Last week, a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers introduced the Strengthening the Tenth Amendment Through Entrusting States Act, giving hope to advocates of marijuana legalization that 2019 might finally be the year the federal government faces reality on the issue. The states have led the way on the legalization front for years, with recreational marijuana legal in 10 states and medical marijuana legal in 33. Yet, Washington has dragged its heels, with cannabis still treated as a Schedule I drug by the DEA, creating a legal quagmire.
The STATES Act would help fix this by forcing the federal government to recognize the legality of marijuana in states that have legalized it. This is a good first step; however, the bill still leaves a lot to be desired. The STATES Act comes nowhere close to full-fledged federal legalization and would not fix ongoing problems weed faces with banking and crossing state borders.
The proposed bill states that the enforcement of federal law “shall not apply to any person acting in compliance with State law relating to the manufacture, production, possession, distribution, dispensation, administration, or delivery of marihuana.” Such a law is vital to add clarity to the current state of the market for pot. Over the past 10 years, federal enforcement has been at the discretion of whichever political administration has been in power. While former President Barack Obama famously promised to not raid legal pot dispensaries, Attorney General Jeff Sessions suspended the previous policy under the Trump administration — admittedly, failing to garner much political support for his drug warrior ways.
To the effect that it creates regulatory stability toward the sale of marijuana under both Republican and Democratic presidential administrations, the STATES Act is undoubtedly needed. However, it does little more than just that. Marijuana would still be classified as a Schedule I drug federally, and its prohibition may still be enforced in states that have not passed any sort of legalization. Users are still at the mercy of their state government to pass sensible drug policies for reprieve from the federal government’s antiquated attitude toward the plant.
Second, it’s not clear to what extent the law would improve the ease of marijuana businesses having access to banking. Currently, only about one in 30 banks or credit unions allow businesses in the pot industry to open an account, and, even so, they are still required to report them to the feds for illegal activities. While the STATES Act may ease the tension for businesses operating legally under state law, it may not, seeing as marijuana would still be a Schedule I drug. Fortunately, another bill that would fix this issue is currently making its way through the House, the SAFE Banking Act.
Finally, the STATES Act does not protect legal weed from crossing borders, keeping the current legal gray area in place. For example, a customer who legally purchased marijuana in a state where it’s legal could conceivably be arrested for using it in a state where it is not, an affront to interstate commerce as a foundational value of the United States.
Indeed, the STATES Act could conceivably set the tone for a cronyism future for cannabis, insulating growers and dispensaries from competition outside their state. Supporters of legalization should hope for more than just half-hearted attempts at legalization such as the STATES Act. Until the federal government tackles the Schedule I elephant in the room, millions of Americans will still be at risk of having their lives ruined for possession of a plant.
Casey Given (@CaseyJGiven) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is the executive director of Young Voices.
