In a
memorandum released by the Department of Justice this week, Attorney General Jeff Sessions instructed federal prosecutors to prioritize
the identification and prosecution of “violent criminals”
under federal law. The directive is likely related to
another memo by Sessions only a few weeks ago, in which he rescinded former President Obama’s
reduction of the use of private prisons. And, while the March 8th memo
does not specifically mention marijuana, it is nonetheless the most worrisome
step the Trump administration has taken against the cannabis industry to date.
According to Sessions, the rationale behind the new policy stems from “crime
rates rising,” along with the DOJ’s “strong evidence
that aggressive prosecutions of federal laws can be effective in combatting
crime.”
The document does not elaborate on what the “strong evidence”
supporting the effectiveness of “aggressive prosecutions”
as a violent-crime deterrent is, nor does it provide any specifics on
who, exactly, should be considered a “violent criminal.” Regardless,
its instructions to federal prosecutors are clear:
“I am today directing the 94 United States Attorney’s Offices
to partner with federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement to specifically
identify the criminals responsible for significant violent crime in their
districts,” Sessions wrote. “Once identified, the [offices]
must ensure that these drivers of violent crime are prosecuted, using
the many tools at a prosecutor’s disposal.”
The second half of the memo contains suggestions as to how prosecutors
can best ensure they “hold [violent criminals] accountable,”
including a bullet-point list of federal criminal statutes “designed
to target violent crime.”
One of those statutes is the
Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, under which the federal government can prosecute racketeering activity
and “corrupt organizations.” Notably, the Act’s definition
of “racketeering activity” includes “any offense involving
… the felonious manufacture, importation, receiving, concealment,
buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in a controlled substance”
– and the criminal penalties can come with mandatory minimum prison
sentences.
In addition, the memo provides alternative ways in which prosecutors can
successfully convict violent criminals – especially where “drugs”
are concerned.
“Of course, federal prosecutors are not limited to using only these
tools, and, in fact, statutes targeting other criminal acts may be equally
effective,” Sessions wrote. “For example, many violent crimes
are driven by drug trafficking and drug trafficking organizations. For
this reason, disrupting and dismantling those drug organizations through
prosecutions under the Controlled Substances Act can drive violent crime
down.”
Under the federal government’s Controlled Substances Act (C.S.A.),
marijuana is classified as a Schedule I substance, which means that it
has no medical value and is highly addictive. And possession of marijuana
– even in states where it is legal – remains illegal under
federal law.
By specifically associating the C.S.A. with “violent crime,”
Sessions’ statement essentially permits – arguably even
mandates – federal prosecutors to go after C.S.A. violators (for example,
marijuana businesses) – regardless of whether or not they are associated with
any aspect of violence or violent crime.
A
statement made by Sessions this past Monday raises similar concerns:
“I believe [marijuana] is an unhealthy practice and current levels
of THC in marijuana are very high compared to what they were a few years
ago . . . We’re seeing real violence around that. Experts are telling
me there’s more violence around marijuana than one would think and
there’s big money involved.”
Sessions has publicly opposed all forms of marijuana legalization or use,
including medical, on multiple occasions. However, his assertion that
marijuana is an especially harmful drug, affiliated with violence (and
therefore with violent criminals), echoes the rationales used to implement
and expand former President Ronald Reagan’s “War on Drugs”
throughout the 1980s.
Given that Sessions was once unsuccessfully nominated for a U.S. District
Attorney position by President Reagan in 1981, those similarities may
be more than coincidence: Sessions’ recent reinvestment into the
federal private prison industry, along with
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer’s comparison of marijuana
legalization to the opioid crisis last month, indicate that an intentional return to the Reagan drug policies may be
at hand – at least insofar as the DOJ is concerned.
In the memo, Sessions stated that “further guidance and support”
was “forthcoming.” At a time when over half of the states
in the country have legalized some form of marijuana, however, whether
those states will welcome – or even adhere to – such “support”
remains to be seen.