U.S. Marijuana Immigration Policy Draws Criticism from Attorneys



It is no secret that sale, possession and consumption of marijuana in the U.S. is a lot much more difficult than Canada’s. With states permitted to exercising autonomy more than their laws – nearly to the point of becoming their personal nations – their choices to legalize cannabis for recreational and/or healthcare use puts them at odds with the federal government.

Whilst current proposed and implemented modifications support safeguard these states and normalize the cannabis sector, U.S. News demonstrates this nevertheless has not stopped the federal government from continuing its witch-hunt.

If this had been an old law, we could at least dismiss it as a relic of a unique time. Having said that, this law was only lately implemented. Not only is it absurd, but it is reflective of the early days of prohibition.


“Good Moral Character”


Probably the most ridiculous aspect of this immigration policy is the wording of the law. According to U.S. News:


“Immigration officials say acquiring or promoting marijuana, even at a state-regulated cannabis shop, shows a lack of ‘good moral character’ and could derail one’s hope of becoming an American citizen”.


The law also does not make exceptions for healthcare customers, lots of of whom rely heavily on the drug to reside a manageable life.

Lawyers in Anchorage, Alaska had been rapid to criticize this policy, which was enacted on April 19th. Lawyer William Brattain aptly describes the rule as “fairly ridiculous”.


Impeding Citizenship


The specifications for citizenship are vast and complicated. In the sea of tests, vetting and bureaucracy, adding “good moral character” to the list of specifications sounds forced.

But it also reflects an earlier time. Whether or not or not immigration officials intend to discriminate against aspiring immigrants, this policy is nevertheless discriminatory.

When the Marijuana Tax Act was passed in 1937, it ran on the narrative that cannabis was a drug employed heavily amongst minorities, such as Hispanics and African Americans. It gave law enforcement probable bring about to cease and search migrants passing by means of the U.S. or searching for citizenship.

These days, this behaviour would be noticed as profiling. But, like in 1937, the current policy adjust discriminates against folks from other nations – albeit in a much less overt style.

William Brattain currently saw the effects firsthand, according to U.S. News:


“Brattain says a single of his customers admitted to smoking two joints as a teenager in Mexico. Brattain says the authorities are applying it to say she lacks fantastic moral character”.


If Immigration is going to say that two joints as a teenager indicates a lack of “good moral character”, then a sizeable portion of American-born citizens also would not pass this arbitrary and regressive test.


Primarily based on Federal Law


Understandably, the government is not eager to attempt and defend a stance this is practically indefensible. U.S. News explains:


“A spokeswoman for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Solutions declined an interview request but sent a statement saying the agency has to determine circumstances primarily based on federal law, beneath which marijuana remains illegal”.


This is understandable if the applicant has a history of promoting cannabis illegally or possibly even becoming a chronic user who possesses substantial amounts of the drug. But occasional use hardly poses a threat to the public, nor does it place a strain on the legal program (unless authorities go out of their way to prosecute petty crimes like this a single).


Contradiction to Policy


Aside from the truth that this law is poorly-worded and even much more poorly believed-out, it really straight contradicts with Chapter five – Conditional Bars for Acts in a Statutory Period of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Solutions Policy Manual.

The manual addresses unique offenses that could get rid of eligibility, which includes cannabis. Having said that, it is a far cry from smoking marijuana as a teenager. The manual says that there is grounds for denial with:


“Violation of any law on controlled substances, except for easy possession of 30g or much less of marijuana”.


Primarily, this April 19th policy says that even applying cannabis disqualifies folks, however their personal established policies say one thing unique.

If this remains the case, attorneys will not have a challenging time difficult the department’s utter hypocrisy.


WeedAdvisor’s Dedication to Cannabis Reform


Stories like these are rather disappointing. Regardless of the immense progress we created, the stigma about cannabis continues to stay powerful. Consequently, regressive policies are nevertheless a frequent occurrence.

Whilst WeedAdvisor can not manage the legal choices of any nation, we can continue to advocate against such measures. To that finish, we will continue to stick to troubles like these and offer you criticism when warranted.

If we do not point out and admonish such modifications, governments will be capable to continue implementing anti-cannabis measures with out opposition or debate.




Latest posts