A coalition of 22 state attorneys general is calling on Congress to address “the glaring vagueness” that has led to legal cannabis products being sold over the counter across the country — including sometimes from vending machines or online.

letter dated March 20 addresses the consequences of Republican lawmakers’ choice to legalize hemp production in the 2018 omnibus Farm Bill — a decision that perhaps inadvertently led to a multibillion-dollar market in intoxicating cannabis products that are arguably federally legal.

Now, the attorneys general want Congress to shutter the market it helped create. In the new Farm Bill, they want the legislature to enshrine in statute the idea that intoxicating cannabis is not federally legal — contrary to what the law currently states.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Congress explicitly made it the DEA’s job to schedule and deschedule drugs in the Controlled Substances Act. Much like a general can tell a private to do their job by running into a firefight, the president can tell the DEA to do their job by descheduling cannabis.

    • gregorum@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Funny, because you started by explaining that Congress created the DEA and laid out how they work, then end by claiming the President tell them what to do, as if that makes any sense.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        The DEA is part of the Executive Branch, which the president is the head of. The president tells members of the executive branch, such as the DEA, what to do as a matter of course.

        • gregorum@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          The president tell the DEA to review cannabis’s scheduling, but he can’t tell them what or how to decide.

          And he’s done that. And they’re reviewing it now.

          But the decision is theirs to make, and Biden can’t force them to decide one way or the other.

          As mentioned in another comment:

          The president can order the operations of federal agencies, but they can’t order specific procedural outcomes.

          The power of the DEA to schedule drugs comes from Congress, not from the executive branch. Congress created the DEA to build process to review drugs and manage them. The president is in charge of executing that procedure, not changing it or skipping it entirely. The power to effectively make laws is Congress, not the president.

          As weird as it seems, there isn’t actually a loophole where the president can order someone to change the law even if that person is technically their employee.

          • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            It’s all about that soft power. The most direct form of this is via appointments. Simply choosing a head that wants to deschedule, for example. And that is just the most obvious, there are tons and tons of soft power avenues the president has at his disposal.

            • gregorum@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              “If I were in power, I’d easily manipulate my hand-selected, corrupt underlings to my will, bwahaha! Certainly my opponents must operate the same way! MWAHAHAHA!”

              [ Slithering gurgles of evilness abound, loudly ]

              SNAP BACK TO REALITY: No. Actual, responsible government officials don’t act that way and take their jobs seriously— including their oaths to dutifully and honestly execute their duties in service of the people of their nation, rather than their own selfish interests.

              • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Of course presidents would never appoint people that agree with them politically. Who would ever do that? A complete misuse of power! That is why every Democrat appointed justice is even more right-leaning than the ones Republicans put up!

                  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    And there it is

                    What do you mean? Democrats never put in appointments that agree with them politically. They are always super right leaning, even more right leaning than Republican appointments.

    • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      No, the president can tell the DEA to do their job, which is studying whether they should deschedule cannabis. He can’t tell them what results their job should have.

      In this metaphor, the general can tell the private to go fight on the battlefield. The general cannot determine whether the private kills people or comes back alive. The general can train the private and give the private all the support and tools necessary to win a fight, but in the end the results come down to the private.