That's what they've said, but as far as I can tell that isn't how they've behaved. That is, they continue to prosecute individuals who follow state law. They continue to give money to police departments in proportion to the drugs they seize, regardless of whether those drugs were legal under state law. And they continue to launder money for local law enforcement in those states when state law would otherwise prohibit police from keeping assets they seize for their own benefit.

This isn't correct to my knowledge; as an issue of Federal law, that would be the purview of the US Attorney assigned to the region, not the local DA. They get their orders from the US Attorney General.

A local DA could decline to prosecute under state law, but the US Attorney could still pursue federal charges -- this happens fairly regularly (just in general, not even just with regard to drugs or cannabis specifically).

That's what I meant by local.

"They get their orders from the US Attorney General."

Not in this case. The US Attorney General is letting them each do whatever they want as they see fit. That's why there are lots of raids in some parts of California, and almost none in others.

sources?

By this time also:

- There will be a ton more academic research about marijuana

- There will be several FDA approved medicines made from marijuana extracts and specific cannabinoids on the market.

- The price of LEDs will have fallen by 50% as compared with today, meaning that it will be both cheaper to grow marijuana indoors and much harder to detect since thermal imaging cameras will no longer be able to detect rows.

- Solar photovoltaic will also be much less expensive, and this becomes viable for keeping small indoor grows entirely off the grid when combined with LEDs.

- Medical marijuana will be legal in New York state, and probably in 25+ states total.

- Being able to synthetically fabricating new drugs using biotech platforms and 3D printing will be either here already or just over the horizon.

- The baby boomers will be in their 70s and 80s, which is when they will be at their most powerful and active politically, both as voters and also in the house and senate.

There already are a number of FDA approved medicine made from marijuana: Marinol, Cesamet, Sativex. You think we need more?

Marinol's active ingredient is the main cannabinoid in marijuana. You could try arguing (as opponents have) that marijuana has no medical benefit while Marinol does, but it always struck me as bending over backwards to ignore the facts.

> (While this may seem pedantic, it makes a big difference if you're trying to argue for rescheduling in a federal lawsuit.)

Keep in mind that there's already enough to contradict a Schedule I treatment of marijuana (aside from the 25,000+ studies regarding marijuana's medical treatment, there's the government patent on medical uses of marijuana).

It's hard to construct a rational argument in favor of the current laws already, and yet they've still managed to persist.

It's synthetic, not extracted. Again you can't argue that marijuana should be rescheduled because natural cannabis extracts are already FDA approved until Sativex actually gets approval in early 2014. Also, THC is the main psychoactive cannabinoid but not necessarily the main cannabinoid overall.

"You could try arguing (as opponents have) that marijuana has no medical benefit while Marinol does"

You're never going to prevent people from making that argument no matter how dumb it is. We just need to wait for Sativex to get FDA approval so that way they can no longer make it.

Which part of the federal government has accepted that?

Luckily after serving on a grand jury, I know what a PITA is is to bring indictments at the federal level. They will choke on cases if they really try to start prosecuting.