The Rohrabacher-Blumenauer Amendment...

[Adsos Letter]

If the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer Amendment is renewed in the upcoming budget, what will its effect be on Sessions' policy shift?

My understanding is that the amendment (previously known as the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment) restricts the DOJ from using federal funds to prosecute cannabis violations.

I have heard rumblings that Sessions is considering offering local law enforcement a substantial cut of anything seized under asset forfeiture if they will assist the DOJ in going after cannabis. Is that accurate? Is it Constitutional? Law enforcement tends to tack conservative, but I understanding that many local authorities feel that cannabis prosecution is a waste of limited resources in the face of other priorities.

[question everything]

1. Sadly, it is Constitutional and Sessions revived it with vengence

Read a WSJ editorial against Sessions

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10028406138

and an ACLU opinion

https://www.aclu.org/issues/criminal-law-reform/reforming-police-practices/asset-forfeiture-abuse

Police abuse of civil asset forfeiture laws has shaken our nation’s conscience. Civil forfeiture allows police to seize — and then keep or sell — any property they allege is involved in a crime. Owners need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be taken away permanently by the government.

Forfeiture was originally presented as a way to cripple large-scale criminal enterprises by diverting their resources. But today, aided by deeply flawed federal and state laws, many police departments use forfeiture to benefit their bottom lines, making seizures motivated by profit rather than crime-fighting. For people whose property has been seized through civil asset forfeiture, legally regaining such property is notoriously

[Adsos Letter]

2. Thank you for the response.

[Anon-C]

3. Wow! Just wow!

Pure, unadulterated fascism. Many police departments, especially sheriffs departments in California where I live are highly-politicized, disproportionately white, and very networked in the right wing.

[SHRED]

4. I'm interested in looking into...

...potential dealings by Sessions with local law enforcement if you have a link.

[Adsos Letter]

7. Im headed out to take some photos.

I’ll be happy to look it up this evening. I think it was a NY Times article, but I’m just guessing.

[Adsos Letter]

9. This is what I was thinking of. Pretty sure you're already aware of it.

Last edited Mon Jan 8, 2018, 11:13 AM - Edit history (1)

In the last three years, 24 states have comprehensively reformed their forfeiture laws, according to Sheth. As of July 10, when Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy signed H.B. 8146, 14 states require a criminal conviction before seized assets can be legally forfeited to authorities (if no conviction results, the assets must be returned to their owner).

Several states have other types of restrictions -- some ban the use of forfeited assets for law enforcement services and reroute the money to other public services, thereby eliminating the profit motive some say leads to abuse of the practice. (For a specific list of individual state policies, visit the Institute of Justice’s interactive map.)

But Sessions' order gives officers a way to bypass state restrictions.

It revives a program called Equitable Sharing or “adoptive forfeiture,” which allows local law enforcement to process forfeiture cases under federal statute and “share” the assets with federal authorities. In practice, the federal government sends up to 80 percent of the assets right back to local departments, effectively allowing them to get around stricter state laws, says Rulli. (emphasis added) Eric Holder, Obama's attorney general, eliminated adoptive forfeiture except in rare cases.

“Sessions is calling [adoptive forfeiture] a ‘partnership’ between the federal government and states,” says Rulli, “but in fact, it’s an attack on federalism and the ability of states to decide for themselves how they should handle this [issue].”

http://www.governing.com/topics/public-justice-safety/gov-civil-asset-forfeiture-directive-jeff-sessions-police.html

[GReedDiamond]

5. What's most - interesting? - about this to me, is that Rohrabacher is pro-pot...

...but pro-trumputin and all other repuke/fascist party policies dating back to when he was the speechwriter and "Special Assistant" to Preznit Reagan from 1981 to 1988.

A case of the broken clock being correct, but only once a day - or decade or three.

Plus, I have to assume he has some kind of investment(s) in legal cannabis, esp in the state of CA.

[BigmanPigman]

6. He is pro Russia, anti Climate Change, right wing nut

yet pro pot because he is also a libertarian and believes in states' rights like Rand Paul.

[SHRED]

8. I hate the guy but...

...it's deeper than Libertarian with him.
He actually advocates cannabis as medicine.