Pubdate: Fri, 19 Dec 2014
Source: Oklahoman, The (OK)
Copyright: 2014 The Oklahoma Publishing Co.
Contact: http://www.newsok.com/voices/guidelines
Website: http://newsok.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/318
Author: Adam Kemp

STATE SEEKS TO SNUFF OUT COLORADO MARIJUANA SALES

Oklahoma on Thursday joined with Nebraska in filing a lawsuit asking 
the U.S. Supreme Court to deem Colorado's recreational marijuana law 
unconstitutional.

The states argue that Colorado's Amendment 64 runs counter to federal 
law, has created a dangerous gap in the federal drug control system 
and places an undue burden on neighboring states that have seen an 
increase in the amount of Colorado marijuana flooding across their borders.

"Federal law classifies marijuana as an illegal drug," Oklahoma 
Attorney General Scott Pruitt said in a written statement announcing 
the lawsuit. "The health and safety risks posed by marijuana, 
especially to children and teens, are well documented."

Marijuana distributed in Colorado is being trafficked across state 
lines, injuring Oklahoma's ability to enforce the state's policies 
against marijuana, "draining their treasuries, and placing stress on 
their criminal justice system," the lawsuit states.

In Denver, Colorado Attorney General John Suthers said he believes 
the states' lawsuit is without merit.

"Because neighboring states have expressed concern about 
Colorado-grown marijuana coming into their states, we are not 
entirely surprised by this action," Suthers said in a written 
statement. "However, it appears the plaintiffs' primary grievance 
stems from non-enforcement of federal laws regarding marijuana, as 
opposed to choices made by the voters of Colorado."

Pruitt contends the lawsuit does have merit because Oklahoma is 
directly affected by Colorado's sales of marijuana.

"This is not about whether a state can legalize for state law 
purpose," Pruitt said in an interview Thursday evening. "This is 
about whether a state can engage in commercial enterprise in 
marijuana at the expense of another state."

Oklahoma and Nebraska also contend that Colorado's law violates a 
number of international drug-control treaties. Since the 
implementation of Amendment 64, the states claim to have suffered 
"direct and significant harm" arising from the increased presence of 
Colorado-sourced marijuana, according to the lawsuit.

States cite costs

In the lawsuit, the two states say they incurred significant costs 
incarcerating suspected and convicted felons on charges related to 
Colorado-sourced marijuana. The lawsuit did not include any specific 
figures for those costs.

When asked what right Oklahoma has to dictate Colorado state law, 
Pruitt turned the question around.

"What right does Colorado have to tell Oklahoma what it can do or 
not," he said. "This isn't about Colorado passing a state law, they 
did more than just legalize marijuana in their state. They adopted a 
commercial enterprise."

Oklahoma NORML, a group that advocates the legalization of marijuana, 
questioned Pruitt's decision to challenge another state's laws, 
adding that no evidence exists to show an increased burden on the state.

"They haven't showed any hard data backing up that claim," NORML 
spokesman Erik Altieri said. "Most of the legal professionals we have 
spoken with are dubious at how they even have standing to challenge 
another state's law."

Pruitt said they are in talks with law enforcement across the state 
about the extra costs of protecting the border from Colorado marijuana.

"The information we are receiving back is that the Colorado law has 
impacted Oklahoma and injured our state policies against marijuana," 
he said. "It's facilitating commercial trafficking, and it crosses 
state lines and it violates federal law." 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom