Among the three subgroups of Americans that need special attention from cannabis law reformers—women, seniors and minorities—recently, John McWhorter, a lecturer at Columbia University and author of many books, and formerly a scholar at Berkeley and the Manhattan Institute, gave an interesting talk on “Race Relations and the War on Drugs” at a Cato Institute seminar in New York.
In future, it would behoove the current public discourse regarding ‘Reefer Madness and Race’ to get Mr. McWhorter and NAACP’s Cailifornia director Alice Huffman on stage together because whether African Americans are conservative or liberal the war on some drugs disproportionately impacts minority communities by readily creating remarkable social, economic and legal disparities that ending Cannabis Prohibition can certainly help to address and outright alleviate.
GOD Bless Alice Huffman
Where in Hell is Michelle?
Black folk don’t want any problems with whites.
~Jim Crow
Soon it will be okay to serve in The Army if you are Gay.
Soon it will be okay to inhale.
GOD BLESS AMERICA
Veterans for Peace White House Civil Disobedience to End War
GOD BLESS AMERICA
It’s amazing how people think it’s unfair that minorities are arrested more for crimes and stuff. The reason isn’t racial profiling, it’s because they commit more crimes. Ghettos teach their inhabitants to commit crime. Unfortunately those bad neighborhoods are populated by minorities. It’s unavoidable.
[Editor’s note: What is really amazing is how ignorant some people can be about race…’they’ (AKA blacks) don’t commit drug ‘crimes’ more than ‘we’ (AKA whites). In fact law enforcement disproportionately harass, arrest, prosecute and incarcerate ‘them’ at rates way beyond ‘their’ population level and drug use rates (ie, in NYC 90% of those arrested for cannabis offenses are minorities!).
Apparently you didn’t listen to either McWhorter or Huffman…as both described that law enforcement can certainly abate and ‘avoid’ targeting minority communities, but only with an end to racist-inspired and implemented laws like those under Cannabis Prohibition.]
This prohibition is based on racism. In the 1930’s the people working to prohibit cannabis linked it to minorities in order to vilify it. Obviously it worked and the result is we now have a President of color and he supports this totally racist law. Go figure. It’s got to be about the money.
More proof that our legal system is corrupted by hemp laws. NARIJUANA is the smoke screen to hide the hemp field. Where do we get most our oil from? We are made to be the greatest funders of terrorism and criminals for wanting to fund American farmers.
I LOVE ALICE HUFFMAN!!! Watching that video I kept yelling at my computer screen, “Tell it, Alice!” It’s so heartening to know there are still voices like Alice’s telling the truth in this country. Alice, you give me hope that this nation may see a brighter future.
Thank you, Alice. You are a blessing to me and to this nation. I wish I could give you a big bear hug.
I am a white male that has a lot of Minority Friends. I find that there are Major Inequalities toward not only towards my friends, but Minorities as a whole sickining. My friends are some of the best people I know. Just sick and tired of being singled out more often than not.
Thank God for Alice Huffman. It seems this video was prior to Nov 2nd. If so why wasn’t it brought out before this? She is a good speaker. I hope to hear more of her in the future.
A Christmas Present
http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2010/12/jury_pool_in_marijuana_case_stages_mutiny_wont_con.php
Jury Pool In Marijuana Case Stages Mutiny; Won’t Convict
“In what could grow into something much bigger in future cases, potential jurors in Missoula County District Court staged a revolt Thursday, taking the law into their own hands and making it clear they would not convict anybody for having less than 2 grams of marijuana.”
Music to my ears, Thank you Montana.
The more blacks and Mescans they can put in prison the more money the prison system can make for the white contractors, investors, etc. I have known alot of Conservatives in my life and for the most part, THEY ARE RACIST. They dont care if Mexicans and Blacks are in prison for Marijuana, in fact, the only reason they act like they give a cheet is because it is politically correct to give off the appearance of bieng anti-racist. IT IS WHAT IT IS!!!
under 2 grams ? It shouldn’t be for under 2 oz.is more like it .
My primary issue with these kinds of race based arguments (i.e. more Latino/Black/whatever males are arrested for marijuana than white males even though more white males smoke marijuana) is that when people hear an argument like this the solution they come up with will NEVER EVER be less enforcement, or even enforcing it less on those racial groups but to STEP UP enforcement against the white males.
To many pro-affirmative action, short sighted types this might seem like a good thing. Yet it is antithetical to the goal we are ALL hoping to achieve. When making these cases please be careful not to throw any one demographic group to the wolves while pleading the cause of another… this is a slippery slope that needs to be tread carefully.
[Editor’s note: The only wolves here are the Prohibitionists. Government should not arrest one race more than another on cannabis-related charges and if the government is arresting minorities at such highly disparate levels, why wouldn’t the majority recognize the problem as such and try to fix it for the betterment of all, not just minorities? Why cater to a dire view that the majority are inherently racist and will not embrace complete solutions?]
It’s sad the direction our nation is going in just because of some stupid drug-war. When will they end the war on drugs?
Only a villain would support Prohibition–and racists certainly fit the bill. Racists support Prohibition precisely because it results in African-Americans going to prison and getting criminal records.
I have observed more African-Americans getting involved with NORML and speaking up for legalization, and that bodes well for the future. We are all in this together, because Prohibition is an evil that harms everyone no matter what their race. People of all races must join together and speak out against evil laws that are designed to make people unemployed, unemployable, damaged in body and mind and dead.
I know its nice to be optimistic about legalization but I have to interject some bad news. Things are about to get worse. Go read the article in the Washington Post article “Monitoring America” (click the link above) about how all the government databases are being tied into a “counter-terrorism” network. The United States is assembling a vast domestic intelligence apparatus to collect information about Americans and this data WILL AND IS being used to target drug users and marijuana is at the top of the list (schedule 1). Our current president is NOT favorable to changing the law and has made this clear on several occasions. We have become a police state and frankly it smacks of “George Orwell 1984”. It is real and it is here and they make too much money using drugs as a platform for federal money and power. I’m sorry but I for one am not optimistic. Witness what has happened recently in Colorado. This state had one of the most liberal attitudes about MMJ and it was codified into the constitution that MMJ was protected. The drug warriors found a way around that and basically usurped the constitutionally protected rights of that states citizens, forcing draconian measures into existence that documents every “legal” purchase and submits this data to the federal authorities. If we don’t succeed soon in reversing the 70 year old prohibition laws, at the federal level, it may be too late.
Lets not make excuses for people hanging out on the street corner of Broad and Lehigh in Philly openly smoking pot and other drugs. Indiscretion and other criminal infractions make it more likely for a pot smoker in a disadvantaged neighborhood to be arrested. Please get in your car and drive down “to the ghetto” and see for yourself. I went to prison for 9 months for drug related charges and you know what I saw? The people in there were guilty. Sadly many minorities were in there for a variety of reasons. It wasn’t always “just” marijuana. It was pot and driving without a license. Pot and disorderly conduct. Pot and… you get the point. Its more likely for these are petty infractions to attract police attention in a poor neighborhood with higher crime rates.
But hey, as long as we can muddle another conversation as much as we can with race so we can separate people into groups and treat them differently in legislation, the better right?
I have said this a million times and I have no plans to stop until each person in this country hears what they can do to change this wayward government. The only way to change the laws on cannabis and remove the wayward government’s constructive fraud is to use Jury Nullification and Jury Lawlessness to force this change upon the government. The wayward government doesn’t give a rat’s ass about our freedom nor our liberty. We must now ignor thier laws on cannabis but the uses of the Jury! Check the American Court history in the South, you will find that Jury Nullification was used by the KKK. It is time to use this very legal step to force change upon the government, our founding father’s gave this to the People to fight off tyranys like we have today. Lets see some education on being a Jury of one’s Peers. time to check mate this bullshit law once and for all times.
It starts with 2 grams in Montana, 2 grams in New Jersey, 2 grams in Florida. Only 2 grams toppled The Beast.
We The People rebel, refuse this corrupted system.
and so another chapter unfolds,
In the next chapter, where do you find your grace and final peace?
RE: JS on Dec 20th, 2010 at 6:51 pm
I thought the very same thing when I first read the news article at Alternet, and then referenced the original Washington Post article.
The Patriot Act(s), the FISA|Telecom Immunity Act, the Military Commissions Act, and all of the other Executive Orders and tacked-on “security measures” in Congress, whether under GW Bush or BH Obama have increased the power of the Federal government as an all-intrusive police state.
Since even minor crimes can now be considered “terrorist acts”, the merging of the War of Drugs and the War of Terror as functions of “defense of der fatherland” has proceeded unabated. The DEA continues raiding MMJ in States where it is legal, and the goal isn’t always to make arrests but to seize assets (money & equipment & intel (doctors, patient lists, etc.)), in spite of AG Holder’s assurances to the contrary.
It is no use to continue to make excuses for the Obama regime as possibly not being in effective control of the the DEA — his selection of Drug Czar and head of DEA speak otherwise. While we breathed a collective sigh of relief when the draconian, heavy-handed GW Bush regime ended, it has been replaced with an even more repressive, albeit devious, jack-booted Obama regime. The fascist Bush regime has been replaced by the (more erudite) and even more fascist Obama regime.
And the Federal government’s War on People, more specifically the War on Minorities, continues. The cannabis “Big Lie” continues. The Federal government’s War on the Constitution continues. Obama, the former Constitutional Law scholar, most resembles the Mobster Lawyer meme — no better way to destroy a thing but from the inside …
I am a type 1 diabetic this is not on the subject but i live in Nebraska. I have been placed on probation and had to discontinue all use of marijuana, since this time I have had to triple my use of insulin, which concerns me because of hardening of arteries with insulin injection use. I have had diabetes for 35 years and believe that marijuana has many uses for medical purposes. Moreover, I have abused legal drugs that the government says is “ok” for public consumption. I have never wrecked a car or been in any kind of trouble because of the use of marijuana, and is also a positive remedy to insulin injections. Just to inform the public the lumber industry is responsible for the illegalization of marijuana. There are so many positive aspects of marijuana and our government refutes it. As listed in the Constitution of the United States of America when the government becomes unjust or unfair to the greater good of our land we the people are allowed to dismantle the government and reform a new one for the greater good. I love this country but money has become the main issue for all government not the greater good.
[Paul Armentano responds: You may wish to read up on some of the latest science pertaining to cannabinoids and the treatment of diabetes and its symptoms here: http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7005.%5D
I have several minority friends that DONT even smoke so this is all lies its just a choice people want you can be purple or blue .What if purple an blue people smoked what would the excuse be then
I say to those who say the government has stolen our constitution that they are right in that assumtion. I would further say our liberty is in our hearts just as it was in our founding fathers. Liberty lies in our hearts and there like yesterday it can not be taken from us. Only We the People can let it die or thrive their in our hearts. If it thrives there no laws, no court, no congress, no dam layers, no legislation can remove/scam us from it. If We the People let liberty die in our hearts then no laws, no court, no congress, no dam layers, no legislation can save it for US. Only by our united actions as We the People can we take our liberty, freedom, and pursuit of happiness and our country back from a very wayward government. We the People still have power, it reside in US and not those we purt into government office as our employees. We pay the bills to keep their lights on and the water running. We are the providers of the services they need and depend on. We are the Country! We need only to act as one and put them in their respective place, under the Will of the People, after the citizen population and never before. Nullify the laws that go against the Will of the People and this government will grow hears to hear US. If We the People act as one our Will shall be felt globally.
When is enough, enough? When will we say when? And stand up as One Nation against our wayward employees?
Can Jury Nullification End The War On Drugs?
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/12/can-jury-nullification-end-the-war-on-drugs.html
http://criminaljustice.change.org/blog/view/montana_jurors_refuse_to_be_complicit_in_the_drug_war
http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/2010/dec/20/angry_jurors_refuse_convict_mari
Just say NO
President Obama is preparing an Executive Order for “Indefinite Detention,” something he campaigned massively against: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/21/AR2010122104598.html
It will not be long before this is used against those charged for drug allegations.
That’s some messed up change we believed in. We better make this right in 2012 and vote 3rd party.
Editor– your position is hopelessly naive. To Law Enforcement and MOST of the mainstream media the marijuana issue is a joke while the race issue is deadly serious. If you really think saying “look how many more blacks than whites we arrest” will TRULY lead to the arrest of less blacks rather than the arrest of more whites… you have more faith in humanity than I do. Not only that– you have faith in people to be critical thinkers rather than just sheep.
Look around– society, and especially the government, would rather spread the misery around rather than reduce it anywhere.
[Editor’s note: Hopelessly naive or respectful of the power of rightness? If you don’t believe in rightness, then one might as well crawl into a six foot hole in the ground right now. Thankfully, humans have the ability to both repent and act in rational ways, which is better to aspire too than humankind’s dark side. Right?!]
@ Krause and editor
Krause is right, but to a point…
If you look around major cities you see a lot of minority’s in the inner city and because the larger amount in a smaller area it’s easier to watch them resulting in more crimes caught in that area and the odds are already stacked that it would be a minority offender, but if you go further out where there is not ghetto’s etc. you get into the burbs, where the population is spread out which is also more diverse but statistically less crimes cause you can’t watch them as close, ie: look at 10 people 10 foot away see who does something then look at 10 people 100 foot away it’s harder to see the “something”. I agree that some police do profile, sometimes it’s just like second nature to them after so many years in inner city’s seeing the same thing over and over, I don’t agree with it by any means but it’s a sad but true fact. I’m willing to bet this would be true with any race/nationality if you flipped it around (“them” meaning everyone for clarification)
“Jury nullification” means that a jury finds a defendant innocent because the law itself is unjust, or is unjust in a particular application, and so should not be applied.
Does an American Jury have the power and the right to nullify the law? Is nullification a violation of the principle of the rule of law? Yes, and no, While it is common today for court judges to tell prospective jurors that they must apply the law as the court judge gives it to them and that jurors business is simply to determine whether the defendant has broken the law or not. But that is not the founding father’s intention by the right to trial by jury described in the Bill of Rights. As Thomas Jefferson said in 1782;
“…it is usual for the jurors to decide the fact, and to refer the law arising on it to the decision of the judges. But this division of the subject lies with their discretion only. And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact.”
Thomas Jefferson is not talking about nullification per se, but about the power the jury has by taking the interpretation of the law into its own hands at trail.
We have this District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals case of the Unites States v. Dougherty, (1972), which said,
“The jury has an unreviewable and irreversible power…to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge…The pages of history shine on instances of the jury’s exercise of its prerogative to disregard uncontradicted evidence and instructions of the judge; for example, acquittals under the fugitive slave law.”
Does jury nullification contribute to, rather than mitigate, such judicial misbehavior? No, because it is part of the system of checks and balances itself — a check against the bias of judges and the irrationality and corruption that creeps steadily into the law, as irresponsible legislators and judges think about things other than justice. Jury nullification is not a violation of the rule of law because it is part of the rule of law.
The jury is the last line of defense, the last check and balance, against tyrannical government, if, that is, it is charged with determining the justice of a case and not just with blindly applying the law as given by a judge.
The interpretation of the law cannot be trusted to those with the power to enforce it also. The separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive in the federal government was not sufficient to prevent this, as
Jefferson’s maxim that only trial by jury can hold a government to the “principles of its constitution.” Since, as a matter of fact, a jury can practice nullification even if the judge tells it that it can’t, because its deliberations are secret and unrecorded, trial by jury is still, as long as jurors are brave and informed, one of the most important protections for freedom. Most Americans on jury duty blindly obey the judge, but occasionally feelings run high enough in important cases for juries to ignore the judge and do the right thing.
If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognize the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by a judge, and contrary to the evidence…If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision.4th Circuit Court of Appeals, United States v. Moylan, 1969
We the People of these United States of America insist and demand that the present elected government employees return of our Country’s Constitution to and upon the American People FORTHWITH!
1. “The Constitution is a written instrument, as such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now.” South Carolina vs United States 199 U.S. 437, 448 (1905).
2. “Every word appears to have been weighted with the utmost deliberation and its effect to have been fully understood.” Wright vs United States, 302 U.S. 583 (1938)
3. “Where rights are secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.” Miranda vs Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491.
4. “When any court violates the clean and unambiguous language of the Constitution, a FRAUD is perpetrated and no one is bound to obey it.” State vs Sutton Minn. (147, 65 NW 262, 30 L.R.A. 630 Am. St. 459)
We as Citizens of these United States have an absolute U.S. Constitutional Right to invoke Jury Nullification upon the any Court in the union as the last line of defense against a tyrannical wayward government, it’s unjustly applied laws, and protection against a corrupt legislative body. It is every US Citizen’s duty to defend our liberty and freedom by the use of Article 9 of the United States Bill of Rights.
How do We the People of this fine country take back our liberty and freedom from a tyrannical wayward government? How do We the People get fair representation when our Legislators have been bought by corp. lobbyist and corrupted away from our nation’s constitutional values and principles? How do We the People get justice or a redress of grievance from any court when the lawyers have destroyed and corrupted the very rule of law? We the People are left with only one intact last line of peaceful defense to protect ourselves from the tyrants, “Jury Nullification” which means that a jury finds a defendant innocent because the law itself is unjust, or is unjust in a particular application, and so should not be applied upon the Citizen.
Dose the American Jury in criminal cases before the Court have the power and the Constitutional Right to nullify the law? Is Jury Nullification a violation of the principle of the rule of law? The Answer is both, yes, and no. While it is common today for court judges to tell their prospective jurors that they must apply the law as the court judge gives it to the jury and that jurors business is simple, it is to determine whether the defendant has broken the law or not. But that is not the founding father’s intention at all when they wrote the right to trial by jury clause in the 9th Article of the Bill of Rights. In 1782 Constitutional founding father Thomas Jefferson said,“…it is usual for the jurors to decide the fact, and to refer the law arising on it to the decision of the judges. But this division of the subject lies with their discretion only. And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact.”
Thomas Jefferson is not talking about nullification per se, but about the power the jury has by taking the interpretation of the law into its own hands at trail.
We have this District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals case of the Unites States v. Dougherty, (1972), which said,
“The jury has an unreviewable and irreversible power…to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge…The pages of history shine on instances of the jury’s exercise of its prerogative to disregard uncontradicted evidence and instructions of the judge; for example, acquittals under the fugitive slave law.”Does Jury Nullification contribute to, rather than mitigate, such judicial misbehavior? No, because it is part of the system of checks and balances itself — a check against the bias of judges and the irrationality and corruption that creeps steadily into the law, as irresponsible legislators and judges think about things other than justice. Jury nullification is not a violation of the rule of law because it is part of the rule of law.
The jury is the last line of defense, the last check and balance, against tyrannical government, if, that is, it is charged with determining the justice of a case and not just with blindly applying the law as given by a judge.
The interpretation of the law cannot be trusted to those with the power to enforce it also. The separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive in the federal government was not sufficient to prevent this, as
Jefferson’s maxim that only trial by jury can hold a government to the “principles of its Constitution.” Since, as a matter of fact, a jury can practice nullification even if the judge tells it that it can’t, because its deliberations are secret and unrecorded, trial by jury is still, as long as jurors are brave and informed, one of the most important protections for freedom. Most Americans on jury duty today blindly obey the court judge, but occasionally feelings run high enough in important cases for juries to ignore the judge and do the right thing.
(4th Circuit Court of Appeals, United States v. Moylan, 1969)
“If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognize the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by a judge, and contrary to the evidence…If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision.”You as an American Juror are not obligated to enforce bad laws! You as an American Juror do not have to send your fellow citizens to jail or prison who you don’t think deserve to go there, regardless of what the prosecution says, regardless of the written law, and regardless of any court judge who tells you otherwise. You are not beholden to them, it is they who is beholden to you and every other citizens of American.
“If the legislator clearly misinterprets a constitutional provision, the frequent repetition of the wrong will not create a right.” Amos vs Mosley, 74 Fla. 555; 77 So. 619. (Congress)
There are too many factors to the whole drug war/disproportionate minority prosecution debacle to boil it down to “we need to arrest more white people”, or “we need to arrest fewer black people”. Although I do not view dealing or using drugs as being a crime, the law does. As such, it is more efficient to concentrate your crime-fighting efforts where there is the most crime. Crimes are committed by people, so the best place to look for higher concentrations of crime is amongst higher concentrations of people. As minorities tend to be lower skilled, (or at least paid less), they tend to live in areas that cost the least to live in (inner cities). Inner-city tenements tend to consist of highly concentrated human domains, therefore are the most likely to host high concentrations of crime. With this knowledge in mind, is it really such a surprise that the majority of inmates tend to be minorities? Meaning that if the majority of people living in the inner-cities were white, the majority of those arrested would be white.
Just the same, I don’t see how arresting more white people, or trying to tax those who’ve made something of their lives into needing to live in inner-city dwellings will help. I think the best solution would be to legalize drugs. That way there would no longer be any pretense for much of what our police consider law enforcement to be…
-Oz
[Editor’s note: 1) Law enforcement subjectively chooses where to employ their limited resources, in doing so, they CHOOSE to arrest a hugely disproportionate number of minorities to whites. 2) If law enforcement arrested and incarcerated (and therein terrorized) a disproportionate number of whites to that of minorities, they’d have pitchforked mobs (with their lawyers in tow) outside of every precinct screaming for ‘justice’.
Some have argued that such would be one of the best ways to shorten the war on some drugs: bring the government and its war into their homes, neighborhoods, cars and pockets…which is probably why the government does not really target whites in the war on some drugs, because if they did, they’d lose the support of the political and business elite.]
“the power of rightness”? That IS naive… Winning is what matters now, not some hollow moral victory. But I do understand those people obsessed with racial politics will find a way to interject that point into anything & everything. At the end of the day I care zero percent about the racial aspect– it doesn’t encourage me to spend more money or get out the word. I disagree with this article based on points I’ve already made.
Please feel free to pander to people who give a crap about tying race into their cannabis politics. To me they are now and will forever be two distinct issues.
[Editor’s note: So, in other words “I’m white and I don’t care”. Thanks for being part of the problem as much as the folks who favor arresting cannabis consumers, who also don’t care about the data, immorality and financial costs to all of targeting minorities on drug-related crimes.]
What are black people thinking now? What do women really think about this issue?
I like your approach and would sign up for your newsletter any day.