Divide up article and redirect to Legality of cannabis by country [ edit ] The equivalent title at most other-language Wikipedias is just the chart we have at Legality of cannabis by country.
NCSL recognizes that its members have differing views on how to treat cannabis in their states and believes that states and localities should be able to set whatever policies work best to improve the public safety, health, and economic development of their communities. NCSL believes that federal laws, including the Controlled Substances Act CSAshould be amended to explicitly allow states to set their own cannabis policies without federal interference and urges the administration not to undermine state cannabis policies.
Where states have authorized cannabis production, distribution, and possession by establishing an effective regulatory scheme, the administration should direct federal prosecutors to respect state cannabis laws when exercising discretion around enforcement.
NCSL maintains that the administration should prioritize its enforcement actions against criminal enterprises engaged in cannabis production and sale, and not against citizens who are compliant with state cannabis laws.
Furthermore, NCSL urges Congress to prohibit the administration from using federal funds to enforce the CSA in a manner inconsistent with these enforcement priorities.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine identified challenges and barriers in conducting cannabis research in a report: The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids.
NCSL urges Congress and the administration to address the challenges and barriers identified in this report. NCSL believes that it is especially important that Congress and the administration provide researchers access to cannabis in the quantity, quality, and type necessary to research the health effects of cannabis use and that adequate funding sources are made available to support cannabis and cannabinoid research that explores the health benefits and risks of cannabis use.
Civil Justice The National Conference of State Legislatures recognizes the importance of permitting aggrieved parties to seek full and fair redress pursuant to state law in state courts for physical harm done to them due to the negligence of others.
NCSL also understands the importance of having clear state rules to govern the means and methods by which people can seek such redress. Our American federalism contemplates diversity among the states in establishing these rules and respects the ability of the states to act in their own best interests in matters pertaining to civil liability due to negligence.
NCSL regards the regulation of medical professionals, products, and other civil tort actions as purely state matters, not meriting federal intervention or preemption of state laws.
NCSL maintains that no comprehensive evidence exists demonstrating either that state medical malpractice laws, product liability laws or general tort laws have created a problem of such dimension that a federal solution is warranted or that federal legislation would achieve its stated goals.
NCSL believes that this type of legislation would create serious new problems in the fields of medical malpractice, product liability, and tort law by dictating a single set of rules controlling the timeliness of claims and the admissibility of evidence.
By doing so, such proposals would place state legislatures and state courts in an untenable position legally. Most states have taken up the issues surrounding medical malpractice, product liability and tort reform and continue to handle the issues surrounding the filing and processing of these cases in ways that are consistent with existing state law, giving due consideration to factors that may be unique to a particular state.
Criminal Justice It is the policy of the National Conference of State Legislatures to advance and defend a balanced, dynamic criminal justice partnership between governments at the local, state and federal levels while preserving traditional areas of state authority in this area of the law.
NCSL urges Congress and the Administration to avoid federalizing crime policy and substituting national laws for state and local policy decisions affecting criminal and juvenile justice. Federal jurisdiction should be reserved for areas where a national problem has been identified and states are unable to adequately provide solutions due to scope, or is required to protect federal constitutional rights.
The federal government should partner with states to examine ways to avoid unnecessary preemption of state laws; and should strive to maintain its current financial commitments to existing state-federal partnership programs. NCSL believes that federal actions must recognize that states and local governments have the predominant responsibility to ensure public safety and the administration of justice, and must adhere to fundamental principles of federalism in all areas of criminal justice, including but not limited to: Improvement of the Structure of State Criminal Justice Systems NCSL urges the federal government to include states in the development stages and on the board of any commissions or task forces that work to improve or review state criminal justice structures.
NCSL insists that the federal government not infringe on the legitimate rights of the states to determine their own criminal laws, but shall include them in the process of working to create better state criminal justice systems overall.
As states strive to improve policies and practices related to criminal justice, NCSL supports direct participation by state policymakers in any federal policy efforts or proposed legislation to redefine how those relationships should be strengthened.
Federal Financial Assistance States continue to improve criminal justice systems and policies, and recognize that federal funding is sometimes necessary to implement state reforms in this area. Funding levels for Department of Justice grants and reimbursements to states should be maintained or increased.
NCSL also supports any other federal grant program that seeks to assist states in addressing state criminal justice issues, such as school violence or opioid abuse reduction.
NCSL opposes the withholding of any federal criminal justice funding as a penalty for state policy choices. NCSL urges the federal government to respect state criminal justice priorities and advance change through partnerships rather than mandates.
Where new federal grant programs to states are created, NCSL maintains that funding should be directed to states rather than pass directly to local governments.
The mandates imposed by this Act are not only preemptive, they are inflexible and in some instances not able to be implemented by states. States should be permitted to classify and penalize sex offenders, and establish registration and notification requirements in accordance with their own state laws, particularly with respect to juveniles.
States should define and decide which juvenile offenders meet criteria for sex offender registration, and be afforded the flexibility to implement state procedures that best address this population.
The federal government should provide technological support and federal funding assistance to states with regard to sex offender registration and public notice systems, including cooperation with the federal National Sex Offender Public Website NCOPW.
NCSL supports frequent and meaningful communication between the Department of Justice and state policymakers and implementing agencies so that information on procedures that meet or fail to meet federal guidelines and statutory requirements are effectively conveyed to the states.
NCSL calls upon the federal government to exercise the utmost flexibility in determining whether to penalize states that are working in good faith toward compliance with federal law. States should not be responsible and penalized for absence of compliance by sovereign tribal jurisdictions.
Juvenile Justice States must preserve authority to determine which juvenile offenders are treated like adults, under what circumstances, and for how long, with regard to sex offender registration and all other matters of juvenile and criminal justice policy.
NCSL supports the goals of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, and urges the federal government to provide state flexibility in achieving these objectives.This research examined the prevalence of drinking and cannabis use among adolescents in the United States, Canada, and the Netherlands, countries with substantially different laws and policies relating to these substances.
Laws regarding alcohol and cannabis were found to be strictest in the United. Get the latest health news, diet & fitness information, medical research, health care trends and health issues that affect you and your family on timberdesignmag.com Facts and statistics from impeccable sources regarding drugs, drug use, and drug policies in the US and globally with direct quotes, .
Commissioner’s message. The digital revolution, which many have described as the 4 th industrial revolution, has brought important benefits to individuals, from ease of communications to greater accessibility of information, products and services that make our lives better materially and intellectually.
It is and will continue to be a major . People who hope to work in the local cannabis industry also will have to be mindful of workplace policies.
The chief executive officer of Terradiol, Canton's largest cultivator, reported that the company has "no issue" with employees' medical cannabis use if it's in compliance with state law. March is a big month for marijuana in Illinois. Aside from choosing between candidates vying for gubernatorial and attorney general nominations — all of whom have weighed in on the legalization debate — millions of voters in the state’s most populous county will be asked to decide for themselves whether Illinois should end cannabis prohibition.