New bill would clarify that used bong water is not actually a drug
Under current Minnesota law, the water in this pipe is considered a controlled substance. (Getty Images)
DFL lawmakers in the House and Senate (SF1905/HF1657) ) have introduced legislation that would remove an unusual loophole in state law allowing prosecutors to treat the water in a bong as a controlled substance, no different than the uncut version of whatever illicit drug the bong was used to smoke.
Under current law, prosecutors can treat bong water quantities of greater than four ounces as a 'drug mixture' and add it to the weight of any actual drugs found on a suspect, which can turn a misdemeanor possession offense into a first-degree felony with the potential for decades in prison.
The issue received widespread attention last year when the Reformer reported on the case of Jessica Beske, a Fargo woman facing up to 30 years in prison over 8 ounces of water allegedly found in a bong in her car during a traffic stop in Polk County.
The proposed legislation removes the language allowing authorities to consider certain quantities of bong water a 'drug mixture,' and explicitly states that the legal definition of mixture 'does not include the fluid used in a water pipe,' nor does it include any quantity of drugs that may be dissolved in a pipe's fluid.
'Counting dirty bong water as pure drugs is like counting a beer bottle full of backwash and cigarette butts as 80-proof whiskey,' said Bruce Ringstrom Jr., one of Beske's attorneys. 'Sending helpless addicts to prison for having dirty bong water takes up prison space that should be used for actually dangerous offenders.'
Polk County Attorney Greg Widseth, who charged Beske with the bong water offense, is well known among defense lawyers and drug law reform advocates for seeking severe penalties for nonviolent drug offenders.
Kurtis Hanna, a drug reform lobbyist with Blunt Strategies, said that the main problem with the current law 'is that it ends up treating end users of drugs as if they are drug wholesale dealers, which goes against the original legislative intent' of the state's drug laws.
Hanna pointed out the law's absurd implications: 'If someone dropped $20 worth of cocaine into a swimming pool, should law enforcement be able to weigh all the water in the pool and prosecutors charge the person with possessing that many pounds of cocaine?'
Bong water has an unusually rich history in Minnesota. A 2009 state Supreme Court decision explicitly gave prosecutors the ability to treat bong water as a controlled substance. After the decision drew national headlines and widespread ridicule, the Legislature passed a bill to exempt bong water quantities of less than four ounces, but then-governor Tim Pawlenty vetoed the bill and went on 'The Daily Show' to defend his decision.
Lawmakers passed the four-ounce exception again the following year, and newly sworn-in DFL governor Mark Dayton signed it. In 2023 the Legislature passed a bill decriminalizing drug paraphernalia, even items containing trace amounts of drug residue. But the bong water provision was overlooked.
The new bill awaits consideration by the public safety committees in the House and Senate.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Louisiana Legislature targets out-of-state doctors who provide abortion pills
Packages of Mifepristone tablets are displayed at a family planning clinic on April 13, 2023 in Rockville, Maryland. (Photo illustration by) The Louisiana Legislature has approved a bill targeting out-of-state abortion-inducing drug providers, giving more time to individuals who want to sue someone who performed, attempted to perform or substantially facilitated an abortion. The legislation is part of an effort from anti-abortion advocates to crack down on doctors who ship abortion-inducing medication to states where the procedure is illegal. In nearly all instances, abortion has been illegal in Louisiana since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022. House Bill 575 by Rep. Lauren Ventrella, R-Greenwell Springs, easily passed both chambers. She dubbed her proposal the 'Justice for Victims of Abortion Drug Dealers Act,' though it would apply to all forms of the procedure. It extends the window for abortion lawsuits from three years to five years and allows out-of-state doctors and activists to be sued. The bill will become law unless vetoed by Gov. Jeff Landry, which is unlikely. Ventrella's bill has the support of Attorney General Liz Murrill, who is currently prosecuting a case against a New York doctor accused of providing abortion-inducing medication to the mother of a pregnant minor in West Baton Rouge Parish. Gov. Kathy Hoschul has refused to extradite the doctor to Louisiana to face charges, citing New York's shield laws. The doctor and the minor's mother were both indicted. Murrill has alleged the minor was coerced to take the medication, though her mother was not charged with this crime. Ventrella's legislation was substantially whittled down throughout the legislative process. In its original state, it would have allowed the 'mother of the unborn child,' her parents, the man who impregnated her and his parents as potential plaintiffs. The man would have been unable to sue if the pregnancy was the result of rape, sexual assault or incest. The measure also would have allowed the plaintiffs to sue anybody who facilitated the abortion, with this term originally being undefined. It also would have allowed drug manufacturers to be sued. The legislation received bipartisan pushback, with multiple lawmakers raising privacy concerns. Last year, Louisiana lawmakers classified mifepristone and misoprostol as controlled dangerous substances. Both are used in medication abortions but also have other uses, including to stop life-threatening postpartum hemorrhages. Medical professionals opposed the move, warning the designation could make the drugs more difficult to access in time-sensitive medical crises. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Proposal to protect children from online harassment and 'doxxing' advanced by Maine lawmakers
Jun. 10—AUGUSTA — A proposal to protect children from online harassment and "doxxing" advanced in the Maine Legislature Tuesday. The bill would allow families to file a lawsuit or seek a protection from harassment order if a child is targeted. Lawmakers in the House of Representatives voted 78-69 in support, followed by the Senate voting 18-14 in support. It will face an additional round of votes before it could be sent to Gov. Janet Mills for her consideration. "Doxxing is harmful," said Rep. Melanie Sachs, D-Freeport, the bill's sponsor. "It is hurtful, and no child should be subjected to it." The proposal moves forward after Rep. Laurel Libby, R-Auburn, was censured by the House in February for posting photos on Facebook of a transgender student as she led calls for the state to ban transgender athletes from competing in girls' high school sports. The incident has added to the momentum behind the bill, though it was submitted prior to Libby's post. Sachs said she introduced the bill because of a separate case in 2023 in which an adult was targeting a different student in Freeport through social media posts, website content and podcasts. "I was horrified," said Sachs, who said she was also surprised to learn that there were no Maine laws that mentioned doxxing, which is the knowing or reckless disclosure of personal information that causes physical harm or property damage, constitutes stalking or causes the targeted person to fear for their safety. The bill, LD 537, allows for civil lawsuits against a person who engages in doxxing of a minor and also would allow a minor to obtain a protection from harassment order. Debate on the bill in the House Tuesday was brief. Lawmakers opposed to it said they support the idea but took issue with the way the bill was written. In the Senate, several Republican lawmakers who ended up opposing the measure asked questions and said they were unclear how the proposal differs from what is already allowed in Maine law. Sen. Anne Carney, D-Cape Elizabeth, responded saying that while the bill doesn't provide for any criminal penalties, it does offer an avenue for civil action in cases that might be hard to prosecute and allows for injunctive relief, which is a court order prohibiting someone from doing something. "This is a piece of legislation that won't apply to a lot of cases because the elements of the civil action are hard to establish, and intentionally so. But the reality is children are being coerced in these ways, and we need to protect them," Carney said. At a public hearing in March, lawmakers on the Judiciary Committee heard overwhelming support from students, educators and mental health professionals about the need for the bill. They also received written testimony in support from Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey. Frey said that doxxing is difficult to regulate because of the First Amendment. "But the language in this bill is carefully crafted to anticipate any potential First Amendment concerns and can be defended against a constitutional challenge," he wrote. Several people who testified at the hearing cited Libby's post as a reason the legislation is needed. Libby has defended her actions, saying the state track championship she posted about was a public event and that photos were already posted elsewhere online. She used the student's first name but not their last name. The bill initially approved Tuesday does not cover photos of children if the photos were taken in a public place or previously made public, unless the photos are accompanied by the minor's name or other personal information such as contact information or the address of their home or school. Copy the Story Link
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
YDC victim lawyers slam effort to make fund administrator a political appointee
Lawyers from seven firms representing victims alleging abuse at the former Youth Development Center in Manchester accused Senate budget writers of a 'shameful breach of trust' by seeking to make the settlement fund administrator a political appointee. Rilee leads letter-writing campaign from lawyers representing alleged YDC abuse victims Rus Rilee, an attorney for alleged victims of sexual and physical abuse at the Youth Development Center, wrote a letter with other lawyers criticizing Senate budget writers for moving to turn a settlement fund administrator into a political appointee. The lawyers released a letter they sent to Attorney General John Formella, calling on the Legislature to reject the proposal during negotiations over a compromise state budget over the next week and a half. 'Yet what is most appalling about this proposed change is that it was introduced and voted upon at the 11th hour, without any opportunity for public comment whatsoever, and without the consent and participation of the survivors,' the lawyers wrote. 'This represents a shameful breach of trust by the state, as well as a breach of the state's promise to resolve survivors' claims fairly.' David Vicinanzo with the firm of Nixon and Peabody, and Rus Rilee had organized the campaign as the pair represent more than 80% of the 1,300 alleged victims who have applied for the YDC Settlement Fund to award them damages. The Legislature in 2022 created the settlement fund at the urging of then-Gov. Chris Sununu. John Broderick, a retired Supreme Court chief justice, was the choice to administer the fund after Formella and a group of plaintiff attorneys had recommended his appointment. The Supreme Court confirmed the choice. Near the end of completing its $15.7 billion state budget proposal, the Senate Finance Committee added onto the trailer bill a change regarding the administrator that, if approved, would require he or she be confirmed by the Executive Council. The language would have the administrator serve without a fixed term of office which meant that person would serve 'at the pleasure' of the governor and could be removed at any time without cause. 'By attempting to change the Settlement Fund in a way that denies YDC survivors the promises they relied on when they gave up their rights, the state is engaged in a bait and switch,' the letter said. 'It is trying to get all the benefit of its deal without giving up anything in return. Were any privately owned business to engage in such behavior, your office would rightly investigate and pursue charges for such lawless, bad-faith behavior. Our state must be held to a higher standard.' The other law firms signing the letter were Shaheen & Gordon; Manning, Zimmerman & Oliveira; Stachowske Law; Hunt Law; The Coolidge Law Firm; and Gillis & Bikofsky. YDC settlement funding, payment to lawyers also part of budget debateThe state budget conferees must also work out other issues regarding the YDC Settlement Fund. The Legislature has already approved $165 million for damages. Lawyers have filed applications for as much as $1.4 million in such awards. The House budget would spend another $20 million for damage awards over the next two years. A recent audit from the Legislative Budget Assistant Michael Kane's office concluded long-term settlements already made already commit the state to spend $26 million through June 30, 2027. The Senate-approved budget would also spend $20 million but give the fund the proceeds from the future sale of the YDC property. State officials said the sale of the Sununu Youth Services Center complex could yield up to $80 million. The state is building a smaller, treatment-centered complex for juveniles with behavioral health problems or who committed criminal acts on the grounds of the former Hampstead Hospital. The Senate budget also contains a provision that would not allow lawyers to receive their legal fees before the length of time damages were to be paid out to victims. klandrigan@
