With cannabis industry struggling, Western Mass. sellers and growers seek relief from high court
They seek to overturn a federal law they say strangles their business. They were turned back last week by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
But plaintiffs say their fight against the Richard Nixon-era Controlled Substances Act of 1970 is not over.
'It is fair to assume that we shall seek Supreme Court review,' wrote one of their attorneys, Jonathan D. Schiller of the firm Boies Schiller Flexner.
The plaintiffs include Canna Provisions, with stores in Holyoke and Lee; Wiseacre Farms, which grows cannabis in West Stockbridge; Gyasi Sellers, of Springfield, which delivers cannabis; and Verano Holdings Inc. based in Chicago. That company owns Zen Leaf Enfield, at 98 Elm St., in Enfield, Connecticut.
The plaintiffs say the 1970 law is an overreach and prevents them from making use of banking services and bankruptcy protection available to most businesses.
The U.S. Supreme Court receives 7,000 to 8,000 petitions each term, but hears only about 80 cases.
The Boies in the firm's name is that of David Boies, who represented former U.S. Vice President Al Gore during the recount controversy against President George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential election.
Boies argued in person when the case came before U.S. District Judge Mark G. Mastroianni in Springfield a year ago. The judge ruled in favor of the U.S. Department of Justice and upheld the Controlled Substances Act.
The companies appealed to the First Circuit and a three-judge panel ruled Tuesday, once again in favor of the government.
The plaintiffs declined further comment.
They sued in 2023, saying that with states legalizing cannabis for recreational use, the 1970 federal law exceeds Congressional power.
Making their argument, the companies reached back into history showing that marijuana predates the U.S. Constitution.
'Each of the thirteen original colonies enacted' laws concerning marijuana — 'then known simply as 'hemp'' — some of which 'encouraged (or even required) colonists to grow marijuana,' the suit read.
Even the Magna Carta of 1215 created rights concerning hemp cultivation and sometimes even 'made the cultivation of hemp compulsory.'
But the appeals judges were unmoved, saying that if left unregulated, the trade in marijuana within states would impact interstate commerce. And Congress has the right to regulate interstate commerce.
As a practical matter, federal law makes it harder for marijuana companies to lease farm land for fear of losing federal agricultural supports or to do banking or borrow money.
The Massachusetts marijuana industry does $1 billion a year in sales, according to data kept by the Cannabis Control Commission.
Commission data says marijuana retails for $125 an ounce these days, down from $416 in 2020.
Ryan Dominguez, executive director of the Massachusetts Cannabis Coalition trade association, said 30 Massachusetts cannabis businesses closed in the last year.
Regulation is expensive, he said. And every neighboring state except New Hampshire has legalized recreational marijuana. Many of those states have tailored their laws – such as limits on how much customers can buy in one transaction – to compete with Massachusetts.
The federal law means none of them can take federal tax deductions, he said. And if they want to go out of business, they can't claim bankruptcy protection.
The bankruptcy issue is something the lawsuit could fix if it reaches the Supreme Court, Dominguez said.
'A lot of these people would have to declare personal bankruptcy,' he said.
And that means they would lose personal assets in addition to the business.
Placing pigeons in the park on purpose in Springfield
Cause detailed for February train derailment in Wendell
'Global order has been upset': World Affairs Council gauges tariff war impact on Western Mass
Read the original article on MassLive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
40 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump Isn't the Only One to Blame for the Gerrymander Mess
President Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Texas Republicans have reignited the gerrymandering wars. The brazen power grab in Texas pushed Democrats to start their own efforts to unravel independent commissions established by voters, and now it's threatening to tilt the whole country into chaos. Mr. Trump and his G.O.P. allies are surely the instigators, but the true architect of this mess, the person who bears as much or more responsibility for it, is Chief Justice John Roberts and his conservative Supreme Court. Over several years of rulings, this court has effectively rolled back laws that had for generations protected the right to vote. The current frenzy is just the latest example of the most antidemocratic feature of American politics in 2025. It's the toxic combination of the conservative Supreme Court majority and a political party that believes longstanding norms are for suckers and that lacks any commitment to fair play and majority rule. Since he joined Ronald Reagan's Justice Department in 1981 as a young foot soldier in the nascent conservative legal movement, Chief Justice Roberts has pursued the patient, steady bleeding of the Voting Rights Act. In 2013, he wrote the 5-to-4 decision in Shelby County v. Holder that effectively ended preclearance, the Voting Rights Act's most effective enforcement mechanism, and liberated states, many clustered in the South, from federal oversight of legislative maps. But the case that did the most to bring us to our current impasse came six years later, Rucho v. Common Cause. The gerrymander mayhem was created by the Rucho case. In that decision — also 5 to 4 and written by the chief justice — the court ruled that partisan gerrymandering is a nonjusticiable political question and shuttered the federal courts to future claims. The decision incentivized extreme gerrymanders nationwide and left voters all but powerless to challenge them. The chaos we face today could have been prevented. Instead, the court enabled it. At a time when Americans might look to federal courts as honest brokers, the Supreme Court's conservative majority kicked away the best, even last, chance at enforcing a national solution to a national problem. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
4 hours ago
Barred from Bolivia's elections, ex-leader Morales campaigns hard for invalid votes
EL ALTO, Bolivia -- Barred from appearing on Sunday's ballot, former leftist president Evo Morales has launched a scrappy campaign for a presidential contender with no name, no face and no formal platform. The contender's known as 'Nulo" — Spanish for the null-and-void vote. Nulo has a reliable base in Bolivia, where voting is compulsory. For many years, voters disillusioned with Morales' increasingly high-handed attempts to prolong his presidency over three consecutive terms defaced their ballots or left them blank. But with the coca-farming union leader disqualified from the race and seeking to distance himself from the unpopular President Luis Arce and other leftists associated with Bolivia's worst economic crisis in four decades, Morales has emerged as Nulo's greatest champion. 'Brothers, we are on the right track. Absenteeism, blank ballots, undecided voters, all of it,' Morales told Radio Kawsachun Coca, his media outlet in the Bolivian jungle of Chapare, where he has been holed up for months among fiercely loyal coca-growing labor unions. If Morales leaves his tropical stronghold, he risks arrest on charges related to statutory rape. He denies the allegations. 'Nulo is where we belong,' he said, urging voters to scratch, scribble and sketch on their ballots. 'We've already won here.' But under Bolivian law, Nulo cannot win the elections— nor trigger a redo. Because authorities must remove spoiled and blank ballots from the final count, a surge by Nulo would give all the candidates a boost without affecting the distribution of votes. Morales is betting that an unusually high proportion of votes for Nulo would embarrass the right-wing front-runners, former President Jorge 'Tuto' Quiroga and businessman Samuel Doria Medina, undermine the credibility of the consequential election and extend his own political relevance. 'Evo wants to be in the election and say, 'This is my vote ... I'm the winner without even having participated,'" said political analyst Carlos Saavedra. Morales' bid for Nulo comes after the iconic leftist leader, like other Latin American populists of his generation, exhausted a range of tactics to stay in power. To run for a third term in 2014, Morales changed the Constitution's two-consecutive-term limit and stacked the top courts with his supporters. To run for a fourth term in 2019, he found a way around a referendum blocking his bid. That last attempt six years ago led to Morales resigning under pressure from the military and fleeing into exile as violent protests erupted over his disputed reelection. This time, with his ally-turned-rival Arce in power, Morales had all the cards — rather, courts — stacked against him. The ex-president's power struggle with Arce splintered his once-dominant Movement Toward Socialism. Although running with a different faction, Senate President Andrónico Rodríguez represents the MAS party's best hope. But support for Rodríguez, a coca-farming union activist like Morales, has declined in recent weeks as an accelerating currency crisis stokes outrage at the long-dominant MAS party. Morales' followers can appear even more disgusted with the left than with the right-wing establishment that their leader built his career opposing. "Evo Morales taught Andrónico everything he knows, and Andrónico stabbed him in the back. How can we trust a candidate like that?" asked Wendy Chipana, a 28-year-old volunteer at a Nulo campaign office in El Alto, the sprawling city of rural migrants overlooking Bolivia's capital of La Paz. 'We only have one candidate, Evo Morales. That's why we're deciding not to cast a single valid vote.' As anger flared in June over Morales' disqualification, his supporters blocked highways and clashed with police in unrest that left eight dead. Morales warned that the country would 'convulse' should Sunday's election proceed. Yet in recent weeks he has changed his tune, urging his followers to register their frustration through the ballot box. Nulo campaigners are asking voters to get creative. Chipana distributes decals of Morales' face that voters can stick on their ballots. Retired professor Martha Cruz, 67, says she'll mark hers with a large X. Diego Aragon, 32, a coca farmer in Chapare, plans to paste a coca leaf on his paper in a nod to Morales' legalization of the medicinal plant, maligned during the U.S.-backed war on drugs as the base product in cocaine. Clothing vendor Daniela Cusi, 44, wants to take her time in the voting booth. 'I'm going to bring paint and draw his pretty little face all over,' she said. With just days to go before the election, Nulo is drawing even some of Morales' detractors who prefer to vote for nothing than back any of the uncharismatic candidates. 'I'm done with Evo, but I have no information about these other candidates,' said Diana Mamani, 30, selling shivering lambs at a market in the far reaches of El Alto. 'The right-wing spends all this money on propaganda but they haven't bothered to come out here.' The two right-wing candidates, Quiroga and Doria Medina, have run for president and lost three times before. Despite disenchantment over his autocratic tendencies, sexual abuse cases and profligate state spending, Morales, as Bolivia's first Indigenous president, retains a level of fervent support that no other candidate can claim. 'I look in the mirror and realize I am just like him,' said Cristina Sonco, 43, a worker at the scenic cable car linking La Paz to El Alto, one of the many infrastructure projects Morales built as president. Like Morales, Sonco is an Aymara, the Indigenous group forming the majority of Bolivia's population. Recalling how his presidency reduced inequality and increased her rights in a country historically dominated by a white and mestizo, or mixed-race, elite, she started to weep. 'He's like a father to me," she said. 'Not like these other candidates.' The light-skinned, Western-educated Quiroga and Doria Medina represent the same ruling class that Morales swept aside when he first rode to power in 2005, vowing to bury 20 years of pro-Washington, free-market policies that failed to lift Bolivians out of poverty. Twenty years later, Bolivia finds itself at the end of another historic cycle. Prices are rising and fuel is scarce. Families can no longer access their dollar savings. In some ways, analysts say, Sunday's elections could leave Morales right back where he started. 'I think that's why Morales is pushing for Nulo, not a left-wing vote,' said Aymara author Quya Reyna. 'It would suit him for the right-wing to come to power.' After all, Morales' past five years spent bickering with his former protégé wasn't a great look for the maverick leader, Reyna said, adding:
Wall Street Journal
10 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
A Defense of George Mason's Diversity Hiring
Your editorial 'A Rebuke for George Mason' (Aug. 5) misunderstands the law and the mission of public higher education. Diversity hiring isn't inherently discriminatory. The Supreme Court has long held that institutions may consider diversity as one factor in a holistic evaluation. President Gregory Washington's comment about seeking candidates who are 'above the bar' but offer 'a broader, shared understanding of what 'best' means' reflects this principle, not an abandonment of merit. Elite institutions increasingly recognize what research shows: Diverse faculties lead to better research, foster innovation and better serve diverse student populations. George Mason enrolls one of the most diverse student populations in Virginia, but its faculty diversity has lagged. That's a legitimate institutional concern, not political theater.
