Obama Administration Has New Drug Policy: Ashby Jones posts on Wall Street Journal Blog that the Obama administration does not plan to prosecute marijuana dispensaries in California unless the dispensary violates a federal law. Jones reports that in a "sit-down" with reporters, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Justice Department will be targeting "outlets operating in violation of both federal and state law, such as those being used as fronts for drug dealers." The Obama administration's new policy is different from the policy implemented by the Bush administration. The Bush administration approved raids of medical marijuana distributors that violated federal statutes even if the dispensaries appeared to be complying with state laws. Josh Meyer and Scott Glover
have an article on the announcement in today's LA Times, and David Johnston and Neil A. Lewis have a piece in the New York Times.
ABA President Comments on Its Reintroduction to Judicial Nominations: Tony Mauro posts his interview with ABA President, H. Thomas Wells Jr., on Blog of the Legal Times today. The post reports on the ABA's return to the judicial nomination process, and gives Wells' account of how the Obama administration brought the ABA "back into the fold." Wells also addressed recent media reports that the ABA's ratings of nominees skew toward liberals and give conservative nominees generally lower rankings. Wells, who has not seen the research, does not believe the ABA is biased. He claims the nominations committee is insulated from ABA policies and confines its assessment of nominees to issues of integrity, competence, and temperament -- not ideology or politics.
Supreme Court Petition to Watch: On SCOTUSblog, Kristina Moore posted "Petitions to Watch" for next week's private Supreme Court conference. On the list of cases up for consideration is Virginia v. Jaynes. Virginia v. Jaynes asks whether a court, when presented with a claim that a statute is overbroad, is required to compare the statute's constitutional applications with the statute's actual unconstitutional application. CJLF's brief in support of certiorari can be found here.
ABA President Comments on Its Reintroduction to Judicial Nominations: Tony Mauro posts his interview with ABA President, H. Thomas Wells Jr., on Blog of the Legal Times today. The post reports on the ABA's return to the judicial nomination process, and gives Wells' account of how the Obama administration brought the ABA "back into the fold." Wells also addressed recent media reports that the ABA's ratings of nominees skew toward liberals and give conservative nominees generally lower rankings. Wells, who has not seen the research, does not believe the ABA is biased. He claims the nominations committee is insulated from ABA policies and confines its assessment of nominees to issues of integrity, competence, and temperament -- not ideology or politics.
Supreme Court Petition to Watch: On SCOTUSblog, Kristina Moore posted "Petitions to Watch" for next week's private Supreme Court conference. On the list of cases up for consideration is Virginia v. Jaynes. Virginia v. Jaynes asks whether a court, when presented with a claim that a statute is overbroad, is required to compare the statute's constitutional applications with the statute's actual unconstitutional application. CJLF's brief in support of certiorari can be found here.
Leave a comment