalize medical cannabis, which conflicts with federal laws, as cannabis is a Schedule I drug according to the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, which classified cannabis as having high potential for abuse, no medical use, and not safe to use under medical supervision. Multiple efforts to reschedule cannabis have failed and the United States Supreme Court has ruled in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Coop and Gonzales v. Raich that the federal government has a right to regulate and criminalize cannabis, even for medical purposes.

Pre-criminalization (1600s–1800s)

Hemp (a product of Cannabis sativa) was first brought to North America by the Puritans.

In the 17th century hemp was encouraged by the government in the production of rope, sails, and clothing; however, hemp use declined in the late eighteenth century. In the late nineteenth century, cannabis became a common ingredient in medicine and was openly sold at pharmacies.[2]

Criminalization (1900s)

The first significant instance of cannabis regulation appeared in District of Columbia in 1906.[3] Regulations of marijuana (the phrase Indian Hemp is sometimes used) followed in Massachusetts in 1911; Maine, California, Texas, Wyoming and Indiana in 1913; New York City in 1914; Utah and Vermont in 1915; Colorado and Nevada in 1917. These laws were passed not due to any widespread use or concern about cannabis, but as regulatory initiatives to discourage future use.[4][5]

Indian hemp regulation (1925)

In 1925 United States supported regulation of Indian hemp, also known as hashish, in the International Opium Convention.[6] The convention banned exportation of Indian hemp and the preparations derived therefrom to countries that had prohibited its use, and required importing countries to issue certificates approving the importation and stating that the shipment was required "exclusively for medical or scientific purposes". The convention did not ban trade with fibers and other similar products from European hemp, high growing varieties of hemp from Europe traditionally grown in the United States for production of fibers with low content of THC. The European hemp grown for its fibers missed, according to 1912 edition of a Swedish encyclopedia, almost entirely to the narcotic properties which characterized Indian hemp[7]

Uniform State Narcotic Act (1925–1932)

The Uniform State Narcotic Act, first tentative draft in 1925 and fifth final version in 1932, was a result of work by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. It was argued that the traffic in narcotic drugs should have the same safeguards and the same regulation in all of the states. The committee took into consideration the fact that the federal government had already passed The Harrison Act in 1914 and The Federal Import and Export Act in 1922. Many persons assumed that the Harrison Act was all that was necessary. The Harrison Act, however, was a revenue-producing act, and while it provided penalties for violation, it did not give the states themselves authority to exercise police power in regard to seizure of drugs used in illicit trade, or in regard to punishment of those responsible therefor. The act was recommended to the states for that purpose.[8] As a result of the Uniform State Narcotic Act the Federal Bureau of Narcotics encouraged state governments to adopt it. By the middle of 1930s all member states had some regulation of cannabis.[9][10][11]

Federal Bureau of Narcotics (1930)

FBN public service announcement used in the late 1930s and 1940s

The use of cannabis and other drugs came under increasing scrutiny after the formation of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) in 1930,[12] headed by Harry J. Anslinger as part of the government's broader push to outlaw all drugs.

"When the present administration took office ten countries had ratified the Geneva Narcotic Limitation Convention. The United States was one of these ten.... It was my privilege, as President, to proclaim, on that day, that this treaty had become effective throughout the jurisdiction of the United States....On Jan. 1, 1933, only nine nations had registered their ratification of the limitation treaty. On Jan. 1, 1935, only nine States had adopted the uniform State statute. As 1933 witnessed ratification of the treaty by thirty-one additional nations, so may 1935 witness the adoption of the uniform drug act by at least thirty-one more states, thereby placing interstate accord abreast of international accord, to the honor of the legislative bodies of our States and for the promotion of the welfare of our people and the peoples of other lands." (Franklin D. Roosevelt, March 1935 in a radio message read by United States Attorney General, Homer Stille Cummings )[13]

Anslinger claimed cannabis caused people to commit violent crimes, act irrational, and act overly sexual. The FBN produced propaganda films promoting Anslinger's views and Anslinger often commented to the press regarding his views on cannabis.

The 1936 Geneva Trafficking Convention

In 1936, the Convention for the Suppression of the Illicit Traffic in Dangerous Drugs (1936 Trafficking Convention) was concluded in Geneva. The U.S., led by Anslinger, had attempted to include in the treaty the criminalization of all activities – cultivation, production, manufacture and distribution – related to the use of opium, coca (and its derivatives) and cannabis for non-medical and non-scientific purposes. Many countries opposed this and the focus remained on illicit trafficking. Article 2 of the Convention called upon signatory countries to use their national criminal law systems to "severely" punish, "particularly by imprisonment or other penalties of deprivation of liberty," acts directly related to drug trafficking.

The U.S. refused to sign the final version because it considered the Convention too weak, especially in relation to extradition, extraterritoriality and the confiscation of trafficking profits.[14]

Marijuana Tax Act (1937)

Main article: Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
Tax stamp for a producer of cannabis

The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 made possession or transfer of cannabis illegal throughout the United States under federal law, excluding medical and industrial uses, in which an expensive excise tax was required. Annual fees for the tax were $24 ($337 adjusted for inflation) for importers, manufacturers, and cultivators of cannabis, $1 annually ($14 adjusted for inflation) for medical and research purposes, and $3 annually ($42 adjusted for inflation) for industrial uses. Detailed cannabis sale logs were required to keep record of cannabis sales. Selling cannabis to any person who has previously paid the tax is $1 per ounce or fraction thereof; however, it is $100 ($1,406 adjusted for inflation) per ounce or fraction thereof to sell any person who has not registered and paid the special tax.[15]

The American Medical Association (AMA) opposed the act because the tax was imposed on physicians prescribing cannabis, retail pharmacists selling cannabis, and medical cannabis cultivation/manufacturing; instead of enacting the Marihuana Tax Act, the AMA proposed cannabis be added to the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act.[16]

New York Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, who was a strong opponent of the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act, started the LaGuardia Commission that in 1944 contradicted the earlier reports of addiction, madness, and overt sexuality.[2]

In its 1969 Leary v. United States decision, the Supreme Court held the Marihuana Tax Act to be unconstitutional since it violated the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.[17] In response, Congress repealed the Marihuana Tax Act and passed the Controlled Substances Act as Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, which repealed the Marihuana Tax Act.[18]

DuPont, William Randolph Hearst, and hemp

The decision of the United States Congress to pass the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was based on hearings,[19] reports[20] and in part on testimony derived from articles in newspapers owned by William Randolph Hearst, who had significant financial interests in the timber industry, which manufactured his newsprint.[21]

Cannabis activist Jack Herer has researched DuPont and in his 1985 book The Emperor Wears No Clothes, Herer concluded DuPont played a large role in the criminalization of cannabis. In 1938, DuPont patented the processes for creating plastics from coal and oil and a new process for creating paper from wood pulp. If hemp had been largely exploited, Herer believes it would have likely been used to make paper and plastic (nylon), and may have hurt DuPont's profits. Andrew Mellon of the Mellon Bank was DuPont's chief financial backer and was also the Secretary of the Treasury under the Hoover administration. Mellon appointed Harry J. Anslinger, who later became his nephew-in-law, as the head of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (FBNDD) and the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN), where Anslinger stayed until 1962.[22]

In 1916, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) chief scientists Jason L. Merrill and Lyster H. Dewe created paper made from hemp pulp, which they concluded was "favorable in comparison with those used with pulp wood in USDA Bulletin No. 404."[23] In his book Herer summarized the findings of Bulletin No. 404:[24]

USDA Bulletin No. 404, reported that one acre of hemp, in annual rotation over a 20-year period, would produce as much pulp for paper as 4.1 acres (17,000 m2) of trees being cut down over the same 20-year period. This process would use only 1/4 to 1/7 as much polluting sulfur-based acid chemicals to break down the glue-like lignin that binds the fibers of the pulp, or even none at all using soda ash. The problem of dioxin contamination of rivers is avoided in the hemp paper making process, which does not need to use chlorine bleach (as the wood pulp paper making process requires) but instead safely substitutes hydrogen peroxide in the bleaching process. ... If the new (1916) hemp pulp paper process were legal today, it would soon replace about 70% of all wood pulp paper, including computer printout paper, corrugated boxes and paper bags.

Hemp was a relatively easy target because factories already had made large investments in equipment to handle cotton, wool, and linen, but there were relatively small investments in hemp production. Big technological improvements in the wood pulp industry were invented in the 1930s; for example the recovery boiler allowed kraft mills to recycle almost all of their pulping chemicals, and other improvements came later. There was also a misconception hemp had an intoxicating effect because it has the same active substance, THC, which is in potent cannabis strains; however, hemp only has minimal amount of THC when compared to recreational cannabis strains.

An alternative explanation for Anslinger's opinion's about hemp is that he believed that a tax on cannabis could be easier to supervise if it included hemp and that he had reports from experiments with mechanical harvesting of hemp reporting that the machines was no success and reports about cannabis farms.[25]

"The existence of the old 1934-1935 crop of harvested hemp on the fields of southern Minnesota is a menace to society in that it is being used by traffickers in marihuana as a source of supply."[26]

"they were able to cut only a part of the Tribune Farm crop by machine, two thirds of it they did by hand with a sharp hand cuttertuff".[27]

An argument for the alternative theory is that hemp was not an alternative as material in the new commercial products from DuPont using oil or coal as raw material, the nylon-bristled toothbrush (1938) followed more famously by women's “nylons” stockings (1940). Nylon was intended to be a synthetic replacement for silk not hemp.

Mandatory sentencing (1952, 1956)

Mandatory sentencing and increased punishment were enacted when the United States Congress passed the Boggs Act of 1952 and the Narcotics Control Act of 1956. The acts made a first time cannabis possession offense a minimum of two to ten years with a fine up to $20,000; however, in 1970, the United States Congress repealed mandatory penalties for cannabis offenses.[2]

Reorganization (1968, 1973)

In 1968, the United States Department of the Treasury subsidiary Bureau of Narcotics and the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare subsidiary Bureau of Drug Abuse Control merged to create the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs as a United States Department of Justice subsidiary.

In 1973, President Richard Nixon's "Reorganization Plan Number Two" proposed the creation of a single federal agency to enforce federal drug laws and Congress accepted the proposal, as there was concern regarding the growing availability of drugs.[28] As a result, on July 1, 1973, the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD) and the Office of Drug Abuse Law Enforcement (ODALE) merged together to create the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).[2]

On December 1, 1975 the Supreme Court ruled that it was "not cruel or unusual for Ohio to sentence someone to 20 years for having or selling cannabis."[29]

Mandatory sentencing and three-strikes (1984, 1986)

During the Reagan Administration the Sentencing Reform Act provisions of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 created the Sentencing Commission, which established mandatory sentencing guidelines.[30] The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 reinstated mandatory prison sentences, including large scale cannabis distribution.[31] Later an amendment created a three-strikes law, which created mandatory life sentences for repeat drug offenders and allowed the death penalty to be used against "drug kingpins."[2]

United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative (2001)

Main article: United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative

In 1996, California voters passed Proposition 215, which legalized medical cannabis. The Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, was created to "provide seriously ill patients with a safe and reliable source of medical cannabis, information and patient support" in accordance with Proposition 215.

In January 1998, the U.S. Government sued Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative for violating federal laws created as a result of Controlled Substances Act of 1970. On May 14, 2001, the United States Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Coop that federal anti-drug laws do not permit an exception for medical cannabis and rejected the common-law medical necessity defense to crimes enacted under the Controlled Substances Act because Congress concluded cannabis has "no currently accepted medical use" when the act was passed in 1970.

Gonzales v. Raich (2005)

Main article: Gonzales v. Raich

Gonzales v. Raich ruled in a 6-3 decision that the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution allowed the federal government to ban the use of cannabis, including medical use. The court found the federal law valid, although the cannabis in question had been grown and consumed within a single state, and had never entered interstate commerce. Congress may ban the use of cannabis even where states approve its use for medicinal purposes.

Attempts to Decriminalize (1970s–2000s)

Main article: Decriminalization of cannabis in the United States

Medical use

Main article: Medical cannabis
cannabis fluid extract medicine bottle from 1906

In 1978, Robert Randall sued the federal government for arresting him for using cannabis to treat his glaucoma. The judge ruled Randall needed cannabis for medical purposes and required the Food and Drug Administration set up a program to grow cannabis on a farm at the University of Mississippi and to distribute 300 cannabis cigarettes a month to Randall. In 1992, George H. W. Bush discontinued the program after Randall tried to make AIDS patients eligible for the program. At the time, thirteen people were already enrolled and were allowed to continue receiving cannabis cigarettes; today the government still ships cannabis cigarettes to seven persons. Irvin Rosenfeld, who became eligible to receive cannabis from the program in 1982 to treat rare bone tumors, urged the George W. Bush administration to reopen the program; however, he was unsuccessful.[32]

In 1996, California passed the Compassionate Use Act, which decriminalized medical cannabis by enacting laws that allow regulated cannabis consumption, possession, cultivation, and distribution for medicinal use; since then twelve states have enacted similar laws.[citation needed] As a result of the court rulings of United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative and Gonzales v. Raich, and the classification of cannabis as a Schedule I drug, the Federal government does not permit cannabis to be used medically; the DEA has taken an active stance against medical cannabis and often raids cannabis dispensaries.[33]

In 1972, 1995, and 2002, petitions for cannabis rescheduling in the United States were filed to remove cannabis from the "Schedule I" category of tightly-restricted drugs that have no medical use, as the Controlled Substance Act allows the executive branch to decriminalize medical and recreational use of cannabis without any action by Congress depending on the findings of the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services on certain scientific and medical issues specified by the Act.[34]

Restrictions on medical use by state

Alaska
One ounce usable.[35] Alaska is the only state where possession of up to one ounce is legal.[36]
California
8 ounces usable. A Physician's recommendation is required.[37] On November 5, 1996 56% of voters approved Proposition 215. The law removes state-level criminal penalties on the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis by patients who possess a "written or oral recommendation" from their physician that he or she "would benefit from medical marijuana." Patients diagnosed with any illness where the medical use of cannabis has been "deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician" are provided with legal protection under this act. Conditions typically covered by the law include: arthritis; cachexia; cancer; chronic pain; HIV or AIDS; epilepsy; migraine; and multiple sclerosis. No regulations regarding the amount of cannabis patients may possess and/or cultivate were provided by this act, though the California Legislature adopted guidelines in 2003.[38] In practice, as certain doctors will prescribe cannabis for any condition, the drug is essentially decriminalized for those who can afford to obtain the paperwork.[39]
Colorado
2 ounces usable. A Physician's recommendation is required.[citation needed]
Hawaii
3 ounces usable.[citation needed]
Maine
Amended to 2.5 ounces usable. No state-run registry. A physician's recommendation is required.[citation needed]
Massachusetts
On November 4, 2008, Massachusetts became the first state to decriminalize marijuana possession passed by voter initiative.
Michigan
2.5 ounces usable. No state-run registry.[citation needed] On November 4, 2008, voters of Michigan passed a ballot proposal which allows for patients with debilitating medical conditions to use the drug and for registered individuals to grow the marijuana in secured facilities. The measure also requires the state's health department to establish a registry of qualified patients and growers.[40]
Montana
1 ounce usable.[citation needed]
Nevada
1 ounce usable. A Physician's recommendation is required.[citation needed] On November 7, 2000 65% of voters approved Question 9. The law, which removes state-level criminal penalties on the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis by patients who have "written documentation" from a licensed physician, took effect on October 1, 2001. Patients diagnosed with the following illnesses can obtain a medical card: AIDS; cancer; glaucoma; and any medical condition or treatment to a medical condition that produces cachexia, persistent muscle spasms or seizures, severe nausea or pain. Other conditions are subject to approval by the health division of the state Department of Human Resources. Once a medical cannabis card is obtained patients may legally possess no more than one ounce of usable cannabis, and may grow no more than seven cannabis plants. The law establishes a state-run patient registry that issues identification cards to qualifying patients. Patients who do not join the registry or possess greater amounts of cannabis than allowed by law are subject to arrest on cannabis charges.[38]
New Mexico
6 ounces usable.[citation needed] Governor Bill Richardson signed Senate Bill 523, "Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act," into law on April 2, 2007. The new law took effect on July 1, 2007. The law mandates the state Department of Health by October 1, 2007, to promulgate rules governing the use and distribution of medical cannabis to state-authorized patients. These rules shall address the creation of state-licensed "cannabis production facilities," the development of a confidential patient registry and a state-authorized cannabis distribution system, and "define the amount of cannabis that is necessary to constitute an adequate supply" for qualified patients.[41]
Oregon
24 ounces usable.[citation needed] On November 3, 1998 55% of voters approved Measure 67. The law, which took effect on December 3, 1998, removes state-level criminal penalties on the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis. Patients are required to possess a signed recommendation from their physician stating that cannabis may help alleviate his or her symptoms. Patients diagnosed with the following illnesses are given legal protection under this act: cachexia; cancer; chronic pain; epilepsy and other disorders characterized by seizures; glaucoma; HIV or AIDS; multiple sclerosis and other disorders characterized by muscle spasticity; and nausea. Other conditions are subject to approval by the Health Division of the Oregon Department of Human Resources. Patients may legally possess no more than three ounces of cannabis, and may grow no more than seven cannabis plants. The law establishes a state-run patient registry that issues identification cards to qualifying patients. Patients who do not join the registry or possess greater amounts of cannabis than allowed by law may be subject to arrest on cannabis charges.[38]
Rhode Island
2.5 ounces usable.[citation needed]
Vermont
2 ounces usable.[citation needed]
Washington
24 ounces usable. No state-run registry.[citation needed] On November 3, 1998 59% of voters approved Measure 692. The law removes state-level criminal penalties on the use, possession and cultivation of cannabis. Valid documentation from a physician affirming that the patient suffers from a medical condition and that the "potential benefits of the medical use of cannabis would likely outweigh the health risks" is required. Patients diagnosed with the following illnesses are given legal protection under this act: cachexia; cancer; HIV or AIDS; epilepsy; glaucoma; and multiple sclerosis. Other conditions are subject to approval by the Washington Board of Health. Patients may legally possess or grow no more than a 60-day supply of cannabis.[38]

Some states include legal use of simple and affirmative defense in the cases of non-complying patients.[citation needed]

Arizona and Maryland both enacted laws that do not legalize medical marijuana, but are favorable to doctors prescribing it and its use as defense in court, respectively.[citation needed]

The state laws, as mentioned above, do not cancel federal laws that criminalize use of cannabis, so federal prosecution is still possible.

Non-medical use

See also: Places that have decriminalized cannabis in the United States
United States non-medical marijuana decriminalization laws.
  State-level but not federal decriminalization of non-medical marijuana
  No federal or state level decriminalization of non-medical marijuana

After the 1960s, a time characterized by widespread use of cannabis as a recreational drug,[2] a wave of legislation in America sought to reduce the penalties for the simple possession of cannabis, making it punishable by confiscation and/or a fine rather than imprisonment. Some of the first examples of decriminalization in drug policy were found in Alabama, when state judges decided to no longer impose five year mandatory minimum sentences for small possession (one cannabis cigarette); Missouri, when their legislature reformed statutes that made second possession offenses no longer punishable by life in prison; and in Georgia, when that state revised second sale offenses

In 1970, the United States Congress repealed mandatory penalties for cannabis offenses and The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act separated cannabis from other illicit narcotics and removed mandatory sentences for possession of small amounts of cannabis.[2]

In 1972 President Richard Nixon commissioned a comprehensive study from the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse. The Commission found that the constitutionality of cannabis prohibition was suspect, and that the executive and legislative branches had a responsibility to obey the Constitution, even in the absence of a court ruling to do so. The Richard Nixon administration did not implement the study's recommendations.(View Report)

In 1973 Oregon decriminalized cannabis[42] and Colorado, Alaska, Ohio, and California followed suit in 1975. By 1978, Mississippi, North Carolina[43], New York, and Nebraska had some form of cannabis decriminalization.[citation needed] In 2001, Nevada reduced cannabis possession from a felony offense to a misdemeanor, but only for adults age 21 and older, with other restrictions.[44]

Starting in the 1970s, multiple states, counties, and cities decriminalized cannabis for non-medical purposes. While many states, counties, and cities have partially decriminalized cannabis, on November 3, 2004, Oakland passed Proposition Z, and became the first place to fully decriminalize cannabis to allow the licensing, taxing, and regulation of cannabis sales if California law is amended to allow so. (see Places that have decriminalized cannabis in the United States for further information).

A recent vote of 54% to 46% in Denver, CO has made the possession of up to an ounce of cannabis legal, although this does not overrule federal laws and one may still be arrested for it, and it only applies to people age 21 and older. Most recently, the town of Breckenridge, CO passed a similar law, also allowing for the possession of up to one ounce of Marijuana. [45]

The American Medical Association and the California Medical Association have both, separately, called for more research on Marijuana. [46][47]

"...CMA consider the criminalization of marijuana to be a failed public health policy; and be it further resolved that CMA encourage and participate in debate and education regarding the health aspects of changing current policy regarding cannabis use."[48]

Drug courts

Main article: Drug court

Drug courts are fast growing in number. The first started in 1989; 2140 drug courts were in operation May 2008, with another 284 being planned or developed.[49] They offer offenders charged with less-serious crimes of being under the influence, possession of a controlled substance, or even drug-using offenders charged with a non-drug related crime the option of entering the drug court system in lieu of serving a jail sentence. Offenders will have to plead guilty to the charge, agree to take part in treatment, regular drug screenings, and regular reporting to the drug court judge for a minimum of one year. Should the offender fail to comply with one or more of the requirements they may be removed from the drug court and incarcerated at the judge's discretion. If they complete the drug court program the charges brought against them are dropped or reduced.

See also

References

  1. ^ Richard J. Bonnie & Charles H. Whitebread, II: PASSAGE OF THE UNIFORM NARCOTIC DRUG ACT
  2. ^ a b c d e f g "Marijuana Timeline". Public Broadcasting Service. Retrieved 2007-04-23.
  3. ^ STATEMENT OF DR. WILLIAM C. WOODWARD
  4. ^ Richard J. Bonnie* & Charles H. Whitebread, II*
  5. ^ The Origins of California's 1913 Cannabis Law
  6. ^ W.W. WILLOUGHBY: OPIUM AS AN INTERNATIONAL PROBLEM, BALTIMORE, THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS, 1925
  7. ^ Nordisk familjebok 1912
  8. ^ ANSLINGER H. J.,TOMPKINS W F THE TRAFFIC IN NARCOTIC
  9. ^ Keel, Robert. "Drug Law Timeline, Significant Events in the History of our Drug Laws". Schaffer Library of Drug Policy. Retrieved 2007-04-24. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  10. ^ The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937,Transcripts of Congressional Hearings
  11. ^ ANSLINGER H. J.,TOMPKINS W F THE TRAFFIC IN NARCOTIC, ch 6, 1953
  12. ^ Records of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
  13. ^ ROOSEVELT ASKS NARCOTIC WAR AID, 1935
  14. ^ Jay Sinha, Law and Government Division: THE HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE LEADING INTERNATIONAL DRUG CONTROL CONVENTIONS
  15. ^ "Full Text of the Marihuana Tax Act as passed in 1937". Schaffer Library of Drug Policy. Retrieved 2007-05-15. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  16. ^ "Statement of Dr. William C. Woodward, Legislative Counsel, American Medical Association". Retrieved 2006-03-25.
  17. ^ Timothy Leary v. US, Supreme Court of the United States, 1969
  18. ^ Pub. L. No. 91-513, 84 Stat. 1236 (Oct. 27, 1973).
  19. ^ The Marihuana Tax Act
  20. ^ The Marihuana Tax Act, Reports
  21. ^ "Additional Statement of H.J. Anslinger, Commissioner of Narcotics". Retrieved 2006-03-25.
  22. ^ "The Emperor Wears No Clothes, Chapter 4". Retrieved 2006-10-21.
  23. ^ Dewey and Merrill, U.S.D.A. Bulletin No. 404, Washington, D.C., October 14, 1916. Page 25
  24. ^ "The Emperor Wears No Clothes". www.jackherer.com/. Retrieved 2007-04-02. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  25. ^ MARIHUANA FARM FOUND IN MARYLAND, New York Times 1936
  26. ^ REPORT OF SURVEY COMMERCIALIZED HEMP (1934-35 CROP)
  27. ^ Letter from Elizabeth Bass - November 5, 1936
  28. ^ "History of the DEA: 1970 - 1975". www.deamuseum.org. Retrieved 2007-04-30. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  29. ^ Supreme Court / Marijuana / Busing / Speedy Trial NBC News broadcast from the Vanderbilt Television News Archive
  30. ^ "An Overview of the United States Sentencing Commission" (PDF). United States Department of State. Retrieved 2007-04-30.
  31. ^ "1985 - 1990". Drug Enforcement Administration. Retrieved 2007-04-30.
  32. ^ Koch, Wendy (2005-06-07). "Court's pot ruling won't apply to patients in federal program". USA Today. Retrieved 2007-05-02.
  33. ^ Klausner, Manuel (January 26, 2006). "Opinion:Let them have their pot". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 2007-05-12.
  34. ^ "http://www.millionmarijuanamarch.com/mmm1_047.htm". www.millionmarijuanamarch.com/mmm1_047.htm. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= and |title= (help)
  35. ^ Bolstad, Erika (2009-10-26). "Alaska's medical marijuana policy stays intact". The Miami Herald. David Landsberg. Retrieved 2009-10-31.
  36. ^ Volz, Matt (2006-07-11). "Judge rules against Alaska marijuana law". The Seattle Times. Frank A. Blethen. Retrieved 2008-05-22.
  37. ^ Muir, Jennifer (2009-10-30). "Gray areas in pot law help the ill -- and those who are not". The Orange County Register. Terry Horne. Retrieved 2009-10-31.
  38. ^ a b c d "State by State Laws". Retrieved 2008-05-07.
  39. ^ Stein, Joel (2008-05-09). "This bud's for you, and you, and you too: How I got my hands on some marijuana -- the legal (and easy) way". Los Angeles Times.
  40. ^ ABC News - Voters Weigh on on Key Ballot Issues Retrieved on November 5, 2008
  41. ^ "State by State Laws: New Mexico". Retrieved 2008-10-11.
  42. ^ McVeigh, Frank J. Brief History of Social Problems: a critical thinking approach, 2004. Page 62.
  43. ^ "North Carolina State Legislature". (NC § 90‑94) / (NC § 90‑95 subs 4).
  44. ^ Harrison, Ann (2001-06-05). "Capitol Hill's cannabis catch-up? Medical marijuana ruling puts spotlight on pending legislation". San Francisco Bay Guardian. Retrieved 2007-04-24.
  45. ^ http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/21515178/detail.html
  46. ^ http://www.mapinc.org/norml/v09/n1014/a03.html?1217
  47. ^ http://www.canorml.org/news/amacma.html
  48. ^ http://www.canorml.org/news/amacma.html
  49. ^ Drug courts
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Legal_history_of_cannabis_in_the_United_States&oldid=338870117"