Pubdate: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 Source: Rocky Mountain News (Denver, CO) Copyright: 2005, Denver Publishing Co. Contact: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/371 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/props.htm (Ballot Initiatives) CITY MUST ENFORCE STATE POT LAW Picking Among Statutes Not A Wise Option The decision by Denver voters to legalize the possession of a small amount of marijuana is more symbolic than real: Only 36 adults were charged last year under the now-defunct city ordinance prohibiting possession. Meanwhile, 1,565 were charged under the state law, which remains intact. But Mason Tvert, the executive director of the group that put the initiative on the ballot, insists Denver authorities should respect voter wishes and stop charging anyone under the state law, too. "Right now," he told one reporter, "there are city officials denying the will of voters who put them in office, and I think that's disturbing." We understand Tvert's frustration, but the matter is not as simple as he makes it out to be. Yes, prosecution of even the state marijuana charges in Denver is left almost exclusively to city attorneys, who for such cases are deputized as special DAs. The regular district attorneys are too busy pursuing more serious crimes. In theory, the mayor could order Denver attorneys simply to stop pursuing such cases. But it would be unwise for him to do so, for three reasons. By far the most important reason is that cities can't - or at least shouldn't - pick and choose among state laws to enforce. Those statutes are supposed to apply equally to all citizens. When states like Colorado passed laws legalizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes in defiance of federal law, they at least had constitutional arguments in their corner involving the commerce clause and federal regulatory reach. Denver has no similar arguments on which to base an intention to ignore state law. Secondly, a pot charge is often a supplemental charge - an add-on to other charges such as trespass, public nuisance, etc. Law enforcement always likes to have as many arrows in its quiver as possible; if the perp gets off on one charge, perhaps he can be nailed with another. Finally, the vote to legalize pot possession was so unexpected that Denver citizens never engaged in a serious debate about its consequences. Most of the pre-election controversy had to do with whether the campaign's billboards were fair. Were Denver voters even aware they couldn't legalize pot, that a state law would remain in place? Does a majority even now really want their mayor to defy state authorities and declare he won't enforce Colorado law in the state capital? We don't know the answer to those questions, and neither does Tvert and his group. The Denver anti-pot ordinance is dead. Long live the state statute. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman