Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In just a few short weeks, many dispensaries in Colorado will began selling legal cannabis (marijuana) to anyone over the age of 21.
Will this application of the new law have any significant effect on New Mexico?
I think it's somewhat likely that we'll see some interesting developments regarding the drug trade/prices in NM and some issues with the NM/CO border.
Would it be in the state's best interest to crack down on New Mexicans bringing home legally purchased MJ from the north, or to relax the laws for possession in smaller amounts?
Prior to Colorado's law change, I believe there was always a lot coming from that direction.
It's not up to the state to relax the laws for possession. The federal laws are the ones the government (and by extension police) chooses to enforce. It is within the legislature's power to follow Washington or Colorado's lead (they're going at it in slightly different ways, so we'd either choose one, a hybrid, or go our own way) on the somewhat unconstitutional but surprisingly effective decriminalization laws they've passed.
With a right-wing Texan in the governor's mansion, we'll probably have to wait for a change in leadership to see much action in this direction; our roundhouse representatives may lean left but they still have a substantial I'm-old-and-all-drugs-should-be-illegal-except-the-ones-I'm-prescribed constituency.
It would be interesting to see a blue NM county try to do what those states have done; the red counties wouldn't be able to derail something on the county level, and since it's flouting federal jurisdiction to begin with, may be just as effective. Am thinking Santa Fe, Taos, or Doña Ana counties, though Colfax (since it's basically already Colorado) or Bernalillo counties may be possibilities too.
I think many New Mexicans would favor following Colorado's path (based on my experiences living here my whole life), and Colorado being so close might put some pressure on... The only thing I see happening soon for reasons Zoidberg already laid out would be a large number of New Mexicans going to Colorado for special vacations, which I already know of people planning to head up that way for that reason. Maybe the state will see the revenue leaving our coffers and that could make them act? I don't see it happening, though, at least not as long as Susana runs things.
I certainly hope that New Mexico does not follow Colorado's "lead." One can argue the merits or evils of marijuana all day long, but the legal reality is that the Colorado law (which was passed by popular referendum where legal scrutiny prior to enactment was practically nil) absolutely is federally unconstitutional. Why? It clearly violates Artcile VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, quoted below with my emphasis in italics:
Quote:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
All it will take is someone to mount a legal challenge to the Constitutionality of the Colorado marijuana law in the Federal Courts, and it will be "game over" for the Colorado marijuana legalization. What is despicable is that the President and the Attorney General of the United States are blatantly violating their Oath of Office to "uphold the Laws and the Constitution of the United States" when they have refused to challenge the Colorado law in the Federal Courts themselves. I guess that they have taken the tact that violating the law is OK as long as it's popular. That's a slippery slope that will eventually lead the country to a very bad place.
All it will take is someone to mount a legal challenge to the Constitutionality of the Colorado marijuana law in the Federal Courts, and it will be "game over" for the Colorado marijuana legalization.
A court would first have to take the case (they have discretion not to) and then rule. And then, enforce somehow.
Further, the state law as I understand it isn't countering the rule of federal law ("legalizing it"), merely its enforcement by state- and local-funded law enforcement ("decriminalizing it" at the state level). Just as it's illegal for undocumented Mexicans to work in Oregon, the state of Oregon doesn't empower its police to arrest them on that basis alone.
I'm relatively certain a Colorado-based DEA or FBI agent could make an arrest of someone in Colorado on low-rent drug possession charges, though this seldom happens. Non-prescription drug smugglers, on the other hand, are still filling Denver's federal courts with cases, though overall aggregate criminal case filings appear to have dropped significantly in the past couple of years (saving taxpayers a lot of money in the process).
Most people here probably aren't aware that New Mexico's federal court district is one of the busiest in the country, putting LOTS of people behind bars, mostly for drug offenses. NM feds filed 2,817 criminal cases in 2012 (Colorado feds, by comparison, filed only 491 that year). Those are your tax dollars running those courts, overloading those judges, prosecutors, and public defenders, and incarcerating those felons (which works well if the goal is repeat business). NM's status as a southern border state fuels that system, so there would be significantly more shock to the federal system to have NM opt not to enforce at the state and local level (starving the prison complex at the grass roots level).
Quote:
What is despicable is that the President and the Attorney General of the United States are blatantly violating their Oath of Office to "uphold the Laws and the Constitution of the United States" when they have refused to challenge the Colorado law in the Federal Courts themselves. I guess that they have taken the tact that violating the law is OK as long as it's popular. That's a slippery slope that will eventually lead the country to a very bad place.
There's a wide gulf between upholding a law and challenging a law's constitutionality in court.
In any case, let's keep this thread NM-focused lest it get transplanted- these federal and state administrations have bigger fish to fry than setting up drug checkpoints at NM's northern border.
A court would first have to take the case (they have discretion not to) and then rule. And then, enforce somehow.
I'm not an attorney, but I have plenty of experience (in a past career) of how things "go down" when a state enacts a law the violates federal law. It goes like this: A person or persons (including corporations) "injured" by the law--this could be any taxpayer in the State of Colorado in this case, because taxpayer funds are being used to promulgate the regulations to enact the law--marches into Federal Court and files a lawsuit. Within the filing would be a pleading for an injunction to stop the illegal act until such time as the Federal Court could rule on the case. The Federal Court would almost certainly grant the injunction, pending their ruling on the case. I watched this happen at the state level with a law that the agency that I worked for would have to administer. The law passed with huge public support in the state, but violated federal law (actually, several federal laws). The Legislature passed the law and the Governor signed it for political expediency, knowing full well that the Federal Courts were 99% sure to strike it down. That's the ugly side of politics for ya. Now, the injured parties, some large out-of-state corporations, simply waited until the day after the law went into effect and went into Federal Court, filed suit, and got an injunction prohibiting enactment of the law, pending the Federal Court's ruling. The ruling took about a week to come down--summarily invalidating the law. Why would the Governor not just thumb his nose at the ruling? Because he could be found in Contempt of Court by the Federal Judge and summarily jailed until he complied with the ruling. Pretty simple.
Here is where things get fun. The Supremacy Clause is one of the most sacred clauses in the US Constitution to the Federal government, going clear back to the founding of the Republic, because, without it, the states could pretty much run wild--destroying the whole concept of the "United" States. So, the Federal Courts have been loathe over these many years to issue any ruling that would substantially weaken the Supremacy Clause. Such a stance is especially true for those politicians who believe in a very strong and centralized Federal government--which is exactly what we have in DC right now. Now, for obvious political reasons, the current Administration does not want to be the ones who throw the you-know-what in the punchbowl, but if such a lawsuit were to be filed in Federal Court, they would be insanely short-sighted and stupid if they tried to block the Federal Courts from hearing it and ruling upon it. And the Federal Courts would be about 95% sure to overturn the Colorado law.
As for New Mexico (or any other state), they would be foolish to waste their taxpayers' money to enact a similar law until the Federal Courts rule on the legality of the Colorado (and Washington state) laws. As to the effect of Colorado's legalization in New Mexico, marijuana is still illegal in New Mexico, so, at the legal level, not much will change. The problem will be the issue of New Mexicans being able to get marijuana readily in Colorado to use (illegally) in New Mexico.
One final note: if the proponents of marijuana legalization truly believe that a majority of voting Americans favor marijuana legalization, then they should pray that the Colorado and Washington laws get struck down in the Federal Courts. Then they would have ample justification to go their US Senators and Representatives and demand that marijuana be legalized at the federal level. The reason that the pro-marijuana crowd likely won't do that is that they know, but will never admit, that they just don't have a voting majority in the United States to force Congress to pass a legalization Bill at the federal level.
one of the bi-state issues that arises is that of NM law enforcement "profiling" CO license plates when they visit or pass through NM. that may already be happening, but hasn't made the headlines yet - although various other NM law enforcement excesses have made headlines recently. while the cops clearly have an "official" excuse for stops and body cavity searches, cooler NM heads may consider the various relationships between a headwaters state and a downstream state and create more pragmatic policies of restraint and tolerance.
Last edited by highplainsrus; 12-08-2013 at 06:33 PM..
"Profiling" of Colorado drivers in neighboring states is nothing new and has nothing to do with marijuana. Colorado drivers--especially large numbers of Front Range drivers--have a widespread reputation for poor driving and flaunting the traffic laws among law enforcement. When I lived in Wyoming, law enforcement people that I knew there would remark that nailing "greenies" (the nickname for Coloradans because of the color of the Colorado license plate) for traffic violations was "like shooting fish in a barrel." Stoned drivers from Colorado may just add to the reputation.
To be fair, New Mexico's widespread reputation for having excessive numbers of drunk drivers no doubt leads to some profiling of New Mexicans in neighboring states. And, sort of ironically, Utah drivers have a bad reputation for speeding and aggressive driving. Go figure.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
