decriminalizing marijuana thesis statement

• The Blue Review
• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share through Email

How marijuana legalization would benefit the criminal justice system

Cody Jorgensen is Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at Boise State University. His research interests include developmental and biosocial criminology, policing and forensics, drug policy, and quantitative methods.

The 2020 election is ramping up and the democratic candidates have been laying out their agendas in preparation for the upcoming primary election. The issue of marijuana policy reform is not the cornerstone of any of the leading democratic candidates’ platforms; however, most of them have discussed their plan dealing with the marijuana issue.

For example, Bernie Sanders has laid out a comprehensive plan to reform our current marijuana laws that includes legalizing the substance within the first 100 days in office and vacating/expunging all marijuana-related convictions. Other candidates like Elizabeth Warren, Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Andrew Yang, and Amy Klobuchar have taken a similar stance and most of the democratic candidates support the Marijuana Justice Act sponsored by Senator Booker. This proposed legislation would remove cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act, expunge marijuana-related convictions, and bar federal funds to states that enforce cannabis laws in a discriminatory way.

Of the leading candidates, Joe Biden is an outlier. He does not support the legalization of marijuana at the federal level. Instead, Biden argues that legalization should be determined by the states. His reluctance seems to be due to his belief that marijuana is a gateway drug. However, research ( Jorgensen ; Cleveland and Wiebe ; Van Gundy and Rebellon ) has consistently shown that Biden’s belief is misguided.

On the other hand, President Trump and his fellow members of the GOP remain steadfast in their opposition to marijuana legalization. They tend to favor the status quo or even ramping up enforcement and prosecution of marijuana-related offenses.

Critics of cannabis reform have given several justifications for prohibiting marijuana, including arguments such as the following

• marijuana causes more harm to society and the user than alcohol and tobacco
• the increased potency of marijuana is dangerous
• the addictive properties of cannabis cause abuse
• decriminalizing marijuana sends a latent message that people should be using it
• drug use is on the rise (especially among youth)
• and marijuana is a gateway drug causing the use of harder drugs.

All of these justifications listed have been debunked by empirical research and are more fiction than fact. As an alternative to misinformation supporting prohibition, this article will present an evidence-based argument for legalizing marijuana and suggests that doing so would be beneficial to our criminal justice system. In short, the Marijuana Justice Act would be good policy.

Marijuana prohibition is undemocratic

According to the latest Gallup poll , a large majority of Americans favor legalizing marijuana. As of 2019, 66% of Americans support legalization. Looking back at long term trends, the data show that attitudes about marijuana and its prohibition have changed dramatically over the past few decades.

When Gallup first measured attitudes about marijuana, only 12% of the population favored legalization. A steady increase in favorable attitudes towards legalization followed with a more dramatic increase beginning in the early 2000s. In 2001, 31% favored legalization and in 2010 that percentage increased to 44%.

There also seems to be a relationship between political ideology and attitudes toward legal cannabis. Gallup data shows that 76% of Democrats, 68% of Independents, and 51% of Republicans favor legalization. Going into 2020, the recreational use of marijuana will be legal in 11 states. This trend began with moves by Colorado and Washington to legalize in 2012.

A likely explanation for the change in marijuana attitudes is that the public understands that cannabis is a less harmful substance than other substances that are currently legal, such as alcohol or prescription drugs. Alcohol is by far a more harmful drug to society and the individual user as compared with marijuana . It follows that criminalizing recreational marijuana use is seen by a large swath of Americans as unjustified or even hypocritical because many Americans drink.

It should also be noted that laws that are viewed by the public as unjustified or illegitimate are not likely to be complied with . Put another way, people are unlikely to voluntarily abide by laws or rules that they view as unwarranted. When the criminal justice system enforces laws that the bulk of the public disagrees with, it harms the credibility of the criminal justice system which, in turn, impedes its ability to accomplish its goals of controlling and reducing crime.

Marijuana prohibition is costly

In 2018, there were more than 663,000 marijuana-related arrests made in the United States. More than 608,000 of those arrests were for marijuana possession only . This means that law enforcement is primarily arresting recreational cannabis users, not dealers. Many of those arrested will end up incarcerated, exacerbating the fact that tax monies supporting the incarceration of non-violent drug offenders are significant. Costs range between $30,000-$35,000 per year to house an inmate.

Furthermore, there are substantial costs involved in making arrests. While calculating the cost of an arrest is difficult and estimates vary widely based on how the cost is calculated, low estimates put the average cost of an arrest around $1,000 ( The National Juvenile Justice Network ; Drug Policy Alliance) and up to around $5,000 on the higher end . This suggests that between $600,000,000 and $3,000,000,000 is spent simply arresting recreational marijuana users. Those tax dollars could be better spent elsewhere, such as on officers’ salaries or updating equipment. Additionally, the process of making an arrest and taking an offender to jail takes the arresting officer off of the street for a significant amount of time, typically a couple of hours. That lost time could also be better spent with officers out on the street making their presence known and/or engaging with community members.

The economic costs are not the only costs associated with marijuana prohibition. There are also human costs, which may outweigh the economic costs . Having a conviction for marijuana possession on a record is not a trivial matter. This mark of a criminal record can negatively affect people in numerous ways. For example, college students can lose their federal aid for tuition and employees can get fired from their jobs due to a single marijuana-related offense. Having such a record also makes it significantly more difficult to get a job, a loan, or to rent an apartment. These are obviously stressful events that can strain relationships and negatively impact one’s mental well-being.

One of the more damaging effects of an arrest is the harm caused by introducing an otherwise law-abiding pot smoker into the formal criminal justice process. Being processed through the system, from initial contact with police to completion of a sentence, is stressful, frustrating, and often seen as unjust. This is especially relevant for non-violent recreational marijuana users who have done nothing else wrong.

The experience is generally viewed as an excessive punishment that does not fit the crime which often leads to offenders (and people close to them) to lose faith and trust in the criminal justice system . This is important because the system cannot effectively do its job if it does not have the support of the public. In this way, marijuana prohibition can do more harm than good.

Marijuana enforcement is racially biased

Marijuana use is fairly equally distributed across social strata. Whites, blacks, Hispanics, the affluent, and the poor use marijuana at about the same rate . However, enforcement of marijuana laws is not equally distributed across social strata. Instead, minorities and the poor are much more likely to be arrested for simple marijuana offenses. Nationally, African Americans are about four times more likely than whites to be arrested for cannabis.

The disparity is even greater depending on where people live. For example, in Iowa, Washington, DC, and Minnesota, African Americans are eight times more likely to be arrested. This is strong evidence of racial bias and largely stems from the racially biased practice of stop-and-frisk .

Stop-and-frisk tactics have been used in cities throughout the country; however, nowhere has the issue been more salient than in New York City. Throughout the history of the practice used by the NYPD, the overwhelming majority of people stopped-and-frisked were young black and Hispanic men. In the overwhelming majority of these instances, the young men were innocent . In 2013, the way the NYPD had been implementing stop-and-frisk was ruled unconstitutional.

Racial profiling is damning to the criminal justice system for obvious reasons. This is particularly the case for police. Racial bias, whether real or simply perceived, negatively affects the police-community relationship . The relationships police have with minority communities have been fractured in recent years due to racial disparities in enforcement and use of force, the consequences of which certainly hinder the system from doing its job effectively .

For example, the police typically do not solve crimes on their own. Instead, crimes are usually solved because members of the community cooperate with the police and give them information about the crime. Community members tell the police who the suspect is, where they hang out, who they hang out with, etc. When people do not trust the police, they will be unlikely to help them in their investigations, and racial profiling is a primary source of distrust.

Additionally, when the police-community relationship is fractured, people in minority communities may be reluctant to call the police for service. Instead, they might opt to deal with problems or conflicts themselves which could lead to an increase in violence.

The War on Drugs is basically a war on marijuana

In their book Drugs and Drug Policy , researchers Clayton Mosher and Scott Akins examine the evidence showing that the War on Drugs has been a resounding failure. This is not a controversial or speculative statement. There is consensus among criminologists, criminal justice scholars, and drug policy experts that the War on Drugs has not been effective and offers no clear benefit to society. It is also expensive costing around $47 billion per year .

The War on Drugs has not reduced drug use and has not reduced crime associated with drug use and the illegal drug trade. At the same time, this approach has incentivized policing for profit via asset forfeiture laws , increased police militarization through the Pentagon’s 1033 program , and contributed significantly to mass incarceration which has disproportionately affected communities of color.

What is more, the War on Drugs is primarily a war on marijuana since the vast majority of arrests made and resources spent have been focused on marijuana offenses. In recent years, drug arrests in general, and marijuana possession arrests in particular, have been increasing while at the same time the rates of serious crimes have been decreasing .

This increase is unwarranted since marijuana use is not a cause of harder drug use nor is it associated with an increase in crime and violence, as is the case with other substance use, like alcohol or methamphetamine. Marijuana is also not associated with the risk of overdose, unlike heroin and the prescription drugs that are at the heart of the current opioid epidemic. This topic has been extensively studied and the empirical evidence generally shows that the War on Drugs has caused more harm than it has prevented.

An evidence-based alternative to the War on Drugs is harm reduction. Harm reduction aims to reduce the harms associated with substance use by focusing on prevention and rehabilitation instead of enforcement and incarceration. Harm reduction strategies have shown to reduce drug use, crime associated with drug use, the spread of infectious diseases, drug overdoses, etc. For example, therapeutic community programs  and drug court programs  are far more effective at reducing behavioral problems associated with drug use than typical “get tough” deterrence based approaches which typically have little to no effect on reducing antisocial behavior.

Wasting precious resources on ineffective deterrence-based strategies does not inspire confidence in the system. The money spent on the enforcement of marijuana laws and the sentencing of marijuana offenders would be better spent on rehabilitation and prevention programs.  As such, continuing the failed War on Drugs, marijuana prohibition in particular, is not conducive to the goals of the criminal justice system. It is ineffective, expensive, and it harms the credibility of our legal institutions.

The marijuana economy is worth billions

It is estimated that the illicit marijuana economy is worth around $30-$40 billion dollars. Surely, it is reasonable to think that this industry should be run by American business owners rather than drug cartels and drug gangs. Demand for marijuana will always exist, and whenever an in demand product or service is made illegal, the black market will inevitably provide it. Criminal enterprises that deliver illicit goods and services do not use the law to solve problems and resolve conflicts. They use violence. Recent research has shown that legalizing marijuana reduces violence and trafficking associated with the illegal drug trade thereby reducing the power and wealth of cartels and drug gangs .

On top of reducing drug related crime, legalizing marijuana has shown to be a meaningful avenue of raising tax revenue. For example, Colorado’s legal marijuana industry has brought in over one billion dollars in tax revenue to the state since it abandoned prohibition . A portion of the tax revenue generated by a legal cannabis industry could be earmarked for police agencies, correctional facilities, drug rehabilitation centers, and crime prevention programs.

There are several programs that are not only effective at reducing crime, but are also cost effective as well. For every dollar spent on an evidence-based crime reduction or prevention program, several dollars are saved down the road in enforcement and correctional expenditures. One of the most successful prevention programs known is the Nurse Family Partnership program .

Using tax money generated from a legal marijuana industry to fund this program nationally will not only reduce crime rates, but will save a lot of money in the long term. Another useful way to spend this proposed tax revenue is by paying our police better. The current salaries for newly hired police officers are abysmal in most jurisdictions across America. Increasing base pay for these public servants may entice qualified candidates into police work who were previously uninterested because of the low pay. Additionally, it is not good for our police to be tired and under excessive stress while on duty.

It is fairly common for police officers to work overtime or have a part-time job to make extra money. Having an over-worked, under-paid, and stressed police force is not conducive to a healthy police-community relationship . Paying rank-and-file police officers more could help reduce their stress and fatigue and may help with recruiting excellent candidates that will make good cops.

The common denominator

The underlying theme of the previous paragraphs is that marijuana prohibition harms the legitimacy and credibility of the criminal justice system for a variety of reasons: it is undemocratic, racially biased, ineffective, detrimental, costly, and wasteful. When any authority figure is viewed as illegitimate or not credible, people are not likely to support that authority figure nor are people likely to voluntarily comply or cooperate with that authority.

In his book Why People Obey the Law , Yale psychologist Tom Tyler shows that this is a robust and consistent finding across a variety of domains. Such evidence strongly suggests that the criminal justice system must be viewed by the public to be legitimate, and the laws it enforces justified, in order to gain the compliance and cooperation of the public and to function as effectively as possible. Marijuana prohibition damages that legitimacy.

Our criminal justice system is ripe for major reform. Some of the reforms that are needed are those that will maximize the perceived legitimacy of our legal institutions. Given the reasons outlined, it is argued here that one of the simplest and most effective ways to accomplish that would be to legalize marijuana. Doing so would also be an effective way to fund crime reduction efforts and to ease the financial burden placed on the criminal justice system.

In the end, marijuana use is not completely harmless and the legalization of it is not without risk; however, the harm associated with marijuana use and legalization pales in comparison to prohibition. The Marijuana Justice Act would make good policy and would ultimately be beneficial to the criminal justice system.

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Advance Articles
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access Policy
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Why Submit?
• About Political Science Quarterly
• About the Academy of Political Science
• Editorial Board
• Advertising & Corporate Services
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

• < Previous

From Criminalizing to Decriminalizing Marijuana: The Politics of Social Control

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Daniel J. Mallinson, From Criminalizing to Decriminalizing Marijuana: The Politics of Social Control, Political Science Quarterly , Volume 134, Issue 4, Winter 2019, Pages 739–740, https://doi.org/10.1002/polq.12975

• Permissions Icon Permissions

As marijuana liberalization progresses in the United States, criminalization’s historical context must not be ignored. Scholars have begun to understand the spread of recent marijuana liberalization, but their work is not always grounded in the historical context of drug control. Nikolay Anguelov’s book From Criminalizing to Decriminalizing Marijuana does this by situating recent advancements in marijuana liberalization within the historical arc of U.S. drug control policy.

While research on the politics of marijuana liberalization has been picking up, Anguelov reminds us of the origins of criminalization and how it is tied to liberalization. Central to his argument is the aspect of social control in drug policy. Drugs were often criminalized to protect the white majority from undesirable “others.” From Asian migration and the denigration of “opium dens,” to banning Mexican marijuana, to Richard Nixon’s racially and electorally motivated war on drugs, race has played a powerful role in American drug policy. This history is vital to consider as we study liberalization efforts. It also helps inform our understanding of the social justice concerns that are surfacing with full legalization and were less salient with narrower medical marijuana programs.

The first three chapters provide the historical context for marijuana policy. Anguelov begins by discussing the early criminalization of marijuana and other drugs. As mentioned, Anguelov emphasizes the racial and social control aspects of early drug control policy. He uses a policy diffusion frame, though the chapters do not rigorously apply or test diffusion theory. That comes later. In addition to the successive political developments that many drug scholars may be aware of, the chapters tie in important social changes that add flesh to the argument that drug policy is a means of social control. Namely, Chapter 2 focuses on the connections between 1960s counterculture, the civil rights movement, and the emergence of the war on drugs. This is taken a step further in Chapter 3 by tying in the scientifically debunked but politically powerful notion of marijuana as a “gateway” drug.

Chapters 4, 5, and 6 take a pause from the historical context and focus instead on the economic costs of the war on drugs, the question of whether marijuana is addictive, and the entrepreneurship of decriminalization. Chapter 4 fits into the overall narrative of the book, as it focuses on domestic and international costs of the war on drugs. The chapter on addiction, however, felt more like an unnecessary aside that broke the flow of the text. That said, the chapter introduces nonexperts to the addiction literature. The narrative picks back up with Chapter 6, which is somewhat grounded in John Kingdon’s agenda-setting theory.

Chapters 7 and 8 provide a valuable addition to the literature on marijuana policy diffusion. Chapter 7 makes the important argument that marijuana policy is not simply dichotomous. There are three, though still broad, distinct categories of marijuana policy in the United States: (1) decriminalization, (2) medical, (3) recreational. The author argues that the three are nested, in that a state cannot move to a more liberalized policy without including the previous levels, at least to a degree. For example, a state adopting a medical cannabis program would need to decriminalize possession and distribution, at least for patients and members of the legal supply chain. Anguelov then expands on the research in testing political, economic, and demographic predictors of each type of policy. While dividing this task into two chapters was confusing, the results are intriguing and yield greater nuance than a dichotomous diffusion model. Chapter 8 also offers useful suggestions for follow-up research.

The book concludes with important thoughts about the collateral consequences of legalization, which must be considered by scholars and practitioners alike. In sum, this book provides a short yet comprehensive overview of marijuana policy in the United States. A missed opportunity, however, lies in the incorporation of greater policy theory. The author relies on policy diffusion theory most heavily but alludes to the multiple streams and advocacy coalition frameworks. Digging deeper into both would add a theoretical richness and systematicity to the author’s analysis. Helpfully, there is much for scholars to build on in this book.

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to Your Librarian
• Advertising & Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1538-165X
• Print ISSN 0032-3195
• Copyright © 2024 The Academy of Political Science
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Americans overwhelmingly say marijuana should be legal for medical or recreational use

With a growing number of states authorizing the use of marijuana, the public continues to broadly favor legalization of the drug for medical and recreational purposes. 

An overwhelming share of U.S. adults (88%) say either that marijuana should be legal for medical and recreational use by adults (59%) or that it should be legal for medical use only (30%). Just one-in-ten (10%) say marijuana use should not be legal, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted Oct. 10-16, 2022. These views are virtually unchanged since April 2021.

The new survey follows President Joe Biden’s decision to pardon people convicted of marijuana possession at the federal level and direct his administration to review how marijuana is classified under federal law. It was fielded before the Nov. 8 midterm elections, when two states legalized the use of marijuana for recreational purposes – joining 19 states and the District of Columbia , which had already done so.

Pew Research Center asked this question to track public views about the legal status of marijuana. For this analysis, we surveyed 5,098 adults from Oct. 10-16, 2022. Everyone who took part in this survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

Here are the questions used for this report, along with responses, and its methodology .

Over the long term, there has been a steep rise in public support for marijuana legalization, as measured by a separate Gallup survey question that asks whether the use of marijuana should be made legal – without specifying whether it would be legalized for recreational or medical use. This year, 68% of adults say marijuana should be legal , matching the record-high support for legalization Gallup found in 2021.

There continue to be sizable age and partisan differences in Americans’ views about marijuana. While very small shares of adults of any age are completely opposed to the legalization of the drug, older adults are far less likely than younger ones to favor legalizing it for recreational purposes.

This is particularly the case among those ages 75 and older, just three-in-ten of whom say marijuana should be legal for both medical and recreational use. Larger shares in every other age group – including 53% of those ages 65 to 74 – say the drug should be legal for both medical and recreational use.

Republicans are more wary than Democrats about legalizing marijuana for recreational use: 45% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents favor legalizing marijuana for both medical and recreational use, while an additional 39% say it should only be legal for medical use. By comparison, 73% of Democrats and Democratic leaners say marijuana should be legal for both medical and recreational use; an additional 21% say it should be legal for medical use only.

Ideological differences are evident within each party. About four-in-ten conservative Republicans (37%) say marijuana should be legal for medical and recreational use, compared with a 60% majority of moderate and liberal Republicans.

Nearly two-thirds of conservative and moderate Democrats (63%) say marijuana should be legal for medical and recreational use. An overwhelming majority of liberal Democrats (84%) say the same.

There also are racial and ethnic differences in views of legalizing marijuana. Roughly two-thirds of Black adults (68%) and six-in-ten White adults say marijuana should be legal for medical and recreational use, compared with smaller shares of Hispanic (49%) and Asian adults (48%).

Related: Clear majorities of Black Americans favor marijuana legalization, easing of criminal penalties

In both parties, views of marijuana legalization vary by age

While Republicans and Democrats differ greatly on whether marijuana should be legal for medial and recreational use, there are also age divides within each party.

A 62% majority of Republicans ages 18 to 29 favor making marijuana legal for medical and recreational use, compared with 52% of those ages 30 to 49. Roughly four-in-ten Republicans ages 50 to 64 (41%) and 65 to 74 (38%) say marijuana should be legal for both purposes, as do 18% of those 75 and older.

Still, wide majorities of Republicans in all age groups favor legalizing marijuana for medical use. Even among Republicans 65 and older, just 17% say marijuana use should not be legal even for medical purposes.

While majorities of Democrats across all age groups support legalizing marijuana for medical and recreational use, older Democrats are less likely to say this. About half of Democrats ages 75 and older (51%) say marijuana should be legal for medical or recreational purposes; larger shares of younger Democrats say the same. Still, only 8% of Democrats 75 and older think marijuana should not be legalized even for medical use – similar to the share of all other Democrats who say this.

Note: Here are the questions used for this report, along with responses, and its methodology .

• Drug Policy
• Medicine & Health

Ted Van Green is a research analyst focusing on U.S. politics and policy at Pew Research Center .

9 facts about Americans and marijuana

Most americans favor legalizing marijuana for medical, recreational use, most americans now live in a legal marijuana state – and most have at least one dispensary in their county, clear majorities of black americans favor marijuana legalization, easing of criminal penalties, concern about drug addiction has declined in u.s., even in areas where fatal overdoses have risen the most, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

student opinion

Should the United States Decriminalize the Possession of Drugs?

Several states have voted to reform their drug laws in response to the opioid epidemic and as a way to address high rates of drug-related incarceration. What do you think of this, and other, solutions?

By Nicole Daniels and Natalie Proulx

Students in U.S. high schools can get free digital access to The New York Times until Sept. 1, 2021.

Attitudes around drugs have changed considerably over the past few decades. Voters’ approval of drug-related initiatives in several states in the Nov. 3 election made that clear:

New Jersey, South Dakota, Montana and Arizona joined 11 other states that had already legalized recreational marijuana. Mississippi and South Dakota made medical marijuana legal, bringing the total to 35. The citizens of Washington, D.C., voted to decriminalize psilocybin, the organic compound active in psychedelic mushrooms. Oregon voters approved two drug-related initiatives. One decriminalized possession of small amounts of illegal drugs including heroin, cocaine and methamphetamines. (It did not make it legal to sell the drugs.) Another measure authorized the creation of a state program to license providers of psilocybin.

What is your reaction to these measures? Do you think more states — or even the entire country — should decriminalize marijuana? What about other drugs?

In “ This Election, a Divided America Stands United on One Topic ,” Jonah Engel Bromwich writes about the growing support to decriminalize drugs in the United States:

Election night represented a significant victory for three forces pushing for drug reform for different but interlocking reasons. There is the increasingly powerful cannabis industry. There are state governments struggling with budget shortfalls, hungry to fill coffers in the midst of a pandemic. And then there are the reform advocates, who for decades have been saying that imprisonment, federal mandatory minimum sentences and prohibitive cash bail for drug charges ruin lives and communities, particularly those of Black Americans. Decriminalization is popular, in part, because Americans believe that too many people are in jails and prisons, and also because Americans personally affected by the country’s continuing opioid crisis have been persuaded to see drugs as a public health issue.

Then, Mr. Bromwich explores the history of the “war on drugs”:

President Nixon started the war on drugs but it grew increasingly draconian during the Reagan administration. Nancy Reagan’s top priority was the antidrug campaign, which she pushed aggressively as her husband signed a series of punitive measures into law — measures shaped in part by Joseph R. Biden Jr., then a senator. “We want you to help us create an outspoken intolerance for drug use,” Mrs. Reagan said in 1986. “For the sake of our children, I implore each of you to be unyielding and inflexible in your opposition to drugs.” America’s airwaves were flooded with antidrug initiatives. An ad campaign that starred a man frying an egg and claiming “this is your brain on drugs” was introduced in 1987 and aired incessantly. Numerous animal mascots took up the cause of warning children about drugs and safety, including Daren the Lion, who educated children on drugs and bullying, and McGruff the Crime Dog, who taught children to open their hearts and minds to authority figures. In 1986 Congress passed a law mandating severe prison sentences for users of crack, who were disproportionately Black . In 1989, with prison rates rising, 64 percent of Americans surveyed said that drug abuse was the most serious problem facing the United States. The focus on crack meant that when pot returned to the headlines in the 1990s, it received comparatively cozy publicity . In 1996, California voters passed a measure allowing for the use of medical marijuana. Two years later, medical marijuana initiatives were approved by voters in four more states.

Students, read the entire article, then tell us:

Do you think marijuana should be legal in the United States? Do you think the country should decriminalize the possession of small amounts of other drugs, like heroin, cocaine and methamphetamines, as Oregon did this election cycle? Why or why not?

What do you think might be the potential dangers of decriminalization? Do you think it will increase the number of people abusing drugs? Will it downplay the threat that drugs pose, especially to children? Could it pose safety risks, like traffic accidents and violence ? Which of these dangers would you be most worried about and why?

What do you think might be the benefits of decriminalization? Do you think it will encourage people to get treatment for addiction ? Will it reduce drug violence, or keep more nonviolent people out of prison? Will it allow the government to regulate drugs, as it does alcohol and tobacco? Could it reduce government spending, stimulate the economy and create jobs ? Which of these benefits would be most important to you and why?

In your opinion, do the benefits of decriminalization of drugs outweigh the risks? Why or why not?

How do you feel about drug use in your community and state? Do you know if there is a concern about addiction or overdose in your region? Do you think decriminalization would benefit your community?

Jay Z: 'The War on Drugs Is an Epic Fail'

Why are white men poised to get rich doing the same thing african-americans have been going to prison for.

TRANSCRIPT In 1986, when I was coming of age, Ronald Reagan doubled down on the War on Drugs that had been started by Richard Nixon in 1971. Drugs were bad, fried your brain. And drug dealers were monsters, the sole reason neighborhoods and major cities were failing. No one wanted to talk about Reaganomics and the ending of social safety nets, the defunding of schools, and the loss of jobs in cities across America. Young men like me who hustled became the sole villain and drug addicts lacked moral fortitude. And in the 1990s, incarceration rates in the U.S. blew up. Today we imprison more people than any other country in the world. China, Russia, Iran, Cuba—all countries we consider autocratic and repressive. Yeah, more than them. Judges’ hands were tied by “tough on crime” laws and they were forced to hand out mandatory life sentences for simple possession and low-level drug sales. My home state of New York started this with Rockefeller Laws. Then the Feds made distinctions between people who sold powder cocaine and crack cocaine—even though they were the same drug. Only difference is how you take it. And even though White people used and sold crack more than Black people, somehow it was Black people who went to prison. The media ignored actual data. To this day, crack is still talked about as a Black problem. The NYPD raided our Brooklyn neighborhoods while Manhattan bankers openly used coke with impunity. The War on Drugs exploded the U.S. prison population, disproportionately locking away Black and Latinos. Our prison population grew more than 900%. When the War on Drugs began in 1971, our prison population was 200,000, today it is over 2 million. Long after the crack era ended, we continued our war on drugs. There were more than 1.5 million drug arrests in 2014, more than 80% were for possession only. Almost half were for marijuana. People are finally talking about treating an addiction to harder drugs as a health crisis, but there’s no compassionate language about drug dealers. Unless of course we’re talking about places like Colorado, whose state economy got a huge boost by the above ground marijuana industry. A few states south in Louisiana, they’re still handing out mandatory sentences to people who sell weed. Despite a booming and celebrated 50 billion legal marijuana industry, most states still disproportionately hand out mandatory sentences to Black and Latinos with drug cases. If you’re entrepreneurial and live in one of the many states that are passing legalized laws, you may still face barriers to participating in the above ground economy. Venture capitalists migrate to these states to open multi-billion dollar operations, but former felons can’t open a dispensary. Lots of times those felonies were drug charges, caught by poor people who sold drugs for a living, but are now prohibited from participating in one of the fastest growing economies. Got it? In states like New York, where holding marijuana is no longer grounds for arrest, police issue possession citations in Black and Latino neighborhoods at a far higher rate than other neighborhoods. Kids in Crown Heights are constantly stopped and ticketed for trees. Kids at dorms in Columbia, where rates of marijuana use are equal to or worse than those in the hood, are never targeted or ticketed. Rates of drug use are as high as they were when Nixon declared this so-called war in 1971. Forty-five years later, it’s time to rethink our policies and laws. The War on Drugs is an epic fail.

In a 2016 Op-Doc, “ The War on Drugs Is an Epic Fail ,” Jay-Z explores the question, “Why are white men poised to get rich doing the same thing African-Americans have been going to prison for?” The featured article also addresses this same issue:

Even as public opinion has changed, law enforcement still aggressively polices the possession of drugs — even legal drugs — by Black people, who, according to an American Civil Liberties Union report released earlier this year, are more than 3.5 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than white people. As of March of this year, 20 percent of the more than two million incarcerated people in the United States were imprisoned because of drug offenses. Many of those people have not been convicted of any crime, and are held in local jails after arrest.

How should state and local governments attempt to address this racial disparity? Should they reduce drug-related sentences, or even acquit those previously convicted? Should people previously convicted of drug offenses be allowed to participate in the now-legal drug business in many states?

About Student Opinion

• Find all our Student Opinion questions in this column . • Have an idea for a Student Opinion question? Tell us about it . • Learn more about how to use our free daily writing prompts for remote learning .

Students 13 and older in the United States and the United Kingdom, and 16 and older elsewhere, are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public.

Nicole Daniels joined The Learning Network as a staff editor in 2019 after working in museum education, curriculum writing and bilingual education. More about Nicole Daniels

Natalie Proulx joined The Learning Network as a staff editor in 2017 after working as an English language arts teacher and curriculum writer. More about Natalie Proulx

• Economics & Finance
• Foreign Policy
• Domestic Policy
• Health & Science
• All Publications

The Case For Marijuana Decriminalization

Table of Contents

Katharine neill harris, william martin, share this publication.

• Download PDF
• Print This Publication

Neill Harris, Katharine and William Martin. 2019. The Case for Marijuana Decriminalization . Baker Institute Report no. 04.16.19. Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. Houston, Texas.

Introduction

In 1972, a National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, comprising establishment figures chosen mostly by President Richard Nixon himself, issued a report declaring that “neither the marihuana user nor the drug itself can be said to constitute a danger to public safety” and recommended that Congress and state legislatures decriminalize the use and casual distribution of marijuana and seek means other than prohibition to discourage use. 1

Nixon, intent on pursuing his newly announced “war on drugs,” ignored the report and Congress declined to consider its recommendations, but during the 40-plus years since its publication, at least 44 states have acted to refashion a crazy-quilt collection of regulations, nearly always in the direction favored by the commission. The specifics vary by state, but most reforms have followed one of three formulas: decriminalization of possession of small amounts of marijuana for personal use, legalization of marijuana for medical use, or legalization of marijuana for commercial sale and general adult use.

Opponents of marijuana reform have argued that a system of prohibition, which carries possible penalties of jail time and imposes a lifelong criminal record on offenders, is necessary to keep people from using marijuana. In 2017, nearly 123 million people aged 12 or older (45 percent of the population) had tried marijuana at least once and 41 million had used in the past year. 2 The percentage of the U.S. adult population that uses marijuana regularly (defined as past 30-day use) has been slowly rising since 2000, long before any state fully legalized the drug. And while teens today are less likely to use marijuana than their peers from a decade ago, they continue to report that marijuana is easy to get, a trend that has held constant over the last 40 years. During this time, illicit marijuana has flourished, increasing in both variability and potency. Taken together, these trends are evidence that prohibition has done little to reduce supply or demand of the drug. Prohibition has, however, cost taxpayers billions of dollars, saddled millions of Americans—many of them young adults who will eventually stop using marijuana on their own—with a criminal record, and contributed to the racial disparities of the U.S. criminal justice system.

Opponents of reform may argue that if not for prohibition, marijuana would be even more available, more potent, and more frequently used. There are legitimate public health concerns about the effects that a legal commercial marijuana market may have on use. But decriminalization, which would still prohibit selling marijuana but would remove the negative consequences of possessing it for personal use, is a very different policy, one that arguably has little impact on use rates or other outcomes of concern, except to reduce the collateral consequences associated with a criminal record.

This paper is the first in a series of reports elaborating on issue briefs published in February 2015 and February 2017 on the same topic. Then, as now, the Texas Legislature was considering several bills to reform marijuana laws. The goal of the 2015 and 2017 reports was to present evidence about the effects of various marijuana reform options, in hopes that the existing research—which overwhelmingly supported the assertion that ending marijuana prohibition benefits society in numerous and significant ways that outweigh potential negative impacts—would motivate elected officials to enact pragmatic policy reforms. That did not happen in Texas. During the current 2019 session, the legislature is again considering several bills that would reduce penalties for marijuana possession and allow legal access to medical marijuana for patients with a variety of conditions. We present the case for reducing penalties below, and address medical marijuana in a subsequent report.

Marijuana Decriminalization

We use “decriminalization” to refer to the removal of all criminal sanctions for possession of small amounts of marijuana for personal use. We consider laws that lower the status of the offense from a felony or misdemeanor crime to a civil violation, like a traffic ticket, to be a form of decriminalization because such laws remove the criminal status of the offense. We acknowledge, however, that some observers may not consider this full decriminalization because marijuana possession is still considered a civil offense and some sanction, usually a fine, still exists. Policies that reduce penalties but retain the criminal status of marijuana possession, such as a reduction in classification from a Class B to a Class C misdemeanor, are not considered decriminalization. Policies that decriminalize marijuana possession for personal use still prohibit marijuana sales. 3

Between 1973 and 1978, 11 states reduced penalties for or the criminal status of marijuana possession. This led some observers to believe the U.S. was on the path toward marijuana legalization decades ago, but several cultural and political shifts halted further reforms and marijuana laws remained relatively stagnant until 1996, when California legalized marijuana for medical use. In the early 2000s, states began making small changes in marijuana laws—e.g., creating diversion programs for first offenders and lowering the length of jail time—that did not necessarily constitute decriminalization but did have implications for the consequences of a marijuana arrest. During this time, large cities (including Seattle, Denver, and San Francisco) also started using their discretion to treat marijuana possession as the “lowest law enforcement priority,” or to reduce penalties for individuals arrested for marijuana possession, especially first offenders.

At least 22 states have now reclassified low-level marijuana possession as fineonly offenses with no prospect of jail time or as civil violations punishable with a modest fine but no criminal charge or record. The amounts of the drug subject to decriminalization vary, ranging from as low as half an ounce (Connecticut and Maryland) to just under 4 ounces (Ohio). 4 Incongruities exist. In Mississippi, for example, possessing up to 30 grams is a civil violation with a maximum penalty of $250, but possession of paraphernalia to use it—e.g., a pipe, a vaporizer, or a bong—is a misdemeanor with a possible $500 fine and six months in a county jail. 5

The ability to study the impact of decriminalization on use rates and other outcomes of interest is fraught with measurement challenges due to variability in state laws and enforcement, and an inability to determine causal links between policy changes and individual behaviors and attitudes. A 2004 review of decriminalization statutes found that of the 11 states thought to have “decriminalized” marijuana possession between 1973 and 1978, four states still considered marijuana a criminal offense. The review also found that 31 of the 38 states considered nondecriminalized as of 1996 had provisions for first offenders to avoid jail time. This review highlights the difficulties in differentiating between decriminalized and non-decriminalized states, yet the majority of analyses studying the impact of decriminalization treat it as a yes/no policy variable. In addition, cross-state analyses of decriminalization typically do not account for large cities located in prohibitionist states that enact de facto decriminalization policies in their jurisdictions, an increasingly common practice that is likely to have an effect on some statewide measures such as arrest rates and jail population sizes.

Marijuana Policy in Texas

Since 1989, possession of less than 2 ounces of marijuana has been a Class B misdemeanor in Texas, with possible penalties of 180 days in state jail, a $2,000 fine, and most damaging of all, a criminal record. Since 2005, the Texas Legislature has had the opportunity to pass a bill to reduce the penalty for low-level marijuana possession from a Class B to a Class C misdemeanor (thus removing jail time), and since 2015 it has had the opportunity to enact legislation to remove criminal penalties for marijuana possession entirely and treat the offense like a traffic ticket. 6 In recent years public opinion surveys have found that a consistent and increasing percentage of Texans support marijuana reform (a June 2018 poll shows that 69 percent of registered Texas voters support penalty reduction 7 ), but this support has not translated into policy change.

Despite state inaction on marijuana policy, a package of criminal justice reforms that the legislature passed in 2007 has allowed local jurisdictions to issue tickets for certain offenses, including low-level marijuana possession, instead of taking people to jail. Called “cite and release,” these programs have been enacted around the state. Travis County was the first to implement such a program, in 2009, when Austin police officers were allowed to issue tickets for marijuana possession. While this program enabled officers to use their time more efficiently, individuals still received a criminal record for the possession offense, thus doing little to address the negative and long-lasting consequences of an encounter with the criminal justice system. Recognizing this shortcoming, the Travis County Commissioner’s Court approved a program to start in January 2018 that allows individuals found with 2 ounces or less of marijuana to take a four-hour class, pay a fee of $45, and, by doing so, avoid a criminal record. 8

In Harris County, Texas, the Misdemeanor Marijuana Diversion Program (MMDP) took effect March 1, 2017, allowing individuals found in possession of 4 ounces or less of marijuana the opportunity to avoid charges, arrest, ticketing, and a criminal record if they agree to take a four-hour drug education class, regardless of past criminal history. 9

While not technically decriminalization, because the possibility of arrest remains if a person does not take the drug class, Harris County’s MMDP is one of the more progressive programs implemented in a state that has long upheld prohibitionist policies. As of February 2019, 8,685 people had participated in the program. Of these, 51 percent (4,467 participants) had completed it and 23 percent (1,992 participants) were in the process of completing the program. About 25 percent of participants (2,212 people) had failed to complete the program and have had warrants issued for their arrest. 10 An earlier assessment of the program found that the primary reason for program failure was that participants could not afford the $150 payment to take the four-hour drug education class. 11

The district attorney’s office estimates that the MMDP saves Harris County $27 million per year. 12 This estimate is based on the avoided costs of arresting, detaining, and prosecuting 10,000 people per year, which is what the county averaged prior to implementation of the program. Current figures suggest the program has closer to 4,500 participants per year. It is likely, however, that the MMDP has led some law enforcement officers to ignore marijuana possession offenses entirely, thus contributing to overall cost savings. Bexar County and Dallas County are also experimenting with alternatives to prosecution for low-level marijuana offenders, as are several smaller counties in Texas.

The fact that numerous Texas counties, including the four most populous, are taking steps to reduce the impact of a marijuana arrest suggests widespread dissatisfaction with current laws and is consistent with public opinion polls finding that a majority of Texans support decriminalizing marijuana possession. Possible impacts of statewide decriminalization are discussed in greater detail below, but evidence to date from Harris County, the most populous county in Texas and the jurisdiction with a diversion program most akin to decriminalization, indicates that decriminalizing marijuana possession would not have a negative impact on the state.

In 2019 the 86th Texas Legislature could decriminalize marijuana possession by passing House Bill 63 (HB 63), which would replace jail time with a maximum fine of $250 for individuals possessing up to 1 ounce of marijuana. The offense would be treated like a traffic ticket, and offenders would not receive the stain of a criminal record. Other measures to reduce penalties for marijuana possession have been introduced this session, but HB 63 is the only one that removes criminal penalties entirely.

Decriminalization and Possible Negative Consequences

Opponents of marijuana reform argue that relaxing prohibition will result in several negative consequences, including increased drug use, particularly among teens, increased crime, and increased driving accidents. Such fears are understandable, but their relevance is primarily in the context of legalization of a commercial market for marijuana. There is limited evidence to suggest that decriminalization has a significant impact on use rates, crime rates, or drugged driving.

Possible Effects on Marijuana Use Rates

A primary objection to marijuana reform is that liberalization of current policies will increase teen access to marijuana or lead teens to think that using it does not carry risks. Numerous studies in the U.S. and abroad have found that decriminalization does not lead to increased use. 13

In the U.S., several studies that assessed the impact of penalty reductions enacted by 11 states between 1973 and 1978 found conflicting evidence, with some studies indicating no relationship between penalty reduction and use and others finding a small increase in use or probability of use in states with more relaxed laws. 14 A more recent study looking at decriminalization’s impact in five states (MA, CT, RI, VT, and MD) found no positive relationship between decriminalization of marijuana possession and past-month marijuana use among 9th-12th graders. In Rhode Island, the study authors found a 4 percent decrease in marijuana use associated with decriminalization. 15

On the other hand, a study using data from Monitoring the Future, an annual survey of roughly 50,000 high school students, looked at the impact of California’s 2010 decision to decriminalize marijuana possession and found that after the law change 12th graders were significantly more likely than 12th graders in other states to report past-30 day marijuana use and to be less likely to perceive a “great risk” associated with marijuana use. The authors suggest this finding supports the hypothesis that decriminalization signals to teens that marijuana use is not dangerous and therefore increases the likelihood of use. However, they also find evidence that the observed impact may be a limited cohort effect that could attenuate following a decline in public attention and media coverage to marijuana issues. In 2010, when decriminalization was adopted, California was also debating whether to legalize a commercial market for marijuana sales, so it is quite possible that increased focus on the topic affected youth attitudes toward marijuana use.

Another analysis also using Monitoring the Future data that were not confined to California found no association between marijuana decriminalization and increased use of marijuana, cocaine, or heroin, suggesting that the law change has had little impact on marijuana or other illicit drug use. 16

There are a few explanations for why decriminalization may not affect use. One is that laws prohibiting marijuana possession are sporadically and unevenly enforced. Even in cases where significant resources are dedicated to enforcing marijuana laws, the likelihood of getting arrested for using marijuana in one’s own home is relatively low, thus limiting the law’s ability to serve as a deterrent from use. Another reason is that a person’s decision about whether to use marijuana regularly is more likely to be driven by perceptions about its health risks and social acceptability than its criminal status,17 suggesting that criminal penalties have little deterrent effect anyway, regardless of enforcement practices, except perhaps for some would-be experimental users. Further, laws that decriminalize possession for use still outlaw marijuana sales and therefore do little to increase availability.

The available evidence provides no reason to think that Texas would see a spike in marijuana use or other negative outcomes as a result of decriminalization.

Possible Effects on Crime Rates

The relationship between marijuana policy and crime is a contested issue. Supporters of reform argue that decriminalization lowers crime by freeing up police resources to pursue more serious offenses and reducing the need for economically motivated offenses (such as theft) created by the burden of a criminal record on employment prospects.

Reform opponents have argued that liberalization could increase property crimes by leading to more users who commit offenses to support their habit. While some evidence has been found linking use of drugs such as cocaine and heroin to economically motivated crimes, there is no evidence to suggest that marijuana users engage in this behavior. 18

Opponents of reform also argue that ending marijuana prohibition will lead to an increase in crime by increasing the number of marijuana users who commit offenses as a result of their drug use. To date, there is a lack of evidence demonstrating that the pharmacological properties of marijuana cause users to commit crimes. An extensive literature review conducted in 2013 by the RAND Corporation on behalf of the Office of National Drug Control Policy found that “even though marijuana is commonly used by individuals arrested for crimes, there is little support for a contemporaneous, causal relationship between its use and either violent or property crime.” 19 The majority of offenders who use marijuana use other drugs; “marijuana alone is involved in fewer than 10 percent of all crimes and fewer than 15 percent of robberies.” 20 The vast majority of arrests related to marijuana are for simply possessing the substance (marijuana accounts for nearly half of drug possession arrests nationally), a crime that would be eliminated if possession were decriminalized.

Few studies exist that examine the impact, if any, that decriminalization has on crime rates. Especially more recently, the bulk of research in this area has focused on whether legalization of marijuana sales, either for medical or adult use, might increase crime. But an analysis using 2014 data found no statistical relationship between marijuana’s decriminalized status and property or violent crime rates. Aggravated assault and larceny theft rates were lower in states that had decriminalized. 21 This is not to suggest that decriminalizing causes a reduction in assault and theft, but at a minimum it indicates that decriminalization does not cause an increase.

Possible Effects on Crime Related to Mental Illness

That said, there are populations for whom extensive marijuana use could lead to criminal activity. For example, there is some evidence to suggest that using marijuana in adolescence is associated with committing crimes in adulthood, with heavier and earlier use increasing the odds of engaging in future crimes, although some studies have found a link only between marijuana use and drug-related and property crime, not violent crime. But most studies finding an association between adolescent marijuana use and later crime are not able to determine the nature of this link (i.e., is it the biochemistry of the plant or contextual factors surrounding its use that affect criminality?), nor are they able to rule out additional circumstantial factors. While the mechanisms behind the possible link between early marijuana use and criminal risk are unclear, the research is quite clear that adolescents, whose developing brains make them vulnerable to long-term and negative effects of repeated exposure to THC, should not use marijuana.22 Research also suggests that marijuana use can exacerbate mental illness, especially schizophrenia, and people diagnosed with schizophrenia or other forms of psychosis should not use marijuana. For people at risk of psychosis, marijuana use can contribute to psychotic episodes, during which a person may be more likely to commit violent acts. Alex Berenson, who has recently written extensively about the relationship between marijuana, psychosis, and violence, argues that marijuana use causes psychosis, and that people with psychosis are more likely to commit acts of violence, and thus that marijuana use causes violence. 23

Critics of this argument have countered that researchers have not been able to rule out the possibility of a “shared vulnerability,” by which people at risk for schizophrenia are also more likely to use marijuana while young due to other mediating factors. 24 And while there is substantial evidence that marijuana may trigger a psychotic episode in a person with schizophrenia, the research linking marijuana use itself to violence and crime is less robust; most studies cannot isolate marijuana use from use of other drugs and alcohol or environmental factors that may contribute to criminality.

The relationship between marijuana and psychosis, and the relationship that marijuana-related psychosis may have with a propensity toward violence, are important public health concerns that should be at the forefront of conversations about whether and how to legalize marijuana sales. But there is no evidence to suggest that decriminalization has any such associated consequences. Even critics of legalizing marijuana for commercial sale, whose primary objection is that doing so will increase violence, have expressed support for decriminalization. Berenson himself supports decriminalization as a “compromise” policy that is warranted in order to remove the burden of arrest and a criminal record for marijuana possession. Implicit in this support for decriminalization is the assumption that reduction or removal of legal penalties does not lead to increased marijuana use.

Possible Effects on Driving Accidents

Opponents of reform argue that relaxation of marijuana laws will increase the prevalence of drugged driving. In the last couple of years, some states that have legalized marijuana sales are seeing an increase in the number of drivers who are under the influence of marijuana. One limitation of these assessments is that only recently have states and localities more actively tested for marijuana-related impairment, limiting the validity of comparing rates of drugged driving before and after law changes.

Most studies of the impact of marijuana policy on drugged driving have focused on legalization of a medical or adult-use commercial market, not decriminalization. One recent study found that Massachusetts experienced a significant increase in THC-involved fatal crashes after decriminalizing in 2009 compared to states with prohibition.25 As the authors point out, however, the study could not determine any causal effects of the law change, and other factors that could cause variation between Massachusetts and comparison states were not controlled for. Another study found that after California decriminalized marijuana in 2010, there was an increase in THC-involved traffic fatalities, but not an increase in marijuana-impaired weekend nighttime drivers. The study authors note several possible explanations for this, one of which is that due to “changes in vigilance regarding ‘drugged driving’ enforcement over time,” THC was more likely to be tested for and its presence recorded after marijuana decriminalization took effect, compared to the period before the law change. 26

Research on marijuana-impaired driving is also complicated by challenges in distinguishing between the presence of THC in drivers involved in accidents and the role that THC may have played in driver impairment. Delta-9-THC is the main psychoactive component in marijuana and the best indicator of whether a person is impaired. A blood sample can determine the presence of delta-9-THC, but active levels of the compound in a person’s blood decline quickly, making time an essential aspect of accurate testing. Due to logistical issues, collecting blood samples from suspected drivers, when feasible, is usually an hours-long process.

Further complicating matters, marijuana use leaves traces of another compound, carboxy-THC, which can be identified through urinalysis and can linger in users’ systems for months, even after impairment has long gone. Regular users can build up both delta-9-THC and carboxy-THC in their systems, meaning that a drug test might show a person to be under the influence of marijuana when that is not the case.

The difficulties associated with accurately determining whether an individual is impaired from marijuana use create uncertainties for law enforcement officers and drivers, as well as for researchers trying to evaluate the prevalence of drugged driving and the connection between this behavior and policy change. Complications in the ability to assess the prevalence and consequences of marijuana-impaired driving highlight the need for improved testing methods, but are not a reason to reject decriminalization. It is still too early to determine whether broad legalization of marijuana increases drugged driving, although there is some evidence to suggest an association. The data regarding decriminalization are far less persuasive.

It is also worth noting that roughly two-thirds of THC-positive drivers involved in fatal crashes tested positive for alcohol, other drugs, or a combination of both. 27 This is not to contend that driving while intoxicated on marijuana is safe. It is not, and DUI laws should apply to marijuana users as stringently as to users of alcohol, but there is no question that alcohol poses the greater threat. A review of numerous studies of the impact of marijuana or alcohol on motor vehicle crashes found that driving while using marijuana raises the chances of an accident by 1.3 to 3 times, compared to 6 to 15 times for alcohol. 28 Other analyses have found similar differences. 29 Legislators seriously interested in reducing traffic accidents should consider lowering the permissible level of blood alcohol concentration. They might also crack down further on the use of cell phones while driving, which quadruples the risk of an accident. Texting while driving is estimated to be 6 times more likely to cause an accident than alcohol. 30

Benefits of Marijuana Decriminalization

Reduction in arrests and collateral consequences.

Over 62,000 people were arrested for marijuana-related offenses in Texas in 2017. Ninety-seven percent of those arrests were for simple possession. 31 Decriminalization would result in a substantial reduction in those arrests and, by extension, a reduction in the consequences that come with a criminal record.

States that have decriminalized marijuana have seen significant drops in low-level marijuana arrests following the policy change. A year after decriminalization, marijuana possession arrests for adults decreased by 90 percent in Massachusetts, 86 percent in California, and 67 percent in Connecticut. 32 Another analysis of decriminalization’s impact on arrests found a 75 percent decline in youth arrests across five states (MA, CT, RI, VT, and MD), and a 78 percent reduction in adult arrests. 33

Arrests for marijuana possession disproportionately affect communities of color. Despite similar use rates, blacks are roughly 3 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than whites and 10 times more likely to be incarcerated. 34 In Texas, blacks make up roughly 12 percent of the state’s population but accounted for 31 percent of marijuana arrests in 2017. 35 These troubling statistics explain why “marijuana is already legal if you’re white” has become a common aphorism. Decriminalizing marijuana would not eliminate racial disparities in marijuana arrests. Even in places that have fully legalized marijuana use, blacks and Latinos are more likely to be arrested for marijuana-related offenses, such as possession as a juvenile or public consumption, highlighting the deeply ingrained nature of disparate law enforcement practices. 36 Still, the overall reduction in marijuana arrests that results from decriminalization will result in fewer people of color becoming ensnared in the criminal justice system.

Some opponents of marijuana reform have argued that very few people actually serve time in jail for marijuana possession. This is increasingly true, in large part because local jurisdictions are implementing alternatives to incarceration for low-level offenders. Still, the consequences of an arrest and a criminal record can be severe. Individuals with a criminal conviction often face difficulties finding employment. They may lose or be barred from obtaining professional licenses, public housing, and educational assistance. Twelve states, including Texas, revoke a person’s driver’s license for a criminal conviction for a period of six months to two years and impose fees to get it back. 37 Noncitizens can face deportation. 38 The negative impacts of a criminal record can extend beyond an individual, potentially affecting long-term outcomes for a person’s family and community. Disparate enforcement of prohibition means that all of these consequences are likely to fall more heavily on minority communities. It is because of the severely negative consequences associated with enforcement of prohibition, and their disproportionate impact on minority youth and young adults, that organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Public Health Association, which strongly oppose adolescent marijuana use, support decriminalizing marijuana possession as a way to minimize the harms associated with its use. 39

More Efficient Use of Resources

Removing the criminal status of marijuana possession would mean federal, state, and local governments would no longer need to spend money to arrest, process, and jail defendants; to provide taxpayer-funded legal counsel to indigent defendants; or to incarcerate convicted offenders or monitor them through probation.

Most recent analyses of the economic benefits of marijuana reform focus on legalization. Decriminalization, a more moderate policy, has more modest economic potential. Still, decriminalizing can save significant dollars in enforcement. Jeffrey Miron and Katherine Waldock of the Cato Institute estimate that Texas spends $330 million (2008 dollars) per year just on marijuana prohibition. 40 That considerable sum could be used to greater benefit if directed to such needs as education, transportation, public health, human trafficking, or to other reforms within the criminal justice system.

Decriminalization could also improve resource allocation for drug treatment. In 2016, roughly half of admissions to publicly funded treatment providers for marijuana use were criminal justice referrals, a pattern that has remained stable for 20 years. 41 People arrested for marijuana (and other drug) possession are often required to undergo treatment, whether they need it or not—and many do not. One study found that 74 percent of treatment participants who had been referred through probation or parole did not meet the criteria for substance use or dependence. 42 In an environment where resources are scarce, mandating participation in treatment programs from people who do not need, or desire, treatment can result in someone else who does need assistance being denied access or put on a waiting list. And while more cautious supporters of decriminalization may like to see mandated treatment as an alternative to incarceration, imposing such requirements can be a significant burden on individuals that complicates their lives and increases unnecessary contact with the criminal justice system.

This is not meant to suggest that marijuana users are never in need of treatment. Approximately 4 million people aged 12 or older, which is 1.5 percent of the U.S. population but 15.6 percent of past-month users, are estimated to have a marijuana use disorder requiring attention. 43 But evidence suggests that people referred to treatment for marijuana use through the criminal justice system are actually less likely to need it than people who enter treatment for marijuana use through other channels. Fewer legal mandates for marijuana users to participate in drug treatment could provide an opportunity to focus limited resources on people who have more serious substance use disorders.

The issue of whether and how to reform marijuana laws has garnered widespread public attention in recent years. Decriminalization of possession for personal use has received considerably less media and research focus than legalization of commercial marijuana sales. There is some justification for this. Compared to legalization of a regulated marijuana market, there is greater consensus about the possible impacts of marijuana decriminalization, which, many experts agree, would be relatively few beyond the intended reduction in marijuana possession arrests. And as states continue to legalize marijuana for medical and adult sale and use, identifying the implications of these more substantial policy changes has become a more pressing issue. That decriminalization has been increasingly eclipsed by debates over full legalization may contribute to the tendency among some of its opponents to conflate penalty reduction for marijuana possession with legalization of sales. 44 This is unfortunate because decriminalization of possession for personal use is a substantively different policy than legalizing the selling of marijuana in any form. A serious conversation about the potential public health consequences of creating a commercial market for marijuana is warranted. But decriminalization is a fairly modest policy proposal that does not increase access to marijuana or allow advertising for its use. The main goal of decriminalization is to remove the permanent damage that an arrest and criminal record can have for an individual, and to use public resources more efficiently in the process.

Decriminalization is not a perfect policy. Under many decriminalization schemes, people can still be arrested, and inability to pay the fines associated with civil penalties will result in incarceration for some people, most likely minorities and the poor. Decriminalization also fails to address the needs of individuals who can benefit from the plant’s medicinal properties. Its greatest flaw, however, is that as long as growing and selling marijuana remain illegal, criminals decide what and to whom to sell, and they get to keep the money, tax-free.

Still, decriminalization is a major improvement over prohibition, one that would reduce arrests and the collateral consequences of a criminal record, reduce racial disparities in drug law enforcement, and allow for more efficient use of taxpayer dollars. Research shows these gains can be had without endangering public safety or encouraging use. Decriminalization is a sensible, conservative policy proposal. Perhaps this is why Gov. Greg Abbott and both major political parties in Texas have expressed support for reducing penalties for marijuana possession. A bill to do just that will come before the Texas Legislature in 2019, and elected officials will have the opportunity to support a policy that is fiscally prudent, socially just, and politically popular.

1. National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, http://bit.ly/2mkmcaT.

2. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health .

3. A system in which it is legal to use marijuana but illegal to sell it creates significant tension in the legal system; this paradox as it relates to the Dutch coffee shop model, for example, has been written about extensively. See, for instance, https://bit.ly/2TtLosp

4. For information on CT marijuana possession law, see https://bit.ly/2usnuU4. For MD, see https://bit.ly/2JC8zRG. For OH, see https://bit.ly/2HSLVlw.

5. See Mississippi State Legislature, House Bill 272, 1998 Reg. Sess., http://bit.ly/2lEIaBk.

6. Dan Solomon, “Could Texas Decriminalize Pot in 2015?” https://bit.ly/2HFJGmk

7. Ross Ramsey, “Most Texas Voters Want to Legalize Marijuana, UT/TT Poll Finds,” https://bit.ly/2KcDnIE.

8. Jay Wallis, “Travis County approves new diversion class for marijuana offenders,” https://bit.ly/2U9grht

9. Office of Harris County District Attorney, “Marijuana program participants given final opportunity to make things right,” https://bit.ly/2YoUHxq.

11. Meagan Flynn, “Not Having $150 ‘No. 1 Reason’ Nearly 300 Have Failed Marijuana Diversion Program,” https://bit.ly/2CC7inV.

12. Mississippi State Legislature, H.B. 292.

13. Carolyn Talmadge, “A Budding Revolution or Destined for Flames? Determining the Effects of Marijuana Legislation on Adolescent Prevalence Use Rates in the United States” (thesis, Tufts University, 2014), http://bit.ly/2mkq5wz; Glenn Greenwald, “Drug Decriminalization in Portugal” (Washington, D.C.: The Cato Institute, 2009); J. Fetherston and S. Lenton, “A Pre-post Comparison of the Impacts of the Western Australian Cannabis Infringement Notice Scheme on Public Attitudes, Knowledge and Use” (Perth: National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University of Technology, 2007).

14. Beau Kilmer, “Do Cannabis Possession Laws Influence Cannabis Use?” Cannabis 2002 Report , Ministry of Public Health of Belgium, pp. 100-124.

15. Rates of past-30 day marijuana use were higher in the five states that decriminalized compared to states that had not, but this was true prior to marijuana law changes. Richard A. Grucza, et al., “Cannabis decriminalization: A Study of Recent Policy Changes in Five U.S. States,” https://bit.ly/2FqnKYL.

16. Angela K. Kills, et al., “The Effects of Marijuana Liberalizations: Evidence from Monitoring the Future,” https://bit.ly/2gWpj5A .

17. Perceived health risks of marijuana use may play a greater factor in decisions about whether to use than the drug’s criminal status—see Eric W. Single, “The Impact of Marijuana Decriminalization: An Update,” Journal of Public Health Policy 10 (1989): 456-466—as may social norms surrounding marijuana use, see Craig Reinarman, et al., “The Limited Relevance of Drug Policy: Cannabis in Amsterdam and San Francisco,” American Journal of Public Health 94 (2004): 836-842.

18. Office of National Drug Control Policy, “Improving the Measurement of Drug-Related Crime,” 2013.

19. Charles Ksir and Carl L. Hart, “Cannabis and Psychosis: A Critical Overview of the Relationship,” Current Psychiatry Report 18 (2016): iv.

20. Ibid., p. 73

21. Shana L. Maier, et al., “The Implications of Marijuana Decriminalization and Legalization on Crime in the United States,” Contemporary Drug Problems 44 (2017):125-146.

22. Sarah-Jayne Blakemore, “Teenage Kicks: Cannabis and the Adolescent Brain,” The Lancet 381 (2013): 888-889.

23. Berenson, Tell Your Children.

24. Ksir and Hart, “Cannabis and Psychosis,” p. 1-12. :

25. See Jaeyoung Lee, et al., “Investigation of Associations between Marijuana Law Changes and MarijuanaInvolved Fatal Traffic Crashes: A State-Level Analysis,” https://bit.ly/2YwQQPa.

26. See Robin A. Pollini, et al., “The Impact of Marijuana Decriminalization on California Drivers,” https://bit.ly/2OwgSgz.

27. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, “Fact Sheet: Prevalence of Marijuana Involvement in Fatal Crashes: Washington 2010-2014,” https://bit.ly/1T2f2Sf.

28. See Robin Room, et al., Cannabis Policy: Moving Beyond Stalemate , http://bit.ly/2n45MVl.

29. For example, a 2016 meta-analysis found an increased risk of 1.22 to 1.36 for a traffic crash involving marijuana, compared to an average increased risk of 7.5 for fatal crashes involving alcohol. See Ole Rogeberg and Rune Elvik, “The Effects of Cannabis Intoxication on Motor Vehicle Collision Revisited and Revised,” Addiction 111 (2016): 1348-1359.

30. See “Texting and Driving Accident Statistics,” Edgar Snyder & Associates, http://bit.ly/2lnIbOU.

31. Texas Department of Public Safety, “The Texas Crime Report for 2017,” https://bit.ly/1qmWejA.

32. Mike Males and Lizzie Buchen, “Reforming Marijuana Laws: Which Approach Best Reduces the Harms of Criminalization? A Five-State Analysis,” Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, September 2014.

33. Ksir and Hart, “Cannabis and Psychosis,” p. 73.

34. American Civil Liberties Union, The War on Marijuana in Black and White (New York: American Civil Liberties Union, 2013).

35. See Drug Policy Alliance, “From Prohibition to Progress: A Status Report on Marijuana Legalization,” https://bit.ly/2E2YJ4T.

37. Brentin Mock, “Why is Pennsylvania Still Suspending Driver’s Licenses for Drug Offenses?” https://bit.ly/2Yp0F1x.

38. John Kelly, “Home and Away: DHS and the Threats to America,” https://bit.ly/2x2r1Ic. However, it is possible to obtain an exception for a first offense involving possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana, see https://bit.ly/2urtY5t.

39. American Academy of Pediatrics, “The Impact of Marijuana Policies on Youth: Clinical, Research and Legal update,” https://bit.ly/2HSXyZU.

40. Jeffrey Miron and Katherine Waldock, “The Budgetary Impact of Ending Drug Prohibition” (Washington, D.C.: The Cato Institute, 2010), 33.

41. Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS): 2016, Admissions to and Discharges from Publicly Funded Substance Use Treatment, https://bit.ly/2FBgIC4; Karen McElrath, et al., “Black-White Disparities in Criminal Justice Referrals to Drug Treatment: Addressing Treatment Need or Expanding the Diagnostic Net?” Behavioral Science 6 (2016): 1-15.

42. S.P. Kubiak, et al., “Treatment at the Front End of the Criminal Justice Continuum: The Association between Arrest and Admission into Specialty Substance Abuse Treatment,” Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention Policy 1(2006): 20.

43. SAMHSA, 2017 National Survey .

44. The Texas Police Association recently opposed decriminalization by framing it within the context of commercial legalization. See https://bit.ly/2U2Brr6, https://bit.ly/2CEMHzd.

This material may be quoted or reproduced without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given to the author and Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. The views expressed herein are those of the individual author(s), and do not necessarily represent the views of Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy.

Related Research

Prioritizing Public Safety Over Applying Outdated Drug Policy

Ceasefire in the War on Marijuana in Texas? Trial by Jury and Jury Nullification

Jury nullification: local option.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.110(6); Nov-Dec 2013

More Reasons States Should Not Legalize Marijuana: Medical and Recreational Marijuana: Commentary and Review of the Literature

Recent years have seen substantial shifts in cultural attitudes towards marijuana for medical and recreational use. Potential problems with the approval, production, dispensation, route of administration, and negative health effects of medical and recreational marijuana are reviewed. Medical marijuana should be subject to the same rigorous approval process as other medications prescribed by physicians. Legalizing recreational marijuana may have negative public health effects.

Introduction

Recent years have seen a cultural shift in attitudes towards marijuana. At the time of this writing, medical marijuana is legal in 20 states and the District of Columbia; recreational marijuana is now legal in Washington and Colorado. A substantial and growing literature documents legalized marijuana may have adverse effects on individual and public health.

Medical Use of Marijuana

The term ‘medical marijuana’ implies that marijuana is like any other medication prescribed by a physician. Yet the ways in which medical marijuana has been approved, prescribed, and made available to the public are very different from other commercially available prescription drugs. These differences pose problems unrecognized by the public and by many physicians.

Lack of Evidence for Therapeutic Benefit

In the United States, commercially available drugs are subject to rigorous clinical trials to evaluate safety and efficacy. Data appraising the effectiveness of marijuana in conditions such as HIV/AIDS, epilepsy, and chemotherapy-associated vomiting is limited and often only anecdotal. 1 , 2 To date, there has been only one randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of smoked marijuana for any of its potential indications, which showed that marijuana was superior to placebo but inferior to Ondansetron in treating nausea. 3 Recent reviews by the Cochrane Collaboration find insufficient evidence to support the use of smoked marijuana for a number of potential indications, including pain related to rheumatoid arthritis, 4 dementia, 5 ataxia or tremor in multiple sclerosis, 6 and cachexia and other symptoms in HIV/AIDS. 2 This does not mean, of course, that components of marijuana do not have potential therapeutic effects to alleviate onerous symptoms of these diseases; but, given the unfavorable side effect profile of marijuana, the evidence to justify use in these conditions is still lacking.

Contamination, Concentration & Route of Administration

Unlike any other prescription drug used for medical purposes, marijuana is not subject to central regulatory oversight. It is grown in dispensaries, which, depending on the state, have regulatory standards ranging from strict to almost non-existent. The crude marijuana plant and its products may be contaminated with fungus or mold. 7 This is especially problematic for immunocompromised patients, 8 including those with HIV/AIDS or cancer. 9 Furthermore, crude marijuana contains over 60 active cannabinoids, 10 few of which are well studied. Marijuana growers often breed their plants to alter the concentrations of different chemicals compounds. For instance, the concentration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the principal psychoactive ingredient, is more than 20-fold more than in marijuana products used several decades ago. Without rigorous clinical trials, we have no way of knowing which combinations of cannabinoids may be therapeutic and which may be deleterious. As marijuana dispensaries experiment by breeding out different cannabinoids in order to increase the potency of THC, there may be unanticipated negative and lasting effects for individuals who smoke these strains.

Marijuana is the only ‘medication’ that is smoked, and, while still incompletely understood, there are legitimate concerns about long-term effects of marijuana smoke on the lungs. 11 , 12 Compared with cigarette smoke, marijuana smoke can result in three times the amount of inhaled tar and four times the amount of inhaled carbon-monoxide. 13 Further, smoking marijuana has been shown to be a risk factor for lung cancer in many 14 , 15 but not all 16 studies.

High Potential for Diversion

In some states, patients are permitted to grow their own marijuana. In addition to contributing to problems such as contamination and concentration as discussed above, this practice also invites drug diversion. Patients seeking to benefit financially may bypass local regulations of production and sell home-grown marijuana at prices lower than dispensaries. We do not allow patient to grow their own opium for treatment of chronic pain; the derivatives of opium, like marijuana, are highly addictive and thus stringently regulated.

Widespread “Off-label” Use

FDA-approved forms of THC (Dronabinol) and a THC-analog (Nabilone), both available orally, already exist. Indications for these drugs are HIV/AIDS cachexia and chemotherapy-associated nausea and vomiting. Unlike smoked, crude marijuana, these medications have been subject to randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trials. Yet despite these limited indications where marijuana compounds have a proven but modest effect in high-quality clinical trials, medical marijuana is used overwhelmingly for non-specific pain or muscle spasms. Recent data from Colorado show that 94% of patients with medical marijuana cards received them for treatment of “severe pain.” 17 Similar trends are evident in California. 18 Evidence for the benefit of marijuana in neuropathic pain is seen in many 19 - 21 but not all 22 clinical trials. There is no high-quality evidence, however, that the drug reduces non-neuropathic pain; this remains an indication for which data sufficient to justify the risks of medical marijuana is lacking. 4 , 23 – 25

If marijuana is to be ‘prescribed’ by physicians and used as a medication, it should be subject to the same rigorous approval process that other commercially available drugs undergo. Potentially therapeutic components of marijuana should be investigated, but they should only be made available to the public after adequately powered, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated efficacy and acceptable safety profiles. Furthermore, these compounds should be administered in a way that poses less risk than smoking and dispensed via standardized and FDA-regulated pharmacies to ensure purity and concentration. Bypassing the FDA and approving ‘medicine’ at the ballot box sets a dangerous precedent. Physicians should be discouraged from recommending medical marijuana. Alternatively, consideration can be given to prescribing FDA-approved medicines (Dronabinol or Cesamet) as the purity and concentration of these drugs are assured and their efficacy and side effect profiles have been well documented in rigorous clinical trials.

Recreational Marijuana

The question of recreational marijuana is a broader social policy consideration involving implications of the effects of legalization on international drug cartels, domestic criminal justice policy, and federal and state tax revenue in addition to public health. Yet physicians, with a responsibility for public health, are experts with a vested interest in this issue. Recent legislation, reflecting changes in the public’s attitudes towards marijuana, has permitted the recreational use of marijuana in Colorado and Washington. Unfortunately, the negative health consequences of the drug are not prominent in the debate over legalizing marijuana for recreational use. In many cases, these negative effects are more pronounced in adolescents. A compelling argument, based on these negative health effects in both adolescents and adults, can be made to abort the direction society is moving with regards to the legalization of recreational marijuana.

Myth: Marijuana is Not Addictive

A growing myth among the public is that marijuana is not an addictive substance. Data clearly show that about 10% of those who use cannabis become addicted; this number is higher among adolescents. 26 Users who seek treatment for marijuana addiction average 10 years of daily use. 27 A withdrawal syndrome has been described, consisting of anxiety, restlessness, insomnia, depression, and changes in appetite 28 and affects as many as 44% of frequent users, 29 contributing to the addictive potential of the drug. This addictive potential may be less than that of opiates; but the belief, especially among adolescents, that the drug is not addictive is misguided.

Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders

Marijuana has been consistently shown to be a risk factor for schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. 30 – 32 The association between marijuana and schizophrenia fulfills many, but not all, of the standard criteria for the epidemiological establishment of causation, including experimental evidence, 33 , 34 temporal relationship, 35 – 38 biological gradient, 30 , 31 , 39 and biological plausibility. 40 Genetic variation may explain why marijuana use does not strongly fulfill remaining criteria, such as strength of association and specificity. 41 , 42 As these genetic variants are explored and further characterized, marijuana use may be shown to cause or precipitate schizophrenia in a genetically vulnerable population. The risk of psychotic disorder is more pronounced when marijuana is used at an earlier age. 32 , 43

There is some evidence that compounds naturally found in marijuana have therapeutic benefit for symptoms of diseases such as HIV/AIDS, multiple sclerosis, and cancer. If these compounds are to be used under the auspices of ‘medical marijuana,’ they should undergo the same rigorous approval process that other medications prescribed by physicians, including randomized, placebo- and active-controlled trials to evaluate safety and efficacy, not by popular vote or state legislature.

Effects on Cognition

Early studies suggested cognitive declines associated with marijuana (especially early and heavy use); these declines persisted long after the period of acute cannabis intoxication. 44 – 46 Recently, Meier and colleagues analyzed data from a prospective study which followed subjects from birth to age 38; their findings yielded supportive evidence that cannabis use, when begun during adolescence, was associated with cognitive impairment in multiple areas, including executive functioning, processing speed, memory, perceptual reasoning, and verbal comprehension. 47 Rogeberg 48 criticized the study’s methodology, claiming that the results were confounded by differences in socioeconomic status; this claim, however, was based on sub-analyses that used very small numbers. Additional sub-analyses 49 of the original study cohort showed that marijuana was just as prevalent in populations of higher socioeconomic status, suggesting that socioeconomic status was not a confounding variable. Any epidemiological study is subject to confounding biases and future research will be needed to clarify and quantify the relationship between cognitive decline and adolescent marijuana use. However, the findings of the original study by Meier et al show there is indeed an independent relationship between loss of intelligence and adolescent marijuana use. This finding, moreover, is consistent with prior studies. 44

Other Negative Health Effects

Substantial evidence exists suggesting that marijuana is harmful to the respiratory system. It is associated with symptoms of obstructive and inflammatory lung disease, 11 , 50 an increased risk of lung cancer, 14 , 15 and it is suspected to be associated with reduced pulmonary function in heavy users. 51 Further, its use has been associated with harmful effects to other organ systems, including the reproductive, 52 gastrointestinal, 53 and immunologic 10 , 54 systems.

Social Safety Implications: Effects on Driving

Marijuana impairs the ability to judge time, distance, and speed; it slows reaction time and reduces ability to track moving objects. 55 , 56 In many studies of drug-related motor vehicle fatalities, marijuana is the most common drug detected except for alcohol. 57 , 58 Based on post-mortem studies, Couch et al determined that marijuana was likely an impairing factor in as many fatal accidents as alcohol. 59 One study showed that in motor vehicle accidents where the driver was killed, recent marijuana use was detected in 12% of cases. 57 Other research confirms a significantly increased risk of motor vehicle fatalities in association with acute cannabis intoxication. 60

Risk Perception and Use in Adolescents

Marijuana use among adolescents has been increasing. Data that has tracked risk perception and use of marijuana among adolescents over decades clearly shows an inverse relationship; as adolescent risk perception wanes, marijuana use increases. 61 As more states legalize medical and recreational marijuana, risk perception is expected to decrease, causing the prevalence of use among adolescent to continue to rise. This is among the most concerning of issues about the drug’s legalization because so many of the negative effects of marijuana—including cognitive impairment and risk for short- and long-term psychosis— are heightened when used during adolescence.

There is some evidence that compounds naturally found in marijuana have therapeutic benefit for symptoms of diseases such as HIV/AIDS, multiple sclerosis, and cancer. If these compounds are to be used under the auspices of ‘medical marijuana,’ they should undergo the same rigorous approval process that other medications prescribed by physicians, including randomized, placebo- and active-controlled trials to evaluate safety and efficacy, not by popular vote or state legislature. Furthermore, these therapeutic compounds should be administered via a route that minimizes long-term health risk (i.e., via oral pill) and should be dispensed by centrally regulated pharmacies to ensure the purity and concentration of the drug and allow for the recall of contaminated batches.

Marijuana for recreational use will have many adverse health effects. The drug is addictive, with mounting evidence for the existence of a withdrawal syndrome. Furthermore, it has been shown to have adverse effects on mental health, intelligence (including irreversible declines in cognition), and the respiratory system. Driving while acutely intoxicated with marijuana greatly increases the risk of fatal motor vehicle collision. Legalization for recreational use may have theoretical (but still unproven) beneficial social effects regarding issues such as domestic criminal justice policy, but these effects will not come without substantial public health and social costs. Currently there is a lack of resources devoted to educating physicians about this most commonly used illicit substance. The potential benefits and significant risks associated with marijuana use should be taught in medical schools and residency programs throughout the country.

Samuel T. Wilkinson, MD, is in the Department of Psychiatry at the Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Ct.

Contact: [email protected]

None reported.

Civic Issues Blog

Just another Sites At Penn State site

Persuasive Essay on Decriminalization: Rough Draft

Everybody who has grown up in the United States in the past 40 years has heard the same spiel from their adults: all drugs are bad and addictive; never use them for any reason.  At the time, kids listen and grow up with this in mind, and never really question what they hear. However, the issue is actually far more complex than the anti-drug programs make it out to be.  The government’s “war on drugs” starting in the 1970’s has made it its goal to reduce the illegal drug trade, and this has included all types of drugs from heroin to marijuana. However, for marijuana specifically, the government’s classification and treatment of it has not only failed to achieve its original goal, but has also led to many unintended consequences that prove why the laws surrounding it are harsh.  Despite marijuana’s growing popularity for its medicinal benefits, the government’s archaic treatment of it have led to many more consequences than benefits for communities across the United States. Current marijuana laws should be revised to make marijuana decriminalized because the laws have not only failed to reduce drug use, but have also disproportionately imprisoned minorities.

To start, the War on Drugs incorrectly classified marijuana, and the subsequent enforcement of these laws have not been successful in their original goals.  As a response to increasing drug use in the 1970’s, Richard Nixon passed the Controlled Substances Act, which classified drugs based on their medical application and potential for abuse.  Schedule 1 drugs were considered the most dangerous, posing a high risk for addiction with little evidence of medical benefits. This list includes heroin, LSD, ecstasy, and marijuana, despite its well documented medical benefits.  Thus, when producing drug law legislation, the government treated marijuana with the same severity as heroin, already highlighting the ridiculousness of drug laws. The War on Drugs also included increased federal funding for drug control agencies and proposed strict measures (such as mandatory prison sentences) for drug crimes.  Although there is disparity between state and federal laws, the federal law still mandates a sentence of 6-12 months for over 1 kg of marijuana, a 5 year minimum for cultivation of 100 kgs, and a 10 year minimum for over 1000 kgs (safeaccess). Mandatory minimum sentences require jail time after your second possession for any amount of marijuana, and sale of marijuana also warrants jail time (norml)  Thus, although these laws differ from state to state, it is not difficult for a marijuana user to find themselves imprisoned (even if only for 15 days). Although this may seem harsh, if it has been successful, then what’s wrong with the laws? According to a Gallup poll, the amount of people who have said they have tried marijuana at some point in their lives has gone up from 4% in 1969 to 38% in 2013.  Since the implementation of stricter drug regulations in the 1970’s, the amount of marijuana users has drastically increased, meaning that the illegal trade of drugs has not decreased and the laws in place have not been successful in reducing illegal use. Therefore, marijuana laws, which are too harsh in the first place, have not been successful in their intended purpose, a strong reason for why they should not continue to be in place.  

Furthermore, not only are those laws overly harsh and inoperative, but they are also exceedingly expensive for the American public.  There are two aspects of these laws that are expensive to the American public: paying the law enforcement who enforce the laws on a day-to-day basis, and paying for the housing/care of those imprisoned for marijuana offenses.  According to a study by the ACLU in 2013, over the next 6 years, states will spend $20 billion enforcing marijuana laws; specifically, states pay $750 per marijuana-related arrest, and $95 is the national average per-diem cost of housing an inmate arrested due to a marijuana-related offense (CNBC).  Many of the monetary costs are incurred in apprehending and processing offenders, which is a time-consuming and expensive process, especially for non-violent offenders. The enforcement of these laws is also expensive in terms of time spent by the officers enforcing the laws. For example, it was estimated that the NYPD spent 1 million hours enforcing low-level marijuana offenses between 2002 and 2012 (CNBC).  Considering that most of these offenders are non-violent and utilizing a much less harmful drug than it is characterized, these numbers start to add up and the worth of these laws comes into question.

Furthermore, the enforcement of these marijuana laws is not consistent and is racially biased against African-Americans, despite their rate of use being similar to whites.  Looking at figure 2 below, for both whites and blacks between the ages of 18-25 years old, marijuana use has been similar for both groups, with whites actually edging out blacks every year in usage rates (ACLU).  Despite these similar usage rates, arrests for marijuana have shown that blacks are 4 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession, while in some states this number approaches 7-8 times as likely (ACLU).  The reasoning behind these astonishing numbers is most likely an economic motive by the law enforcement agencies. Federal programs like the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program include number of arrests in their criteria for distributing funds to local law enforcement.  In order to increase their arrest statistics, law enforcement can concentrate on poorer neighborhoods (which are also more likely to be minority neighborhoods) to generate more busts for low-level offenses that will allow them to reach their numerical goal (NY Times). These minorities convicted of low level drug crimes now find themselves in an unfair position in comparison to their white counterparts, as they now face obstacles in getting jobs, getting professional licenses, or obtaining student loans.  Thus, marijuana laws are disproportionately enforced to arrest more minorities, which leaves them with further obstacles to get their lives back on track; this systematic racism all stems from the same marijuana laws from the War on Drugs.

Although these laws are unfairly targeting minorities, the amount of total offenders for marijuana are so large that it is contributing to the overcrowding of prisons.  Marijuana arrests account for a large percentage of arrests in the United States; the 587,000 arrests for marijuana related offenses accounted for about 5% of all arrests in the US, more than arrests for all crimes that the FBI classifies as violent combined (Washington Times).  These high numbers of arrests do not translate well when those arrested are put into prison: around 50% of federal inmates are there for drug related crimes, with 27.6% of these drug users in prison for marijuana charges (Huff Post). The large amount of prisoners are causing problems for the prisons themselves, who are being forced to put 2 to 3 bunk beds in one room and turn open spaces into living quarters.  If there was any single charge that one could point their finger towards in regards to what is causing overcrowded prisons, it’s drug offenses. Although some of those charged with drug offenses may deserve to be in federal prison, the large amount of people in for marijuana are in these prisons with people using/distributing much more dangerous drugs. Thus, marijuana users who are arguably unfairly in jail in the first place for using a drug that’s classified to be way more dangerous than it actually is are now contributing to the overcrowding of said prisons.  Thus, the marijuana laws of the War on Drugs days has had a multitude of unintended consequences that has negatively impacted the communities they were trying to fix.

Because of marijuana’s laws lack of productivity and production of negative consequences, it would be best to revise these laws to decriminalize marijuana federally to reverse its adverse effects.  Decriminalization means that marijuana will not be completely legal, but offenses for possessing marijuana will be treated similar to a traffic violation rather than a felony. Those caught with marijuana will receive a fine that they must pay, but they will not be arrested and the offense will not go on someone’s criminal record.  The first obvious benefit of decriminalization is there will be a dramatic decrease in arrests for non-violent drug offenses, which account for 5% of all arrests in the US. Releasing those imprisoned for marijuana offenses/preventing anymore prisoners to enter the prison system on marijuana charges is a significant step in reducing the prison population, which was mostly overcrowded by drug offenders.  However, decriminalization will not necessarily stop all the problems with the marijuana laws; the racial profiling and disproportionate arrests of minorities is a complex issue involving the entire criminal justice system. It does not stem entirely from the enforcement of marijuana laws. However, decriminalization is a step in the right direction to end the unfair arrests of minorities, as drug crimes is one of the largest reasons for arrest in the US, so many minorities affected by this will no longer feel these repercussions.  Some may also argue that decriminalization will come with its own set of consequences, such as proliferation of substance abuse and an increase in crime as the result of no marijuana enforcement. Even if both of these consequences did happen, decriminalization has effectively prepared the government to respond to these problems in the form of saving money. From the billions of dollars that would be saved via decriminalization, the government could funnel more money into drug education/addiction facilities, or could facilitate more money to local law enforcement so that they could lock down on the increase in crime.  These problems could also be stopped at their roots if more money is funneled into drug education and more people know the risks of what they’re using. Furthermore, any extra money that’s leftover from covering the unintended costs of decriminalization could be used for any other area of interest of the US government, such as infrastructure, healthcare, etc.

In conclusion, decriminalization would be an effective solution to the current failing marijuana laws as it would save the US money and help put an end to overcrowding of prisons and racial profiling in law enforcement.  Although decriminalization is not perfect and does not end the debate on drug abuse on how it should be handled, it is a good solution given the benefits that will arise from it and from the fact that the original marijuana laws weren’t productive in the first place.  In a country that is slowly gaining more and more support for legalization, the best place to start is by attacking at the root of these issues: the laws in place. By pushing for decriminalization, the dysfunctional laws will not only being replaced but the adverse effects that they caused will also be reversed.  This is the start of change for our drug laws in the US: will you help pull the “weeds?”

Sources: https://www.safeaccessnow.org/federal_marijuana_law

http://norml.org/laws/item/federal-penalties-2

https://www.cnbc.com/id/100791442

https://www.aclu.org/gallery/marijuana-arrests-numbers

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/04/us/marijuana-arrests-four-times-as-likely-for-blacks.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/09/26/more-people-were-arrested-last-year-over-pot-than-for-murder-rape-aggravated-assault-and-robbery-combined/?utm_term=.d4205eac9285

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/war-on-drugs-prisons-infographic_n_4914884.html

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

211 Marijuana Essay Topics & Examples

Should marijuana be legalized? This question is controversial and worth discussing!

🔝 Top 10 Marijuana Research Topics

🌱 marijuana essay: how to write, 🏆 best marijuana essay examples.

• 💡Interesting Cannabis Topics to Write about

🥇 Exciting Marijuana Essay Topics

🎓 controversial weed topics, 🔎 marijuana research paper topics, ❓ marijuana research questions.

Marijuana, also known as cannabis, is a psychoactive drug made from a plant and used for recreational and medical purposes. Being fully prohibited in some countries, it is fully legalized in others. In your essay about marijuana, you might want to focus on the pros and cons of its legalization. Another option is to discuss marijuana dependence. One more idea is to compare and contrast marijuana laws in various US states. Finally, you can discuss the business aspects of the issue.

Whether you have to write an argumentative, descriptive, or cause and effect essay, our article will be helpful. It contains marijuana topics to research and write about. You can use them for a paper, speech, or any other assignment. Best marijuana essay examples are added to inspire you even more.

• Mental and physical effects of cannabis
• Marijuana and mental ability: the correlation
• Cannabis consumption: the key modes
• Marijuana: short-term and long-term effects
• Cannabis and reproductive health
• History of cannabis
• Legal status of marijuana in various countries: compare and contrast
• Should cannabis be legalized?
• Cannabis as a gateway drug
• The use of marijuana for medical purposes

With the current-day process of drug legalization and the popularization of cannabis, writing a marijuana essay becomes more than a one-track, anti-drug endeavor.

Whether your stance is for or against recreational drug use, you should be able to call upon credible sources to form a well-rounded and informed opinion that may sway your readers toward your cause.

Starting from your pre-writing process and bibliography and until you write your conclusion, you need to keep in mind particular points that will make tackling any marijuana essay topics easy. From a structural and pre-writing viewpoint, you should:

• Brainstorm your ideas. Doing so will allow you to decide on a particular approach to your subject.
• Do your research, compiling your bibliography, and perusing various book and journals titles, as well as research papers, interviews, and statistics.
• Utilizing authoritative sources to support your argument will make your writing more academic and respectable.
• Write a marijuana essay outline, which should help you better your essay structurally.
• Compose an eye-catching title. Marijuana essay titles are already intriguing, so do your best not merely to draw your readers in but to prepare them for your argument by demonstrating your stance on the topic.

If you are still not sure how to begin your paper, look for sample ones online. Searching for good examples will help you understand the tools that work in essay writing, which ones you can apply to your issue, and which bore the audience.

Just remember that plagiarism is a punishable offense. However, gaining some inspiration from the work of others is not!

Now you are ready to begin, having carried out the research and created guidelines for your writing process. However, an intriguing title and an issue that may easily excite people is not enough to convince your readers of your subject’s validity.

Nonetheless, the potentially provocative nature of your paper provides you with the ability to write a fail-safe marijuana essay hook. Your introduction should build upon the sentiment expressed in your title and give your audience an initiative to read further.

You can start by providing surprising statistics or describing a present drug scenario. The goal of writing an introduction is to give your readers a brief understanding of your issue and present them with partial facts, making them want to continue reading.

Do not be afraid to expand your topics and link various data together while keeping in mind an academic approach.

Adverse societal effects of marijuana use may include an increase in the number of car accident cases, especially if there is no culture of safety around recreational drug use. However, trying to link it to society’s degradation may require more evidence than mere statistics.

Understand which approach is more likely to convince your audience and be ready to respond to potential counterarguments to your facts. Treating your audience as knowledgeable is one of the central characteristics of a good essayist.

Remember to write only sentences that are relevant to your argument. A sound mental practice when writing an essay is to continuously ask yourself, whether each phrase relates to your thesis statement.

If yes, does it help advance it forward? If the answers for these questions is no, you may have to rephrase, remove, or even re-research your facts to demonstrate a compelling understanding of the issue.

Need more essential tips to get your essay started? Use IvyPanda for all your academic needs!

• Reason Why Marijuana Should Be Legal This is an important consideration since data on the prevalence of Marijuana indicates that the US is still the world’s largest single market for the drug.
• Advantages and Disadvantages of Marijuana Countries including Netherlands, Israel and Canada have lenient laws regarding the use of marijuana, cases in point that proponents of its legalisation have used to highlight the merits of legalising it.
• Alcohol and Drugs Effects on High School Students According to Martin, “society also advertises the image of individual and social happiness for alcohol and drug users; this misconception results in the societal decrease of achievement, especially, of high school age students”.
• Legalization of Marijuana: Arguments For and Against It will therefore be difficult to regulate the use of marijuana among young people and other unauthorized people if it is legalized. It should be noted that marijuana has various negative effects to the health […]
• Legalizing Marijuana: Pros and Cons The focus of this paper will be on the impact of the legalization of the U.S.economy with possible positive and negative sides of the matter.
• How Does Marijuana Affect the Brain? One of the profound findings of the studies is on the negative effects of marijuana on the brain. Research findings on the brain show that abuse of marijuana for a long time affects the brain […]
• Should Marijuana Be Legal? It is perhaps very essential to be acquainted with an account of laws that surround marijuana in order to understand the reasons why the drug ought to be legalized.
• Usage and Effects of Marijuana In the modern world, more and more countries are recognizing the role of cannabis in bringing benefits to the population. For the purposes of better understanding the drug and navigating the modern realities, it is […]
• Political Opinion on Legalization of Marijuana On the other hand, the case introduces the man as a member of the Methodist Church, and this community is known for its strict opinion about marijuana as a gateway drug.
• Discretion Powers Regarding Marijuana Laws Albeit, marijuana laws in New York are favorable for the users as marijuana was fully legalized in March of 2021, allowing for both medical and recreational use.
• Marijuana as an Alternative Medication for Pain Relief The PICOT question for the identified health care issue is the following: in a patient population requiring pain relief, does marijuana represent a viable alternative medication as compared to opioid-based prescription drugs for alleviating the […]
• Marijuana: Properties, Effects, and Regulation At the same time, a regulated cannabis industry slowly emerges, with companies attempting to profit off of the legalization and destigmatization of marijuana.
• Preventing Negative Effects of Marijuana Use The aim of the study is to ascertain specific interventions that would allow reducing cannabis use within the framework of the environment where marijuana is legal.
• Analysis of Arguments: Should Marijuana Be Legalized? Pro Arguments: The majority of Americans agree on the necessity to legalize marijuana. This initiative is accompanied by concerns regarding the actual use of marijuana.
• Risks and Benefits of Medical Marijuana The use of marijuana in the medical sphere is a highly debated and discussed topic. Patients with epilepsy claim that the use of marijuana prevents seizures and provides immense relief.
• Medical Marijuana: Issues & Ethical Considerations The use of medical marijuana in anxiety disorders and PTSD has many concerns. Prescribing medical cannabis can potentially benefit a patient but can cause additional health and legal issues.
• The Benefits of Medical Marijuana This paper aims to discuss that medical marijuana is helpful in the treatment and management of chronic pain conditions such as cancer and epilepsy.
• The Issue of Legalization of Marijuana The issue of the legalization of marijuana in the territory of the state is not unambiguous, therefore it is analyzed by a large number of specialists.
• Synthetic Marijuana: Physiological and Social Factors The report generated by Drug and Alcohol Dependence article in the year 2010 showed that the majority of the people who used synthetic marijuana were between the ages of 12 to 29.
• Cannabis or Marijuana for Medical Use In the West, for the first time, medical use became known thanks to the work of Professor O’Shaughnessy, who personally observed the process of her treatment in India.
• Marijuana Research: Personal Connection and Medical Use In the United States, military marijuana is prohibited, but initially, it was used for recreation and as a form of medicine in the twentieth century.
• Marijuana Possession in a High-School Student Case Her participation in the program will be an educational experience and put the juvenile offender in touch with professionals who can understand the motives of her behavior instead of giving Jane Doe an actual criminal […]
• Marijuana Legitimization and Medical Controversy The proponents of the legitimization of marijuana for medical use argue that it has numerous medical uses. Currently, in the US, there is a rather peculiar situation with the legalization of marijuana for medical use.
• Workplace Policy on Marijuana Use in Michigan The legalization and decriminalization of marijuana use in 23 states of the US lead to complicated issues when it comes to the consideration of workplace policies.
• Law: Legislation Regarding Marijuana Farming To evaluate the applicability of the proposed marijuana farming bill, the current marihuana production legislation needs to be reviewed, and the changes in social norms regarding criminal behavior are to be analyzed.
• Marijuana Legalization: Controversial Issue in Canada Canada became the second country in the world to legalize the cultivation and consumption of cannabis in 2018. Besides, the substance is addictive, and it is challenging to stop consuming it.
• Marijuana: Myths and Legal Justification Over the past decades, much attention has been drawn to the question of the categorization of marijuana in terms of the national systematization of drugs controlled by the US Drug Enforcement Administration.
• Marijuana Legalization and Issues to Consider If marijuana is fully legalized, there might be a rise in use among youth, which is dangerous from the physiological point of view, and there will be no legal justification to end it.
• Hip-Hop and Marijuana Use in College Students It has been estimated that over half of the college student population regularly use marijuana, while over 25% used it during past month.
• Marijuana Use among American and Bolivian Students The study is a perfect example of the use of theory in a research. As such, it is possible for college students in Bolivia to have a similar deviant behavior, which in this case is […]
• The Relationships Between Marijuana and the Legal System The most common ideas discussed within a framework of this debate are connected to the issues of permission to keep marijuana at home for personal needs such as medical needs, and a total ban on […]
• Should Marijuana Be a Medical Option? Medical marijuana is used to refer to the use of marijuana as a physician-recommended form of medication in its natural or synthetic form.
• Use of Marijuana for the Medicinal Purposes It is therefore quite evident that even though the marijuana legalization will go hand in hand with a set minimum age within which individuals will be allowed to use it, at the long run the […]
• The Medicinal Value of the Marijuana: There Are Potential Benefits to a Patient Other Than Risks This article provides an insight to the effects of chemotherapy treatment to the body of the cancer victims. It defines the drug in a lengthy way including what the drug is, the effects of taking […]
• Pros and Cons of Legalization of Medical Marijuana It is evident that medical treatment with the use of marijuana would be beneficial for both: patients and the government because of the opportunity to earn on taxation.

💡 Interesting Cannabis Topics to Write about

• Legalization of Recreational Use of Marijuana The role of the Supreme Court in the specified case boils down to stating the conditions, in which the prescription and the following use of marijuana by the patient, can be deemed as legitimate.
• The Chances of a Successful Appeal by a Marijuana Convict The Superior Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment rights of the defendant were violated; a decision that was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
• Marijuana Legalization: Chronic Seizure Treatment With that said, despite numerous states already having legalized one or both applications, the federal government remains opposed to either form of legalization, and marijuana possession and use remain federal offenses.
• Adverse Effects of Marijuana Use This paper aims to provide an analysis of the article that gives a perspective on the adverse health effects and harm related to marijuana use. Thus, the academic article on the adverse effects of marijuana […]
• “Adverse Health Effects of Marijuana Use” by Volkow et al. Based on national marijuana studies and DSM-IV, the researchers conclude that addiction to marijuana is a non-debatable statement and that starting marijuana use in adolescence doubles or even quadruples the risks of cannabis use disorder.
• Marijuana Use May Double the Risk of Accidents for Drivers According to the Department of Safety and Homeland Security, the number of Americans driving under the influence of illegal substances has risen drastically. The risk of a crash is also related to the number of […]
• Legalized Marijuana: Negative and Positive Sides The economy and finance from the very beginning were anticipating that this law will bring the largest income to the state’s budget and create plenty of job opportunities under the rule of law.
• Marijuana: Legislative History and Future The focus of the legislation in many states is to end the illegal sale of cannabis and monetize it for tax purposes and so that distribution can be controlled.
• Ethical Perspective of the Legalization of Marijuana In spite of a popular view of the medical benefits of marijuana, doctors insist that the use of marijuana provides the same dangerous effect as other drugs.
• Marijuana Legalize: Advanatages and Disadvantages The truth that marijuana is illegal and prohibited is suitably caused by the number of funds invested in the war against drugs.
• Arguments for Banning the Legalization of Marijuana Marijuana is a dangerous drug that should not be legalized even if it is in the context of it containing the medicinal value.
• Federalism and Medical Marijuana Needless to say, United States faced political and social challenges as well, and the disputes over federalism and over the legal use of marijuana in medicine are still the most burning and controversial issues in […]
• The Effects of Marijuana on the Body, Mind and Brain Cells A drug is a substance that changes the bodily function of a body when consumed, there are several definitions of the word drug but it is believed that the most important function of a drug […]
• College Students in UK and Marijuana The reasons for the punishments are very different but the result remains the same: marijuana is still used by the majority of students and is available for everyone.
• Decriminalizing Marijuana for Medicinal Use Because of inconsistent and problematical data, it is impracticable to access quantitatively to what extent that drugs encourage the incidence of crime.
• Psychological Effects of Marijuana Some people experience panic reactions, which tend to be temporary and often are triggered by a feeling of not being in control Marijuana’s psychological effects include a sense of euphoria or well-being, relaxation, altered time […]
• Logical Benefits of Legalizing Marijuana This will be a source of revenue to the government; when the revenues increase, it means that gross domestic product for the country increases. It will be a source of income not only to the […]
• Social Effects of Marijuana Research has shown that the use of marijuana affects the smoker’s day-to-day lifestyle in relation to society, the environment, and day-to-day activities.
• Federal vs. State Law: Medical Marijuana in the US The main problem is that these laws and regulations have not reduced the number of people who use marijuana for medical purposes.
• Medical Marijuana: Pros of Legalizing It must be admitted that at the time of the passage of these laws, histories from some, but not all, heroin users indicated that the use of marijuana had preceded the use of heroin.
• Marijuana: To Legalize or Not to Legalize? Marijuana, which is also known under dozens of nicknames such as weed or pot, is now the most widespread illegal drug across the US. Moreover, the vast majority of marijuana abusers claim pot to be […]
• Marijuana Legalization and Consumption Among Youth The most popular excuse among drug consumers is the instrumental use of the drug. As long as the drug influence is undermined, the number of college students willing to experience the marijuana effects will be […]
• Legalization of Medical Marijuana: Help or Harm? Nowadays, a majority of people worldwide support the legalization of marijuana, and it is possible to predict that this support will keep getting stronger in the future.
• Medical Marijuana Legalization Concerns This change raises political concerns and requires the government to review its economy to adapt to the use of MM. The representation of the legal process highlighted the history of previous legislations and reported on […]
• Medical Marijuana: Legal and Research Concerns However, while the purpose of recreational marijuana is often disconnected from its long-term effects on people’s health in scholarly discussions, the use of medical marijuana is viewed from the point of patient’s health and the […]
• Medical Marijuana in the Army: Addressing a Problematic Issue Denying the use of medicinal marijuana as one of the fastest and the most efficient ways of relieving pain in the military setting, one will inevitably infringe upon the rights of American troops.
• Should Marijuana Be Legalized? Marijuana legalization is a topic of social trends and beliefs that are based not only on health but political and economic factors as well.
• Marijuana Legalization and Its Benefits for Society The example of several states that have already introduced the appropriate law provides the ground for vigorous debates about the absence of the expected deterioration of the situation and emergence of multiple problems associated with […]
• Marijuana Legalization in 5 Policy Frameworks The legalization of marijuana is still one of the debatable issues at the federal and state levels. For instance, the use of marijuana is prohibited at the federal level while the recreational and medical use […]
• Marijuana Legalization in California The muscle relaxation effect of marijuana also appears to be a positive effect that should be used to argue for its legalization.
• Medical Marijuana Legalization by National Football League However, it must be realized that some of these players are usually in excruciating pain to the point that some may have lost consciousness.
• Marijuana: Users, Desired Effects and Consequences The frequent users consist of youths and adults who have abused Marijuana to the extent they have become dependent on it.
• Effects of Marijuana on Memory of Long-Term Users The pivotal aim of the proposed study is to evaluate the impact of marijuana use on long-term memory of respondents. The adverse impact of marijuana after the abstinent syndrome refers to significant changes in prefrontal […]
• Trends in the Use of Marijuana The researchers claim that the legalization of marijuana in California led to the development of the acceptance of marijuana use as well as the increase in this drug consumption.
• Medical Marijuana Legalization Rebuttal The claim of fact is that A.C.A.continues to be beneficial despite the arguments of Republican politicians and current challenges. The claim of policy is the appeal to Republicans and Democrats to work together on the […]
• Marijuana Legislation and Americans’ Contribution To identify whether patients with intractable pain hold more favorable views regarding legislation of marijuana use than the general public, it is necessary to determine various inclusion and exclusion criteria that might influence the society’s […]
• Medical Marijuana Policy and Framing Approach This is a clear indication that different arguments can be presented by these actors to support the legalization and use of medical marijuana.
• Policy Analysis: Rules for Growing Medical Marijuana Overall, the main goal of the document is to address the health needs of people requiring marijuana to relieve the manifestations of their illness as well as the implications of growing marijuana for medical purposes.
• Marijuana Crime in California State and Federal Courts To compare the severity of the punishment that could be imposed by a federal court to what was announced at a state institution, it should be remembered that the investigation process would not take long […]
• Legal Marijuana Market Analysis and Taxes Impact Consequently, the primary goal of this paper is to understand the impact of taxes on the financial stability of the market for legal marijuana with the help of the law of supply and demand and […]
• Controversy Around Medical Marijuana Legalization The consideration of the problem of marijuana legalization from the perspective of public safety involves such points as crime rates and traffic accidents. The fact of economic benefits of the Cannabis legalization is also apparent: […]
• The Legalization of Marijuana: Regulation and Practice It is imperative to note that legalization of marijuana is a topic that has been quite controversial and has led to numerous discussions and disagreements.
• Marijuana History, Medical Purposes and Threats Although many people believe that marijuana is harmless and the access to it should be unlimited, it has a number of negative health effects and might lead to addiction.
• Marijuana Use and Serious Mental Illnesses 21% of the respondents of 18 years and above claimed to have used marijuana for the first time prior to their 12th birthday.
• Marijuana as an Unjustifiable Pain Reliever The debate on whether to legalize the use of marijuana has been there for the last 20 years. In addition to this, it causes panic and anxiety hence causing the user to hallucinate.
• The Safety of Using Medicinal Marijuana for Pain Relief Speaking about the introduction section of the study, it is important to note that it is rather short if compared to other parts of the article as the researchers were paying more attention to presenting […]
• Should Marijuana Be Treated Like Alcohol? Considering the benefits that would accompany the legalization of marijuana and its treatment like alcohol, I strongly agree with Buckley’s comparison; marijuana should be treated like alcohol. First, the use of marijuana affects the body […]
• Political Issues of Marijuana in America The largest demographic groups against the legalization of marijuana include the Republicans and the southerners. Most of the Democrats continue to support the legalization of marijuana in the country.
• Changes in Laws of Marijuana Regulation In addition, the study intends to uncover the impacts of the said laws and the accompanying changes. The case studies will be compared to assess the impacts of legislations on marijuana in the society.
• Concepts of Legalizing Marijuana Although in most cases, most individuals associate Marijuana with numerous health complications and social problems, for example, brain damage, and violent behavior hence, supporting its illegalization, such individuals take little consideration of its significance in […]
• Marijuana Legalization in Illinois The case for legalization of marijuana in Colorado evidences the need to alter federal laws prohibiting marijuana for its legalization law to have both statutory and federal backing in the state of Illinois.
• Public Safety and Marijuana Legalization Some of the states have failed to tax marijuana. Hence, it is difficult to get the precise figures in terms of tax values that states could collect from marijuana.
• Heroin and Marijuana Abuse and Treatment The success in the process of drug addiction treatment is only possible when the patient is willing to co-operate and has a desire to recover and defeat the habit.
• The Marijuana Usage Legislation This research paper is aimed at discussing the effects that can be produced by the changes in the legislation on the use, storage, and distribution of marihuana.
• Medical Marijuana Program in California The physicians should also do a periodic review of the treatment and how the patients respond to the medical marijuana. The medical marijuana is only restricted to patients who are qualified and recommended by a […]
• History and Effects of Legalization of Marijuana As predicted, the legalization of marijuana in several states has led to an increase of marijuana abuse among youngsters Studies have shown a pattern of the use of cannabis and risky behavior of the individuals.
• Debates Around Legalization of Medical Marijuana The supporters and opponents of the legalization of marijuana have opted to focus on either the positive or the negative aspects of the effects of the drug to support their views on policies to legalize […]
• Federal Drug Laws vs. State Medical Marijuana Acts A senate bill for the case of Los angeles is on the process of considering the use of marijuana for medical purpose.
• The Use of Marijuana and Its Benefits Criminalization of the use of marijuana and negative reviews as well as negative exposure from the media has driven marijuana use to the black markets with often negative consequences to the economy and society.
• Marijuana and Its Effects on Mental Health The effects of the use of marijuana can be comparable to those exhibited by the removal of this important part of the brain.
• Medical Marijuana use for Terminal Colon Cancer The author hopes to use this paper to highlight the uses of marijuana in management of colon cancer at its terminal stage.
• How New York Would Benefit From Legalized Medical Marijuana The arrests resulting from possession of marijuana in New York is quite huge compared to those in California and New Jersey states in America.
• Should Be It Legal to Sell the Marijuana in the United States? What I want to know is the reasons of why so many people use such serious psychoactive drug as marijuana of their own accord and do not want to pay special attention to their activities […]
• Supporting of Marijuana Legalization Among the Adult Population Proponents argue that legalization of marijuana will lead to increased revenues for the government amid economic challenges. Legalizing marijuana will not lead to cancer and deaths but will spark the debate for apparent effects of […]
• Marijuana: The Issues of Legalization in the USA To understand all the possible effects of the marijuana legalization, it is necessary to pay attention to the definition and classification of the drug with references to determining the most important social and legal aspects […]
• Reasons for Legalization of Marijuana The legalization of the drug would bring to an end the discrimination of the African Americans in marijuana-related arrests, reduce the sales of the drug and its use among teenagers, encourage the development of hemp […]
• Legalizing Marijuana: Arguments and Counter-Arguments On the other hand, many groups have outlined that the legalization of marijuana would lead to an increase in the rate of crime in addition to opening up of the gateway to the abuse of […]
• Drug use and misuse in western society: Effects of chronic marijuana use among young women and girls It is also based on the fears of the impacts of the drug use, concerns over the reduced productivity that’s likely to cause harm to the user and the society and so on.
• Medical Marijuana Policy in the United States The importance of legalization of medical marijuana is that, the government will be able to monitor and control marijuana in the country.
• The Arguments For and Against Marijuana Decriminalization The production, preparation, trade and use of marijuana has been prohibited in most parts of the world and a lot of resources are used every year to combat it.
• The Illegal Use of Marijuana Canada is among the leading nations in the percentage use of illegal marijuana as stated in the World Drug Report of the year 2007.
• Marijuana and Its Economic Value in the USA The grim reality of the economic performance of the United States of America lies in the lengthy debate over the legalization of marijuana.
• Should We Legalize Marijuana For Medical Use? In addition to that, the use of Marijuana especially by smoking either for medical reasons or to heal ailments, is a social activity that will help bring them together and improve their social ties.
• Why Marijuana Should Be Legalized? The government should save that money it uses in prohibiting the use of marijuana as it has no proved harm to the users.
• Arguments on Why Marijuana Should Be Illegalized The greater part of the population believes that the sustained use of this product is beneficial in numerous ways. Therefore, it is clear that the negative effects of the drug outdo the constructive ones.
• A Case for Legalizing Marijuana Marijuana is one of the drugs that the government policy targets and as it currently stands, the government uses a lot of resources in prosecuting and punishing marijuana consumers through the legal system.
• The Marijuana Industry and Its Benefits Marijuana use also slows down the growth of cancerous tumors in the brain, lungs, and breasts; thus, it is valuable in the management of cancer.
• The Decriminalization of Marijuana One of the main reasons that the supporters of this argument have progressed is that by decriminalization of marijuana, the government would save huge amounts of money that it uses on enforcing laws that relate […]
• The Use of Marijuana in California The US government ensures that its use is limited to a minimum by enforcing harsh punishments to the dealers and users of marijuana.
• Federal Government Should Not Legalize the Use of Marijuana On the other hand the use of marijuana actually increased in the country. It is not only the DEA or the federal government that is reluctant in the legalization of marijuana.
• Issues with Marijuana Legalization in the United States This is the reason why the debate on the legalization of marijuana has been on the increase since the past 10 years.
• The history of marijuana According to the new set of legislation, it was considered illegal to be found in possession of 25 grams of marijuana.
• Does Legalizing Marijuana Help or Harm the United States? The latter measure is not merely being advocated by the proponents of marijuana use since the legalization of marijuana has been supported by NAACP not because it fully backs the smoking of marijuana.
• Marijuana, Heroin and Prescription Opiate Abuse and How Are They Related to the Society The core issues mentioned in the article revolves around addiction and abuse of opioid agents as well as its relation to the use of heroin and marijuana.
• Increasing Marijuana Use in High School The author’s concerns in the article are that the usage of marijuana is becoming prevalent among the American youth. It is evident that the author is against the publication and marketing of the medical marijuana […]
• The Union: The Business Behind Getting High by Brett Harvey Some other reasons advanced by the documentary include the ability of the government to control the sale of such drugs to minors and also collection of tax revenue. The documentary espouses a number of reasons […]
• The Debates on the Legal Status of Marijuana This means that the use of marijuana encourages the consumption of other drugs such as alcohol and cigarettes. Additionally, the use of marijuana is associated with increase in crime and consumption of other illicit drugs.
• Marijuana Is a Healthier Alternative to Cigarettes Cigarette smoking has also been reported to cause respiratory infections due to the damage caused in the cells that prevent entry of microorganisms into the respiratory system hence reducing the immunity of the system.
• Marijuana’s Negative Effects and Advantages Marijuana is the most commonly abused drug among the youths and adults in the United States and other countries in the world.
• Use of Marijuana and Its Consequences The plant was grown in the United States of America for agricultural purposes during the colonial period up to the beginning of the 20th century.
• Should Marijuana Drugs Be Decriminalized? The production, preparation, trade and use of marijuana has been prohibited in most parts of the world and a lot of resources are used every year to combat it. Thus, decriminalization of marijuana is likely […]
• Argument About Legalizing Marijuana in America Therefore, if at all the government of the United States is to prohibit the use of marijuana in the country, it should be ready to cater for the high costs that come in hand with […]
• Marijuana’s Positive and Negative Effects The main aim of creating these institutions is to evaluate the impact and the effects of marijuana on the abusers and on the environment.
• Limited and Controlled Use of Marijuana The question of legalizing marijuana refers to the legal use of marijuana both in private and public places for medical use or otherwise.
• The Moral and Ethical Reasons Why Marijuana should be legal It is my humble opinion that the billions of dollars being spent on the war against marijuana should be diverted to more useful projects like feeding the less fortunate in the society.
• The Problem of Legalization of Marijuana and Hemp Many individuals tend to believe that the use of Marijuana is morally wrong as it alters the mental state of the user and leads to dangerous addictions and actions in the end.
• Minor and Major Arguments on Legalization of Marijuana Premises 1: If marijuana were to be legalized it would be impossible to regulate its’ sell to, and use by the minors. Making marijuana illegal is denying them a right to the use of this […]
• The Reasons Why Marijuana Should be Made Legal Among the reasons that support the legalization of marijuana include: the medical basis that marijuana has some benefits and that the state could gain revenue from the trade of marijuana as opposed to the costs […]
• Why Is Marijuana Legalized In Some States And Not Others? I consider the legalization of marijuana to be a positive step as its prohibition entails intrusion of personal freedom and just like any other substance it is only harmful when it is not taken in […]
• Marijuana Legalization and Crime Rates The possible outcome of this effort will be the safe consumption of the drug, easy monitoring, and creation of awareness to the public on the dangers of excessive use of the drug and lastly the […]
• The Effect of Legalization of marijuana in the Economy of California It has been predicted that if the government legalizes the drug, there will be a lot of changes pertaining to the demand for the drug in the market and as a result, there will be […]
• Marijuana Must Not Be Legalized According to the national institute of drug abuse, the active chemical in marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinol, act on the region of the brain responsible for time awareness, sensory, attention, thoughts, memory and pleasure.
• Decriminalization of Marijuana The decriminalization of marijuana resulted due to public outcry over the effects of marijuana. Among the disadvantages include the saving of money and time for other businesses, promotion of the judicial justice as the centre […]
• Policy Brief: Why Marijuana Use Should Be Legalized in the Us In this perspective, it is valid to argue that marijuana users may be undergoing long incarcerations in US jails due to the misconceived fantasies that took root in the public mind in the 1930’s, and […]
• Medical Uses of Marijuana The feelings of hallucination make one to lose consciousness and feel as though in very different world that is full of bliss.
• Should Marijuana Be Legalized in Canada?
• Drug Testing and Legalization of Marijuana
• Has the Time Come to Legalize Marijuana?
• Framing the User: Social Constructions of Marijuana Users
• Drugs and Legalization Drug Marijuana Dealing
• Decriminalization and Marijuana Smoking Prevalence
• Has Marijuana Become More Accepted in Today’s Culture?
• Get Ready for Americas Fastest-Growing Industry: Marijuana
• Clearing the Smoke Between Cigarettes and Marijuana
• Key Findings and Decriminalization of Marijuana
• Facts That Most People Don’t Know About Marijuana
• Issues Hampering the Legalization of Marijuana
• Economical Argument for the Legalization of Marijuana
• Juvenile Smoking and Marijuana Use
• All the Reasons Why Marijuana Should Be Legalized for Medical Purposes
• Exploring the Effects and After Effects of Marijuana
• Factors That Influences Teenagers to Use Marijuana
• College Students Attitude Toward Marijuana Use on Campus
• Drugs Case for Legalizing Marijuana
• Logical Reasoning for the Legalization Marijuana
• Future Trends and Marijuana for Medicinal Purposes
• Countering Anti-Medical Marijuana Efforts in Massachusetts
• Abnormal Psychology Problem: Excessive Use of Marijuana and Alcohol
• Food and Drug Administration Bans Use of Marijuana in the US
• Addiction and Smoking Marijuana Plays
• Analyzing Affordable Care Act and Marijuana
• Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana is Hazardous
• America Requirements Medicinal Weed: Marijuana Legalization
• Comparing and Contrasting Marijuana and Alcohol
• Many People Believe That Marijuana Should Be Legalized
• How Media Framing Effects Marijuana Prohibition and Legalization?
• How Can Legalize Marijuana Help the United States?
• How Does Military Jurisdiction Deal with Marijuana Now Would Legalization?
• How America Will Benefit from Legal Marijuana?
• How Legalizing Marijuana Will Impact Society?
• Does Marijuana Cause Brain Damage?
• How Marijuana Will Not Work in the US?
• Does Marijuana Have Any Medicinal Uses?
• How Many Individuals Smoke Marijuana in the United States?
• Does Previous Marijuana Use Increase the Use of Other Drugs?
• How Medical Marijuana Works?
• How the Social Contract Theory Prevents the Legalization of Marijuana?
• How Marijuana Affects Hauora?
• Why Do Americans Enjoy Marijuana?
• What are the Positive and Negative Effects of Legalizing Marijuana?
• What are the Benefits and Drawbacks of Legalising Marijuana?
• Does Legalizing Marijuana Make Sense?
• What Are the Medical Causes and Effects of Marijuana Use?
• How Are Employers Coping with Medical Marijuana Legislation?
• Does Marijuana Work the Treatment of Diseases?
• Does Marijuana Have Medicinal Purposes?
• How Does Marijuana Law Work in District of Columbia Class?
• Does Increasing the Beer Tax Reduce Marijuana Consumption?
• How Legalizing Marijuana Could Help Boost the Economy?
• Does Marijuana Have More Harmful or More Beneficial Effects?
• How Will Marijuana Legalization Affect Public Health?
• Does Marijuana Use Impair Human Capital Formation?
• How Gender and Age Effects Marijuana Usage and Brain Function?
• How Marijuana Affects Our Society?
• How American Children Start to Smoke Marijuana and Why?
• Mental Disorder Essay Topics
• Drugs Titles
• Sleep Disorders Research Topics
• War on Drugs Questions
• Chronic Pain Research Ideas
• Criminal Behavior Essay Topics
• Epilepsy Ideas
• Drug Trafficking Research Topics
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 29). 211 Marijuana Essay Topics & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/marijuana-essay-examples/

"211 Marijuana Essay Topics & Examples." IvyPanda , 29 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/marijuana-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '211 Marijuana Essay Topics & Examples'. 29 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "211 Marijuana Essay Topics & Examples." February 29, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/marijuana-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "211 Marijuana Essay Topics & Examples." February 29, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/marijuana-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "211 Marijuana Essay Topics & Examples." February 29, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/marijuana-essay-examples/.

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Justice Department formally moves to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug in historic shift

FILE - Cannabis clones are displayed for customers at Home Grown Apothecary, April 19, 2024, in Portland, Ore. The Justice Department has formally moved to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug in a historic shift to generations of drug policy in the United States. A proposed rule sent Thursday to the federal register recognizes the medical uses of cannabis and acknowledge it has less potential for abuse than some of the nation’s most dangerous drugs. (AP Photo/Jenny Kane, File)

• Copy Link copied

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department on Thursday formally moved to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug, a historic shift in generations of U.S. drug policy.

A proposed rule sent to the federal register recognizes the medical uses of cannabis and acknowledges it has less potential for abuse than some of the nation’s most dangerous drugs. The plan approved by Attorney General Merrick Garland would not legalize marijuana outright for recreational use .

The Drug Enforcement Administration will next take public comment on the proposal in a potentially lengthy process. If approved, the rule would move marijuana away from its current classification as a Schedule I drug, alongside heroin and LSD. Pot would instead be a Schedule III substance, alongside ketamine and some anabolic steroids.

The move comes after a recommendation from the federal Health and Human Services Department, which launched a review of the drug’s status at the urging of President Joe Biden in 2022.

Biden also has moved to pardon thousands of people convicted federally of simple possession of marijuana and has called on governors and local leaders to take similar steps to erase convictions.

“This is monumental,” Biden said in a video statement, calling it an important move toward reversing longstanding inequities. “Far too many lives have been upended because of a failed approach to marijuana, and I’m committed to righting those wrongs. You have my word on it.”

AP AUDIO: Justice Department formally moves to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug in historic shift

AP correspondent Jackie Quinn reports the government effort to reclassify marijuana has gotten underway.

The election year announcement could help Biden, a Democrat, boost flagging support, particularly among younger voters .

The notice kicks off a 60-day comment period followed by a possible review from an administrative judge, which could be a drawn-out process.

Biden and a growing number of lawmakers from both major political parties have been pushing for the DEA decision as marijuana has become increasingly decriminalized and accepted, particularly by younger people. Some argue that rescheduling doesn’t go far enough and marijuana should instead be treated the way alcohol is.

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York applauded the change and called for additional steps toward legalization.

The U.S. Cannabis Council, a trade group, said the switch would “signal a tectonic shift away from the failed policies of the last 50 years.”

The Justice Department said that available data reviewed by HHS shows that while marijuana “is associated with a high prevalence of abuse,” that potential is more in line with other Schedule III substances, according to the proposed rule.

The HHS recommendations are binding until the draft rule is submitted, and Garland agreed with it for the purposes of starting the process.

Still, the DEA has not yet formed its own determination as to where marijuana should be scheduled, and it expects to learn more during the rulemaking process, the document states.

Some critics argue the DEA shouldn’t change course on marijuana, saying rescheduling isn’t necessary and could lead to harmful side effects.

Dr. Kevin Sabet, a former White House drug policy adviser now with the group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, said there isn’t enough data to support moving pot to Schedule III. “As we’ve maintained throughout this process, it’s become undeniable that politics, not science, is driving this decision and has been since the very beginning,” Sabet said.

The immediate effect of rescheduling on the nation’s criminal justice system is expected to be muted. Federal prosecutions for simple possession have been fairly rare in recent years.

Schedule III drugs are still controlled substances and subject to rules and regulations, and people who traffic in them without permission could still face federal criminal prosecution.

Federal drug policy has lagged behind many states in recent years, with 38 states having already legalized medical marijuana and 24 legalizing its recreational use. That’s helped fuel fast growth in the marijuana industry, with an estimated worth of nearly $30 billion.

Easing federal regulations could reduce the tax burden that can be 70% or more for marijuana businesses, according to industry groups. It also could make it easier to research marijuana, since it’s very difficult to conduct authorized clinical studies on Schedule I substances.

Associated Press writers Zeke Miller in Washington and Joshua Goodman in Miami contributed to this report.

Follow the AP’s coverage of marijuana at https://apnews.com/hub/marijuana .

Rescheduling Marijuana Is 'Unjustifiable Abdication Of Responsibility' Says Black Cannabis Lawyers Assn. Urges Full Decriminalization

The National Association of Black Cannabis Lawyers  (NABCL) issued an official statement on President Joe Biden's plans to  reclassify marijuana as a Schedule III substance . 

“While we appreciate the administration's clear statement that we must reevaluate our outdated and inaccurate stance on cannabis, NABCL has significant concerns that merely rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III falls drastically short of the comprehensive decriminalization promised to American voters," stated NABCL founder and executive director  Natacha Andrews, Esq.

See Also:  Cannabis Advocates Say DEA’s Move Represents ‘Progress But Not Justice,’ Ends War On Medical Marijuana Patients, But Not War On Drugs

This week, the Department of Justice (DOJ) published a  proposed rule  in the US Federal Register, starting the 60-day public comment period. 

The DOJ proposed to "transfer marijuana from schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act ("CSA") to schedule III of the CSA, consistent with the view of the Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") that marijuana has a currently accepted medical use as well as HHS’s views about marijuana’s abuse potential and level of physical or psychological dependence." 

The department is now soliciting comments on this proposal, which must be submitted electronically or postmarked on or before July 22, 2024. 

Cannabis rescheduling news has shaken up the industry, with both positive and negative reactions. To learn about the biggest impacts of this move, and what's next for the marijuana space join us at the Benzinga Cannabis Capital Conference this October in Chicago. Hear directly from key industry players and policymakers. Get your tickets now by following  this link . 

Benefits For Large Corporations And Pharma Companies  

Andrews said rescheduling keeps " federal criminalization. With cannabis as a Schedule III controlled substance, arrests, incarceration, and discriminatory policing practices for possession and distribution will persist. Without automatic release provisions, those currently incarcerated on cannabis related charges will remain behind bars." 

NABCL director added that "rescheduling alone creates benefits for large corporate cannabis and pharmaceutical companies through tax incentives – but does not prioritize patients, or support a diverse workforce. It does nothing to improve affordable medical access, protect small businesses, ensure fair wages and working conditions, or mandate reinvestment into the communities ravaged by the drug enforcement policies fueled during prohibition."

During the public comment period, NABCL will help gather support for full decriminalization and comprehensive legalization, calling for reform that prioritizes equitable access, transparency, resentencing, expungements and veterans access. 

"Developing new policies without fully reckoning with those harms is an unjustifiable abdication of responsibility," Andrews pointed out. 

See Also:  Cannabis Stocks And ETFs Surged On Marijuana Rescheduling News: WTR’s Industry Report Analyzes What’s Behind The Optimism

Photo: Courtesy of H_Ko via Shutterstock

© 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

This article Rescheduling Marijuana Is 'Unjustifiable Abdication Of Responsibility' Says Black Cannabis Lawyers Assn. Urges Full Decriminalization originally appeared on Benzinga.com .

• Essay Database
• world trade center
• Greek Food and Culture
• The Future Portrayed I…
• Intercultural Communications
• In Heart of Darkness, …
• Things Fall Apart by C…
• In J.M. Coetzee's Wait…
• The Criminals Of Profe…
• Socialization of Children
• The Poet of Nature, Wi…
• Leonhard Euler
• Articles of Confederat…
• About all Sharks
• Vietnam Poetry

Decriminalization of marijuana

What is paper-research.

• Custom Writing Service
• Terms of Service
• Privacy Policy
• Biographies

More From Forbes

New hampshire senate passes recreational marijuana legalization bill.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

The New Hampshire Senate last week approved a bill to legalize recreational marijuana sales, marking the first time the state’s upper legislative chamber has passed a measure to establish a regulated market for adult-use cannabis commerce. The Senate passed the proposal, HB 1633, six weeks after a different version of the legislation was approved by the state House of Representatives, leading Republican Gov. Chris Sununu to vow he would not approve the measure without amendments to restrict weed sales to state-run pot shops.

The New Hampshire Senate has approved a bill to legalize recreational marijuana and authorize ... [+] regulated pot sales to adults.

New Hampshire is the only state in New England that has not fully legalized recreational pot. Possession of up to three-quarters of an ounce of marijuana has been decriminalized, but possession of larger amounts of weed is still a criminal offense and regulated sales of cannabis are not allowed.

If passed, HB 1633 would legalize the possession of up to two ounces of marijuana by adults and set the stage for legal sales of recreational cannabis under a tightly regulated model overseen by the New Hampshire Liquor Commission. The Senate version includes provisions sought by Sununu to limit retail pot sales to 15 shops run by the state under a franchise model. The House version does not include provisions for the franchise model, leading the governor to say last month that he would not sign the measure .

“Governor Sununu has been crystal clear about the framework needed for a legalization bill to earn his support, focusing on harm reduction and keeping it out of kids’ hands,” his office said in a statement to reporters after the House passed the marijuana bill on April 11, according to a report from Marijuana Moment. “The legislation passed today doesn’t get us there but the Governor looks forward to working with the Senate to see if we can get it done.”

Bill Now Heads Back To House Of Representatives

The version of the bill approved by the Senate also includes amendments that expand the law enforcement powers of the state liquor commission and increase the penalties for some marijuana-related offenses. The bill now heads back to the New Hampshire House of Representatives, where lawmakers can approve the Senate’s changes, reject the amended version or send the measure to a bicameral conference committee to negotiate a consensus.

Samsung Slashes Galaxy S24 Price In A Major New Promotion

The 108 best extended memorial day sales you can still shop today, shop the birkenstock memorial day sale with these last chance deals.

Democratic Rep. Anita Burroughs, a key sponsor of the bill, said the Senate’s amendments will make the legislation unpalatable to many lawmakers who supported the measure in the House.

“I already know of 50 Democrats who are going to nonconcur, and I think that’s the tip of the iceberg,” she told the New Hampshire Bulletin last week.

“I’ve been fighting for this for a lot of years, and I never imagined a day where I would vote against a bill that I’ve been sponsoring and working on,” Burroughs added. “But it’s like a bridge too far.”

Advocates for cannabis policy reform are urging lawmakers to reach a compromise, arguing that a now may be the best opportunity to legalize recreational weed. If the bill succeeds, New Hampshire will join the 24 states that have legalized recreational marijuana .

“While the Senate version of HB 1633 has flaws, it would still represent significant progress” over current law, Karen O’Keefe, director of state policies for the cannabis policy reform advocacy group Marijuana Policy Project, told Marijuana Moment. “It would legalize twice as much cannabis as neighboring Massachusetts and Vermont starting in January 2026, preventing hundreds of annual arrests. It would also stop people from losing their children, being denied medical care including organ transplants, and losing their professional licenses for cannabis.”

“Gov. Sununu is the first New Hampshire governor to support legalization,” she added, “albeit with many parameters that required an extremely restrictive bill. He is not running for re-election, and the leading candidate for governor, Kelly Ayotte, is a staunch opponent of legalization.”

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

Biden moves to reclassify marijuana: Would weed be legal in North Carolina?

President Joe Biden directed a review of how marijuana is classified in 2022. Last year, the Department of Health and Human Services recommended that it be rescheduled to Schedule III.

On Thursday, May 16, Biden posted a video to X , formerly known as Twitter, reinforcing his support of the potential reclassification and saying the Department of Justice would be reclassifying marijuana.

The reclassification would mean, among other things, that marijuana and THC products could be prescribed as medication on a federally legal level. Biden has also stressed the importance of discontinuing the practice of federal punishment for marijuana possession.

"Today, my Administration took a major step to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug," Biden said. "It's an important move toward reversing longstanding inequities. Today's announcement builds on the work we've already done to pardon a record number of federal offenses for simple possession of marijuana."

More: Is medical marijuana legal in North Carolina? What to know about NC's first dispensary

What is the current federal law on marijuana? What's changing?

The president's order has the potential to change marijuana from a Schedule I drug — a classification for highly dangerous, addictive drugs without medical use — to a Schedule III drug , meaning it could become federally legal to prescribe marijuana as medication.

Though this wouldn't mean marijuana would be completely legal at a federal level, the classification would place the plant in the same category as drugs like anabolic steroids and ketamine. In his initial 2022 statement, Biden mentioned the fact that marijuana is currently placed in a schedule higher than the classification of fentanyl and methamphetamine, which he called "the drugs that are driving our overdose epidemic."

In the same initial statement, Biden committed to three steps towards ending what he called a "failed approach" to regulating marijuana. The steps were:

• Announcing a pardon of all prior Federal offenses of simple possession of marijuana and directing the Attorney General to develop a process for issuing certificates of pardon to eligible individuals.
• Urging all governors to do the same with regard to state offenses.
• Asking the secretary of the HHS and attorney general to initiate the administrative process of expeditiously reviewing how marijuana is scheduled under federal law.

In Biden's May 16 announcement he reasserted this commitment, condemning the practice of jailing any person for simple possession of marijuana.

"I'm committed to righting these wrongs," Biden said. "You have my word on it."

More: Marijuana legalization may be on the ballot in these four states in 2024

Is marijuana legal in North Carolina?

Marijuana is not legal for recreational use in N.C. It can technically be prescribed in some specific cases in patients with severe seizures but is otherwise illegal for medical use, as well.

However, it is legal for medical use on the Qualla Boundary, home of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians. In 2021, marijuana was legalized for medical use in Cherokee, a sovereign nation located on the Qualla Boundary with its own elections, laws, government, and self-governed and autonomous institutions. However, those laws pertain only to tribal land.

Outside of the Qualla Boundary, some low-THC products have been legalized in N.C. under a  2021 state law.  The law allows the sale of products with no more than 0.3% delta-9, allowing the sale of cannabinoids like THC and CBD.

More: As NC's 1st cannabis dispensary opens, Cherokee Co. DA to 'continue to enforce state law'

Would the change make weed legal in NC?

Regardless of its classification at a federal level, marijuana remains illegal in North Carolina. The General Assembly and Gov. Roy Cooper would have to pass a law legalizing it in order for cannabis to be legal in N.C.

Which states have legalized cannabis?

At 24 states, nearly half of the U.S. has now legalized marijuana, as reported by  USA TODAY.  Here's a list of states that allow recreational cannabis use and the year it was legalized:

• Minnesota: 2023
• Delaware: 2023
• Rhode Island: 2022
• Maryland: 2022
• Missouri: 2022
• Connecticut: 2021
• New Mexico: 2021
• New York: 2021
• Virginia: 2021
• Arizona: 2020 
• Montana: 2020
• New Jersey: 2020
• Vermont: 2020
• Illinois: 2019
• Michigan: 2018
• California: 2016
• Maine: 2016 
• Massachusetts: 2016
• Nevada: 2016
• District of Columbia: 2014
• Alaska: 2014
• Oregon: 2014
• Colorado: 2012
• Washington: 2012

Iris Seaton is the trending news reporter for the Asheville Citizen Times, part of the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at [email protected].

• Anniston/Gadsden

Marijuana laws, colonoscopies: Down in Alabama

• Updated: May. 28, 2024, 4:48 a.m. |
• Published: May. 28, 2024, 3:48 a.m.
• Ike Morgan | [email protected]

Welcome back. It’s a short work week, so we’d better get started. If you didn’t read yesterday, note that the answers and results from Friday’s quiz are there.

Get the Down in Alabama newsletter: Enter your email to subscribe to the daily Down in Alabama newsletter:

Dangerous storms

The storms that blew through the state early yesterday knocked out power for some 137,000 Alabama Power customers and likely led to one death .

According to authorities, a woman in her late 70s in Mountain Brook was killed when a tree fell on her apartment. She was alone at the time, and no other injuries were reported. The woman was pronounced dead on the scene.

Several thousand remained without power as of this recording, according to the Alabama Power outage map.

Attention pot enthusiasts

We may soon see the federal government reclassify marijuana. But, as Savannah Tryens-Fernandes reports , that would not affect state drug laws.

See, the FDA recently recommended that marijuana move from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug. That move would reflect the FDA’s stated belief that the vast majority of weed users are not doing something that is dangerous to themselves or others.

So last month, the DEA proposed to reclassify marijuana to reflect a view of the drug as less dangerous that it’s currently treated. There are still a few steps left on the federal level before that happens. If it does, it’ll probably give those in the marijuana business some tax advantages, but it doesn’t legalize or decriminalize it in Alabama.

Here, possession can be a misdemeanor if law enforcement believes the marijuana is just for you, and a felony if not. Selling it can get you up to 20 years in prison, and selling it to a minor can get you up to 99.

A life saver

If you’re someone who’s been sitting out your colorectal cancer screenings or you’re wondering whether having a colonoscopy is worth the time, here are some numbers that came up in a story that might interest you.

AL.com’s Sarah-Whites Koditschek reported on free screenings for low-income and underinsured Jefferson County residents that are being given at UAB through a state grant.

UAB says that in the first year of the program, 100 colonoscopies were performed, mostly for low-income minority patients. Half of them resulted in removed polyps from the colon, and three of them resulted in the detection and treatment of early-stage cancer.

All three cancer cases were successfully treated.

In a state full of people who’d love a chance to play the lottery, 3% is a relatively sizeable portion, so make sure you start getting screened as you get into middle age.

The free screenings at UAB for patients of federally qualified health centers will be available through September.

“We’re just a gritty group of girls that are gonna scratch and claw their way to a world series. And we did it.”

Alabama softball catcher Riley Valentine , in an ESPN interview after the Tide upset Tennessee in a super regional to reach the Women’s College World Series for the second straight year.

More Alabama News

• Alabama fish consumption advisories: What are they and who reads them?
• Hoover man, 2 others injured when boat bursts into flames on Alabama’s Lake Mitchell
• Huntsville reality TV star arrested for DUI
• For ‘Idol’ contender Triston Harper, homecoming concert is chance to give thanks
• Meet the 46 coaches impacted by Nick Saban’s retirement

Born on this date

In 1916, writer Walker Percy of Birmingham.

The podcast

• Apple podcast page
• YouTube podcast page
• Spotify podcast page
• Alexa skill page on Amazon
• Amazon Music podcast page

If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.