Drug WarRant

At Stop The Drug War:

Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) Tuesday issued an executive order Tuesday requiring that current state employees submit to random drug tests and that applicants for state jobs undergo pre-hiring drug tests. The order will go into effect in 60 days for current employees and immediately for new hires, but it certain to be challenged in court.

Drug testing, when conducted by the government, is a fourth amendment issue. It is search and seizure of the most private kind, and is thus subject to the “reasonableness” test. And while the Supreme Court has allowed drug testing as reasonable for people in safety-critical jobs and students in extra-curricular activities (!), it still has never allowed a blanket random test of all government employees. (Private sector companies can require that all employees be drug tested because they’re not the government for the purpose of the fourth amendment.)

The ACLU of Florida attacked Scott’s order, saying that a federal court had in 2004 already ruled that the state was violating the Fourth Amendment when the Department of Juvenile Justice instituted a random drug testing program. In that case, a US district judge ordered the agency to halt random drug testing and pay the worker who sued $150,000.

“I’m not sure why Gov. Scott does not know that the policy he recreated by executive order today has already been declared unconstitutional,” ACLU of Florida Executive Director Howard Simon said in a statement. “The state of Florida cannot force people to surrender their constitutional rights in order to work for the state. Absent any evidence of illegal drug use, or assigned a safety-sensitive job, people have a right to be left alone.”

Couldn’t resist a little bit of photoshop fun.

It’s not even directly a drug war story, other than the fact that the tactics are part of, and have grown from, the drug war.

If you haven’t read about this already, you owe it to yourself.

A man was suspected of cockfighting, so Sheriff Joe Arpaio got an arrest warrant, and showed up… with armored vehicles including a tank… and Steven Seagal. Then they killed all the chickens, so I guess Steven Seagal and Joe Arpaio won.

See Radley Balko’s first report and bizarre follow-up.

Watch the video. It’s unbelievable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BxPjDCuqjg

This post at Opposing News includes Senator Jay Rocefeller’s full response to why he confirmed Michele Leonhart for head of the DEA.

His letter is almost perfectly typical of the kind of response you get from so many elected officials on this issue, and could almost serve as a template.

Here’s the exciting conclusion:

You should know that I am opposed to the recreational use of all illegal drugs. I am very proud of my long record of fighting drug abuse and crime related to it. I have voted to support harsh penalties for drug offenders and have worked hard to make funding available so our police can properly train and equip themselves for the war on drugs. I believe it is very important to punish drug offenders, help the addicted when we can, and keep drugs away from our children, and my votes in the Senate reflect those values.

At the same time, I believe that our government must enact policies that are effective, and not merely punitive, as we work to prevent drug abuse. That is why I am committed to providing treatment where it is appropriate, enforcement where it is necessary, and education in healthful choices for everyone. Rehabilitation services must be a priority in order to help those with drug addiction, which could save many lives and many families, and over time will be a bargain compared to the ravages of crime, increased health care costs, and the overwhelming costs of incarcerating so many of our state’s youth.

Thank you again for being in touch. I wish you the very best.
With Warm Regards,

Jay Rockefeller

I like the “wishing you the best” and “warm regards” after salivating over punishing people.

ASAM issues white paper to halt medical marijuana use in many states

It’s a press release by the American Society of Addiction Medicine about their “white paper” opposing medical marijuana. It’s put together, in part, by Andrea Barthwell and Robert DuPont, so you know it’s full of lies and deception.

Here’s an organization that is actually inserting itself into the realm of other medical professionals to tell them what they should or should not do, all to protect the profits of the treatment industry.

This is outstanding.

Press Release

Being launched today by NGOs from around the world as a side event of the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna: The War on Drugs – Count the Costs.

Speakers will outline the many costs of the war on drugs, and the aims of the campaign, to an audience of international policy makers, NGO representatives, and media. See the new project website here: www.countthecosts.org for more details

The War on Drugs: Count the Costs campaign will bring together interested parties from around the world, including NGOs, policy makers and others whose work is negatively impacted by international drug enforcement. Together they will call on governments and international agencies to meaningfully evaluate the unintended consequences of the war on drugs and explore evidence-based alternatives.

This is something I’ve been interested in, and talking about, for years, and, if I ever get time to do it, is the subject of the book I’m writing: Prohibition Isn’t Free (which is also the name of our Foundation).

Of course, the prohibitionists hate talking about the costs. They want the discussion to be limited to:

• Prohibition: x amount of drug harm
• Legalization: >x amount of drug harm

Not only is that comparison unsustainable, it most importantly ignores all the costs of prohibition.

Nice to see a global effort on this topic.

The National Cancer Institute website (a .gov site that’s part of the U.S. National Institutes of Health) has a new Information Summary on the use of Cannabis and its components for people with cancer-related symptoms caused by the disease itself or its treatment.

It’s actually quite good, and pretty handily disputes what much of the rest of the government is saying.

New Report Finds “Drug Courts Are Not the Answer”

At two briefings on Capitol Hill today, the Drug Policy Alliance released a groundbreaking new report, Drug Courts are Not the Answer: Toward a Health-Centered Approach to Drug Use (www.drugpolicy.org/drugcourts), which finds that drug courts have not demonstrated cost savings, reduced incarceration, or improved public safety; leave many people worse off for trying; and have actually made the criminal justice system more punitive toward addiction – not less.

War on drugs as failed, say former heads of MI5, CPS, and BBC

The “war on drugs” has failed and should be abandoned in favour of evidence-based policies that treat addiction as a health problem, according to prominent public figures including former heads of MI5 and the Crown Prosecution Service. […]

The MPs and members of the House of Lords, who have formed a new All-Party Parliamentary Group on Drug Policy Reform, are calling for new policies to be drawn up on the basis of scientific evidence.

It could lead to calls for the British government to decriminalise drugs, or at least for the police and Crown Prosecution Service not to jail people for possession of small amounts of banned substances.

Defendant Sentenced to 18 Years on 11 Gram Federal Crack Conviction

TalkLeft has a good piece discussing the absurdity of sentencing that is based on charges for which the defendant has been acquitted. It’s a real injustice and a violation of the very concept of jury trials.

The always excellent Radley Balko is moving on from Reason Magazine soon to begin writing at Huffington Post — a chance to reach a much larger audience (and perhaps an audience that needs to hear what he has to report). Good luck, Radley!

Here are a few of his current pieces that should not be missed…

Failing Upward in Criminal Justice

Paey’s prosecution was an outrage, and it generated significant media attention. In 2007, after Paey had served nearly four years of his sentence, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist gave him a full pardon. Yet Scott Andringa, who prosecuted the case as an assistant state attorney in New Port Richey, has never expressed a hint of remorse. In fact, Andringa, now a defense attorney in private practice, brags about his efforts to imprison Paey on his professional website, noting that he “was the prosecutor assigned to a controversial drug trafficking case that was later profiled on 60 Minutes, Nightline, and in the New York Times.”

And now Andringa wants to be a judge.

How Drug Cops Go Bad

Critics of prohibition often argue that drug cops are especially susceptible to corruption because their jobs regularly bring them into contact with black-market cash and large quantities of illicit substances worth more than the average police officer makes in a year. There is something to that, but I think the problem runs deeper. Drug crimes are consensual crimes, which means there are no aggrieved victims to file a complaint. The only way to fight consensual crimes is with surveillance, informants, or undercover cops. Surveillance requires a warrant, which requires some evidence of criminal activity. The latter two options are far more common, but they require the police to break the very laws they are enforcing—or encourage someone else to do so. That creates a moral disconnect right off the bat.

Politicians paint cross-hairs on Americans

To date, there has been little outcry from the press, and not a single national politician from either the Democratic or Republican parties has condemned or even questioned the increasing use of government violence against Americans.

It will be a welcome day when America’s political and media figures get as indignant about innocent Americans killed by their own government as they do on those thankfully rare occasions when deranged people carry out attacks on government officials.

The UNODC likes to work in semi-secret, so you won’t see video or transcripts of their proceedings. The only real way to get a glimpse is through the fine live-blogging done by CND blog (a project of the International Harm Reduction Association).

These entries are paraphrases of what goes on in the sessions by a writer, so that must be taken into consideration when judging a country’s statements, but still it can be interesting.

One that really stuck out for me was Sweden’s bizarre distortion of the definition of rights in their opening statement. As you may know, one of the criticisms that has been directed at the UNODC is the fact that human rights is a core principle of the U.N. (in fact, all other activities of the U.N. are supposed to take a back seat to human rights) and that the drug war is a prime violator of human rights.

Sweden turns all logic upside down by claiming that protecting children from drugs is a human right

[…] Sweden remains a strong supporter of UNODC’s activities in addressing the world drug problem and as a guardian of the Conventions. […] The ultimate aim is abstinence and reintegration of dependent users.

There is no contradiction between drug conventions and human rights and fundamental freedoms. One of the most important elements is the protection of children from illicit drugs. Our children are most vulnerable to drug abuse. We have legally binding obligations under international law to protect children of their rights and give them good living conditions. We must ensure that children do not become victims of illicit drugs. Last year, a resolution was adopted on children’s rights. States should take measures to protect these rights. States should raise awareness among the general population and among children (article 33 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child). Protecting children from drug abuse, production and trafficking, is an obligation.[…]

After the break, I’ve posted the drugged driving discussions.
Continue reading →

In one of the more absurd moves this administration has made regarding drug policy so far, the drug czar has chosen Sweden as a drug policy model for the U.S. to emulate.

Director Kerlikowske also highlighted both nations’ common experiences with drug use, and showcased Sweden’s successful balanced public health approach and opposition to drug legalization as a model for the United States.

And his justification? Take every lie and platitude about balance and science and stick them into one paragraph.

“History has taught both of our nations that we must support robust and comprehensive drug policies which recognize we cannot arrest our way out of the drug problem and that drug addiction as a disease of the brain. We are proud of our strong partnership with Sweden in supporting balanced drug strategies guided by science and research and opposing drug legalization, both within Europe and around the world,” said Director Kerlikowske.

Uh, yeah. Right. Balanced. Can’t arrest our way out of it. Robust. The whole world. Science. Oppose legalization. Brain disease. That about covers it.

Today is the beginning of the 54th session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna, Austria

The agenda appears to be more the same — administering and strengthening the destructive policies they’ve been following for half a century. I see Gil Kerlikowske got his pet project – drugged driving – added to the agenda as well.

There’s a big scandal that’s been going on in San Francisco, regarding some drug busts in the Henry Hotel, and something surprising that happened. Apparently cops have been lying in court regarding how those busts went down.

That, of course, is not the surprising thing. It’s the fact that they got caught on video.

What this scandal is making clear in San Francisco is not that some cops sometimes lie, and in court while under oath, but rather that this is a regular part of doing business for many, if not most, narcotics cops.

Peter Keane had an outstanding OpEd in the San Francisco Gate this week about this: Why cops lie

Count this as one more casualty of the “war on drugs.” It is simply additional collateral damage from using the American criminal justice system as the battlefield of that war. […]

Why do police, whom we trust as role models of legal conduct, show contempt for the law by systematically perjuring themselves?

The first reason is because they get away with it. They know that in a swearing match between a drug defendant and a police officer, the judge always rules in favor of the officer. Often in search hearings, it is embarrassingly clear to everyone – judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, even spectators – that the officer is lying under oath. Yet nothing is done about it. […]

Another reason is the nature of most drug cases and the likely type of person involved. Usually police illegally enter a home, search it and find drugs. Like the recent scandal in San Francisco concerning the Henry Hotel residents, the defendant is poor, uneducated, frequently a minority, with a criminal record, and he does have drugs. Police know that no one cares about these people.

But the main reason is that the job of these cops is chasing drugs. Their professional advancement depends on nabbing dopers. The dominant culture they grew up with is popular mythology glorifying rogue cops like Popeye Doyle from the 1975 film “The French Connection.”

This is a culture that goes all the way to the top in our corrupt drug war.

When I wrote about Michele Leonhart back in 2003 (she has since advanced to Director of the Drug Enforcement Administration), I noted that she seemed oddly surprised that lying on the stand in the service of the drug war was even… wrong.

The most startling statement in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch investigation of [super snitch] Andrew Chambers was from Michele Leonhart:

“The only criticism (of Chambers) I’ve ever heard is what defense attorneys will characterize as perjury or a lie on the stand.”

She continued by saying that once prosecutors check him out, they’ll agree with his admirers in DEA that he’s “an outstanding testifier.”

This corruption creates far-reaching damage to the relationship between law enforcement and our communities. Yet another dangerous by-product of this ill-conceived and destructive war.