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 …

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.

A 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.worldEnglish
    15·
    9 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. Biden even appointed the current head of the DEA, Anne Milgram.

    • gregorum@lemm.eeEnglish
      4·
      9 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.worldEnglish
        11·
        9 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.eeEnglish
          1·
          9 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.worldEnglish
            11·
            9 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 position is even more right-leaning than the ones Republicans put up!

              • BombOmOm@lemmy.worldEnglish
                11·
                9 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.