logo
Marijuana legalization hits roadblocks after years of expansion

Marijuana legalization hits roadblocks after years of expansion

Yahoo15-04-2025

A recreational marijuana user smokes weed in the Bushwick section of the Brooklyn borough of New York City. This year, marijuana advocates are playing defense in multiple state legislatures. ()
As every state surrounding Idaho legalized marijuana, state Rep. Bruce Skaug started to view it as inevitable that the Gem State would follow suit.
Not anymore.
Skaug, a Republican, supported two bills this legislative session taking aim at marijuana use: one to impose a mandatory minimum $300 fine for possession and another that would take away the right of voters to legalize pot at the ballot box.
He believes other states are starting to regret liberalizing marijuana use, because of potential health concerns and lackluster revenues from marijuana sales.
'Looking around at other states that have legalized marijuana, it's not improved their states as a place to raise a family, to do business,' he said. 'It just hasn't come through with the promises that we heard years ago for those states.'
Idaho's not alone. After years of expanding legal access, lawmakers in several states this year have targeted marijuana in various ways.
To help close budget gaps, officials in Maryland, Michigan and New Jersey have proposed raising marijuana taxes. Health concerns have pushed lawmakers in states including Colorado and Montana to attempt to cap the level of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, the primary psychoactive component in cannabis, in marijuana products sold at dispensaries. And some lawmakers have even tried to roll back voter-approved medical marijuana programs.
Looking around at other states that have legalized marijuana, it's not improved their states.
– Idaho Republican state Rep. Bruce Skaug
'This year in particular, we're playing defense a lot more than we have in the past,' said Morgan Fox, political director at the advocacy group National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML.
To some extent, he said, the pendulum on marijuana liberalization is swinging back. But Fox said recent legislative efforts are not indicative of waning public support for legalization. He said prohibitionist politicians have been emboldened to act against the will of voters.
Polling from the Pew Research Center has found little change in support for legalization in recent years: 57% of U.S. adults say that marijuana should be legal for medical and recreational purposes.
Colorado and Washington state began allowing recreational marijuana sales in 2014. Today, 24 states and the District of Columbia allow recreational sales, and 39 states and the district have sanctioned medical marijuana.
'There's been this air of inevitability for a while,' said Daniel Mallinson, an associate professor of public policy at Penn State Harrisburg who researches marijuana legalization.
With medical marijuana programs operational in most states, Mallinson said there is pressure to expand recreational marijuana, especially given uncertainty over whether the federal government will act on the issue.
'Recreational is still in its takeoff period,' he said.
But he acknowledged that new medical research has raised concerns among some lawmakers. One study published in January found a link between heavy marijuana use and memory function. Other studies have found a higher risk of heart attacks among people who use cannabis.
Mallinson said the research on marijuana is 'very young,' as many institutions are wary of conducting clinical trials because of federal drug laws. The federal government classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug — the same classification as drugs such as heroin and ecstasy.
'There's a mixture of science and politics in this area,' he said. ' … I could imagine seeing in these really conservative states like Idaho, you know, this kind of a backlash, like, we don't want this here at all, so we're going to try to put up barriers to even considering it.'
In Idaho, Skaug said he pursued the state's new mandatory $300 fine for marijuana possession to bring more consistency to how the state handles marijuana cases.
While Idaho law previously allowed fines of up to $1,000, he said judges had issued fines as low as $2.50.
Pot smell and safety concerns ignite disputes over public smoking
'So that wasn't the right message. That's not even worth the time to write the ticket,' he said. 'So it's not that we're going to arrest more people for misdemeanor possession of marijuana, but there will be more citations in the amount of $300.'
Skaug also backed a proposed constitutional amendment that would give only the legislature the power to legalize marijuana and other drugs. That question will go to voters next year.
Skaug said he's worried outside groups would influence a public vote to legalize marijuana by pouring millions into a ballot initiative campaign. If the amendment he supports passes, it wouldn't ban pot — it would leave legalization up to lawmakers.
'If the evidence comes back that says marijuana or some other drug is positive in the medical community and a good thing, then the legislature can legalize that,' he said. 'But we're going to leave it with the legislature.'
Advocates have been trying without success to get enough signatures to put a medical marijuana question on the ballot for more than a decade in Idaho, said Democratic state Rep. Ilana Rubel. The House minority leader, Rubel said she hit 'a firm brick wall' in pitching medical marijuana legislation in Boise, where GOP lawmakers privately tell her they don't want to look soft on crime.
She views the proposed amendment as another example of the GOP-controlled statehouse being out of touch with regular Idahoans. She said the state's closed Republican primaries have led to more conservative stances from lawmakers.
'I think this is one of those issues where there is just a huge, huge gap between what the people of Idaho want and what they're going to get from their legislature,' she said.
A 2022 poll commissioned by the Idaho Statesman found that nearly 70% of Idahoans supported legalizing medical marijuana.
But even discussions about medical marijuana are shut down in Idaho because of concerns about problems with drugs in liberal cities such as Portland, Oregon, and Seattle, Rubel said.
'A very large number of red states have legalized medical marijuana, and they haven't seen any of the parade of horribles that has been presented whenever we introduce this idea,' she said. 'There's just a lot of hysteria and paranoia about where this is going to lead that is really not tied to reality.'
In several states, lawmakers have aimed to restrict the potency of marijuana products.
Montana state Sen. Greg Hertz, a Republican, said he doesn't want to end recreational marijuana sales, which voters approved in 2020. But he said today's products are much stronger than people may realize.
Drug decriminalization stumbled in Oregon. Other states are taking note.
'People were voting for Woodstock weed, not this new high-THC marijuana,' he said.
A bill he sponsored this year would have banned sales of recreational marijuana products, including flower and edibles, exceeding THC levels of 15%. Montana currently allows up to 35% THC in flower, with no limit on other products.
That legislation stalled, but Hertz said he plans to pitch a similar measure during Montana's next legislative session in 2027.
A separate bill reducing the state's dosage of THC for edibles just passed the legislature last week. The measure, which now heads to Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte, would change the individual dosage limit on edibles such as gummies from 10 milligrams to 5 milligrams.
Hertz said the state rushed into its liberalization of marijuana without fully understanding the consequences.
He pointed to state health department data showing rising emergency room visits related to marijuana and dozens of cannabis poisoning cases in recent years — including 36 involving children 10 years or younger.
'We probably opened up the barn door too wide,' he said. 'I'm just trying to slow this down a little bit.'
With many states facing gaping budget holes this year, marijuana has proven a popular target from Democrats and Republicans looking to raise revenues without across-the-board tax increases.
Maryland Democratic Gov. Wes Moore in January proposed hiking the cannabis tax from 9% to 15% to help close the state's $3 billion budget hole. In March, lawmakers agreed to a budget framework that would raise the state marijuana tax to 12%.
Ohio Republican Gov. Mike DeWine proposed doubling marijuana taxes from 10% to 20% — a notion that has so far faced opposition in the legislature.
The Colorado psychedelic mushroom experiment has arrived
In Michigan, Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer proposed a new 32% wholesale tax on marijuana growers to help fund road improvements. That tax would be on top of the 10% excise tax on recreational marijuana and the state's 6% sales tax.
Whitmer said it would close a loophole that has exempted the marijuana industry from wholesale tax, which is applied to cigarettes and other tobacco products. Michigan lawmakers, split sharply along partisan lines, have until Sept. 30 to approve a state budget.
Lawmakers in some states have even taken aim at voter-approved medical marijuana programs this year.
In South Dakota, a bill that failed in committee would have gutted the medical marijuana program overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2020.
In November, Nebraska voters widely supported ballot measures to roll out a medical marijuana program — winning majority support in each of the state's 49 legislative districts.
But setting up the regulatory scheme has proven controversial, the Nebraska Examiner reported. Lawmakers are pursuing legislation that would define which medical conditions and forms of cannabis would qualify.
Medical marijuana advocates say overly strict rules would hamper the program and undermine the will of voters. But some legislators insist on limitations to prevent widespread access to marijuana.
'We make it legal for anything and everything, it's essentially recreational marijuana at that point,' state Sen. Rick Holdcroft, a Republican, told the Nebraska Examiner this month.
Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Nancy Mace said 'due process is for citizens.' Here's who it's really for
Nancy Mace said 'due process is for citizens.' Here's who it's really for

Yahoo

time30 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Nancy Mace said 'due process is for citizens.' Here's who it's really for

In early June 2025, Republican U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina wrote an X post (archived) that read: "Due process is for citizens." Her comment had been viewed more than 2.4 million times as of this writing and had amassed more than 6,500 likes. The same claim has appeared in multiple X posts. In a similar tone, in May 2025, another X user wrote: "Due process is for citizens, not invaders." (X user @NancyMace) In short, due process is the legal principle that the government must follow fair procedures before depriving a person of life, liberty or property. It serves as a safeguard against arbitrary actions by the state, ensuring that people are treated justly under the law. For a more detailed explanation, see our full breakdown in this article on former President Bill Clinton's 1996 immigration law. While Mace's post did not explicitly say that due process protections are, or should be, limited to only U.S. citizens, her replies below the post reinforced that interpretation. However, the U.S. Constitution protects all "persons," not just citizens, under the due-process clauses of the Fifth and 14th amendments. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that these protections apply to anyone physically present in the United States regardless of citizenship or immigration status. An MSNBC article on the topic similarly concluded that Mace's "implication … that noncitizens don't get that protection" was "incorrect." The South Carolina representative doubled down on her stance in the replies below her post, suggesting that noncitizens should not be entitled to due-process protections in the U.S. For example, when one X user wrote, "The Constitution doesn't say 'only citizens.' Due process applies to persons — that includes non-citizens. That's settled law," Mace replied by saying: "Skip due process coming in, don't expect it going out. Citizens first!" Other replies further suggested she believed only U.S. citizens should be entitled to such protections (archived, archived, archived). (X users @FJBIDEN_22 and @NancyMace) These exchanges were not the first time Mace commented on due process. In late May 2025, she weighed in on the principle in response to a federal judge's decision to block the deportation of eight noncitizens convicted of violent crimes. The day before U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy issued a 17-page order in which he emphasized that "the Court recognizes that the class members at issue here have criminal histories. But that does not change due process," Mace criticized the ruling, telling Fox News (archived): "They didn't want due process on their way in illegally, they shouldn't get due process on their way out." However, the representative's comments about due process contradicted remarks she made about the principle in the past. In February 2023, Mace wrote on X (archived): "Everyone deserves the right to due process. Even those we vehemently oppose." (X user @NancyMace) Snopes has reached out to Mace for comment on whether she maintains that due-process protections should apply only to U.S. citizens and how she reconciles that view with her 2023 statement. We will update this article if we receive a response. The U.S. Constitution's guarantee of due process appears in the Fifth and 14th amendments, both of which state that no person should be deprived "of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." As shown, the language uses "person," not "citizen," with regard to due-process protections. Further, the Supreme Court has repeatedly interpreted that due-process protections apply to everyone within U.S. borders regardless of citizenship or immigration status. In Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel Mezei (1953) the Court emphasized (Page 212) that "aliens who have once passed through [U.S.] gates, even illegally, may be expelled only after proceedings conforming to traditional standards of fairness-encompassed in due process of law." Similarly, in cases such as Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) and earlier decisions dating back more than a century, the Supreme Court made clear that the government cannot detain or deport people arbitrarily. In the 2001 case, the Court underscored that "the Due Process Clause applies to all persons within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent." In simple words, noncitizens must be given fair procedures, such as notice or a "credible fear interview," before being deprived of their liberty. The Supreme Court expressed the same view in the case of Reno v. Flores (1993), stating: "It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings." This was not the first time Snopes addressed a claim regarding Mace. For instance, in late May 2025, we investigated a rumor that she ordered staffers to create burner accounts to promote her online. Meanwhile, earlier in June 2025, we also fact-checked a rumor about whether the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, signed by Clinton, allowed deportation without due process. "327K Views · 15K Reactions | Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) Responds to Arguments That Illegal Immigrants Convicted of Heinous Crimes Deserve Due Process after a Judge Blocks a Deportation Flight to South Sudan | 'They Didn't Want Due Process on Their Way in Illegally, They Shouldn't Get Due Process on Their Way Out.' Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) Responds to Arguments... | by Fox News | Facebook." 2022, Accessed 6 June 2025. "U.S. Constitution - Fifth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | | Library of Congress." 15 Dec. 1791, Constitution Annotated. "U.S. Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | | Library of Congress." 9 July 1868, Deng, Grace. "Did Nancy Mace Order Staffers to Create Burner Accounts to Promote Her Online? Here's What We Know." Snopes, 30 May 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. Dunbar, Marina. "Court Halts Trump Administration's Effort to Send Eight Men to South Sudan." The Guardian, The Guardian, 23 May 2025, Gabbatt, Adam. "Group Stranded with Ice in Djibouti Shipping Container after Removal from US." The Guardian, The Guardian, 6 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. " 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993)." Justia Law, Rubin, Jordan. "Due Process Is Not Limited to Citizens, Contrary to Nancy Mace's Claim." MSNBC, 4 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. Wrona, Aleksandra. "Bill Clinton Did Not Sign Law in 1996 Allowing Deportation without Due Process." Snopes, 5 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001)." Justia Law,

California lawmakers condemn violence amid anti-immigration raid protests
California lawmakers condemn violence amid anti-immigration raid protests

Yahoo

time30 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

California lawmakers condemn violence amid anti-immigration raid protests

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — Central Valley lawmakers spoke out against violent protesters as California residents, including those in Bakersfield, continue to protest against immigration enforcement. In a statement released on Wednesday, Assemblywoman Dr. Jasmeet Bains said while Americans have the right to protest forcefully but peacefully, she has no tolerance for 'masked crowds that loot stores and burn the American flag.' Bains went on to criticize politicians who interfere with law enforcement, pointing out President Donald Trump in particular. Protesters gather at downtown Liberty Bell for 2nd time as fear lingers over immigration raids 'A president who pardons felons who assault police officers should have kept his nose out of law enforcement's business,' Bains said in her statement, referring back to the Jan. 6 rioters pardoned by Trump in January. 'I don't want to see another TV interview with Trump, the Governor, or any other politician acting tough,' Bains said. 'Let our law enforcement leaders speak, give them what they need to restore order, and then get out of their way.' Protests against ICE agents and immigration enforcement activities have been roiling through Los Angeles, where Trump recently deployed the National Guard and the Marines in response. While there are no reports of immigration enforcement officers in Kern County as of June 11, a widespread fear took over the community in recent months when a sudden immigration raid in January targeted farm workers and laborers in the community. Since Monday, Bakersfield residents have protested against ICE raids in solidarity with L.A. On Tuesday, Congressman David Valadao announced his joining of a Republican delegation to introduce a resolution formally condemning the riots in L.A. Valadao shared similar words of opposition to violence and vandalism as Bains, but also urged Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to 'restore peace' to California's streets through the resolution. 'Standing for law and order should be common sense, and ICE should continue to prioritize the removal of known criminals from our country,' Valadao said in a press release. Congressman Vince Fong heavily criticized Newsom and the protesters in L.A., calling Newsom's refusal to allow local law enforcement agencies to cooperate with federal agents 'disgraceful.' In an interview with NewsNation, Fong accused Newsom of refusing to protect federal agents and buildings, saying downtown L.A. is 'under siege' due to the protests. Never miss a story: Make your homepage 'You have search warrants that are being issued, approved by judges, arrests are being made on illegal immigrants that have committed heinous crimes, and the governor of California is opposed to that and won't allow the cooperation of state and local law enforcement to work with federal officials? I mean, this is the height of irresponsibility,' Fong said. Fong said he wants to see the 'progressive groups that are hellbent on destroying downtown L.A.' get arrested and be held accountable for damages. 'The number one priority for the government on the federal level, on the state level and on the local level is to protect communities,' Fong said. 'And if the local government and the governor of California won't do it, then someone has to, and the president is stepping up.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Schumer says 16 Republicans have ‘discomfort' with green tax credit rollbacks
Schumer says 16 Republicans have ‘discomfort' with green tax credit rollbacks

Yahoo

time30 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Schumer says 16 Republicans have ‘discomfort' with green tax credit rollbacks

Democrats are working to convince some 16 of their Republican colleagues to oppose the GOP's policy bill because of its rollbacks to climate-friendly tax credits, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday. 'We have a group … of seven or eight Democrats who are talking to their Republican colleagues … and we're getting some vibes that people realize this bill went too far, and we're hoping they can all go together to John Thune and to Crapo and say, 'Change it. We can't be for it the way it is,'' Schumer told reporters Wednesday, referring to Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho). 'We have a list of 16 Republican senators who have shown some discomfort with this, and that's the main group we're focused on,' he added. The version of the 'big, beautiful bill' passed by House Republicans makes major cuts to tax credits for climate-friendly energy sources, making it so that any project that is not already under construction within 60 days of the law's enactment is ineligible for the tax credits. This provision, among others, is expected to bar many projects from eligibility and could ultimately lead to less low-carbon energy development. At least some Republicans have publicly expressed skepticism of a rapid end to the credits, with Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Thom Tillis (N.C.), John Curtis (Utah) and Jerry Moran (Kan.) warning against a full repeal. However, House Republicans who have championed the cuts are pushing for them to stay in their current form, with members of the Freedom Caucus board recently saying it will 'not accept' changes that water down the cuts. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store