Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
https://www.facebook.com/groups/242320335844414/
Search
S S
Sensible Washington's Not Browse Notes Friends' Notes Pages' Notes My Notes My Drafts Notes About Me Jump to Friend or Page Get Notes via RSS Report
1.) The moratorium violates state law by refusing to allow provisions under ESSB 5073 to establish medical cannabis collective gardens.
2.) RCW 69.50.608 State preemption does not allow for cities to supersede state law, in this case Sec. 403 and Sec 413 of ESSB 5073.
3.) Allowing the moratorium to expire, then proceeding with permitting, collecting license fees, any taxation, or other monies collected constitute possible charges for aiding and abetting the manufacture or distribution of a federally controlled substance, conspiracy, and money laundering.
4.) When considering a moratorium, cities must assess risk in choosing between violating state law vs. federal law.
5.) Since no city employee or elected official has ever been charged for complying with state medical marijuana laws, it is reasonably safe to assume this won't happen, but can.
6.) The likeliest risk for the city would come from a lawsuit from anyone denied their rights to establish a collective garden under state law.
7.) Conclusion: City officials cannot effectively respond to the duties owed their constituency, because of conflict in state vs. federal law. This conflict should stand as motive for them to demand clarity in law, either by using their leverage to ask for a change to the state constitution to provide protections from federal interference, or by asking for outright removal of cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act. Unlike Comment Share