States vs. Federal Govt. in the Fight for Legalization
Even with California, the sixth biggest economy in the world, legalizing pot, incongruities in state and federal law hinder growth in the marijuana market.
That’s according to Paul Armentano, Deputy Director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML).
“Californians, like most Americans, believe that it’s preferable to have the commercial marijuana market governed by licensed businesses, rather than by cartels and drug dealers,” Armentano said.
“But unfortunately these businesses, even when they are state compliant and locally compliant, largely cannot act in a transparent manner, because they do not have access to banking. They can’t run credit cards, and we see little accountability or transparency because of this conflict with the federal government.”
But there might be some progress. Legalizing marijuana on a federal level has gained bipartisan support in Congress, with Representatives Tom Garrett (R-VA) and Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) introducing a bill last March calling for an end to marijuana prohibition on the federal level.
The “Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2017” would put legislative power in the hands of states and remove cannabis as a Schedule I drug. Knowingly taking marijuana to a state where it’s prohibited, though, would still be subject to criminal penalties.
For full interview [click here](https://cheddar.com/videos/weed-across-america-federal-vs-state-laws).
The Biden administration and major consumer technology players on Tuesday launched an effort to put a nationwide cybersecurity certification and labeling program in place to help consumers choose smart devices that are less vulnerable to hacking.
Former President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he has received a letter informing him that he is a target of the Justice Department's investigation into efforts to undo the results of the 2020 presidential election, an indication that he could soon be indicted by federal prosecutors.
The court’s ruling applies to higher education institutions and other entities that receive federal funding and doesn’t directly change private employer obligations, but business leaders might pull back diversity, equity and inclusion programs to avoid lawsuits.
