BTW, when this law takes affect, if you get caught sharing a dab, sharing your O-pen, giving away a piece of your brownie, or giving someone a drop of tincture to another MMJ patient, you're going to jail for felony marijuana sales. No more cannabis cups or events.
How do you guys think the lawsuit filed by AMMA is going to be played out? I wouldnt be surprised if it gets tossed to the side, because the supreme court justice seems pretty happy with the new regulations.
I'm sure our wonderful court system we have in California will help us out wonderfully like they always have.
I agree that the new laws don't change the nature of the patient/physician relationship required for a MMJ recommendation. SB420 already defined "attending physician" and the new law does not change that. I think that by making the argument that the new laws change things shows an incorrect understanding of that part of the law, and does not help the AMMA's case. Regarding the 100 sq. ft. patient garden "limit", I don't think the law actually "limits" patient gardens, rather it requires patients to acquire a license if they wish to exceed 100 sq. ft. in their gardens. Patient possession and cultivation limits that were written into SB420 were deemed unconstitutional by an appeals court in People v. Patrick Kelly (2008). These were hard limits though. I don't think the same arguments that were made in People v. Patrick Kelly can be made in the case against the new regulations. The new regulations do not say that patients cannot grow more than 100 sq. ft., they just have to acquire a state license to do so. I think that the arguments will be: Does the licensing requirement address a legitimate state interest (public safety, public health, etc...)? Does the licensing requirement invalidate any of the protections established by Prop 215? My hunch is that a court would answer "yes" to the first question and "no" to the second. Remember that patients in CA do not actually have a "right" to cultivate marijuana (see local control issue below). Regarding the "local control" of cultivation issue, that was already decided in Maral v. Live Oak (2014). This decision confirmed the authority of local governments to ban cultivation completely. Furthermore the authority of local governments to ban dispensaries was confirmed in City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center (2013). These decisions were handed down before the new regulations were signed into law. Suing the state for preserving the local control authority that already existed before the regulations were written seems like a losing argument. I get it that a lot of growers will hate these regulations. Many will have to conform to the new regulations or quit growing commercially. Their complaints that the regulations violate their "rights" to cultivate are specious though. They never had the "right" to cultivate in CA to begin with. In the long run, however, I think the regulations will help patients in CA, and will promote greater acceptance of the MMJ industry as well.
California is in deep doo doo. All everyone is doing is waiting to see how high all the new licensing and maintenance tax fees are going to be because they'll get passed on to the patients and recreational users. The changes start Jan 1st, 2016. Tick tock...
Everyone is acting as if marijuana is such a huge issue when booze will always kill thousands more people every day of the week Growing harvest in one's home speaks to the rights of obtaining happiness through financial freedom and optimal health. California Constitution:http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1 SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy. Selling out commercially or backstabbing local neighbors and small farmers who want the same right to grow mmj as they do hemp is still harmful to ALL California citizens
That is the complaint....why are the rich people telling the poor people they aren't allowed to make a living anymore? These regulations will not help patients, it will help bureaucrats and politicians fill their pockets. LOL yep.....after CA picks it's 15 new billionaires and says "Fuck you!" to everyone else it's going to drive the industry back under ground. If they make it extremely limited or difficult to get a licence beyond just complying with health/safety/environmental regs they won't be regulating anything. LA/SF can't just pull the plug on most of the emerald triangle and claim that 'regulating' us out of our ability to make a living is good for us. EL OH EL most everyone north of SF/Sac is dependent upon growing cannabis and they will all give CA the finger before they let SF/LA shit on our their way of life again. Or they go like me and give CA the fingah, liquidate and leave. I feel bad for all the folks in the ET that are going to get fucked and left with property they can't sell. It's great for big money to establish market dominance though....which I can't help but suspect is the primary motivation for this legislation.