All Activity

You will be permitted to posting companies, yet not one-way links, except in cases where they can be permitted plus for issue. ppc management london

Excellent list — the server comparison tools simplified my decision. Side-by-side stats like drop rates and population were priceless. Real votes added the final confirmation. slot online Excellent job curating trustworthy private servers with community-backed rankings. This is the definitive place to discover servers that value fairness and player activity. Real votes make all the difference when choosing where to play. slot gacor Helpful — I valued the transparency on player complaint resolution timelines. Quick, fair resolution processes prevent toxic situations from escalating. Real votes showed which teams are responsive. slot online Personalized latex fashion like this feels very exclusive. The fit, shine, and design options sound amazing. Full-size customization ensures confidence. Global delivery within 20 days is great service. rtp live slot gacor Excellent list — the server comparison tools simplified my decision. Side-by-side stats like drop rates and population were priceless. Real votes added the final confirmation. togel online Excellent job curating trustworthy private servers with community-backed rankings. This is the definitive place to discover servers that value fairness and player activity. Real votes make all the difference when choosing where to play. slot online

We continuously strive to expand the escorts service concept in Lodhi Road to make it more accessible and affordable for everyone seeking premium elite Escorts Service in Lodhi Road. Furthermore, we prioritize the privacy of our clients above all else. Our Lodhi Road escort models originate from respectable backgrounds in society and understand how to maintain the confidentiality of those who seek their company.

Great article Lot's of information to Read...Great Man Keep Posting and update to People..Thanks แทงบอลเต็ง

Thanks for a very interesting blog. What else may I get that kind of info written in such a perfect approach? I’ve a undertaking that I am simply now operating on, and I have been at the look out for such info. แทงบอลเต็ง

This particular is usually apparently essential and moreover outstanding truth along with for sure fair-minded and moreover admittedly useful My business is looking to find in advance designed for this specific useful stuffs… แทงบอลเต็ง

Exploring dark, atmospheric environments is one of my favorite aspects of horror games fnaf. The attention to detail in the settings, from creepy abandoned houses to haunted forests, really enhances the overall experience and makes me feel like I’m part of the story.

“Another example of why we should be a unicameral Legislature.” By Leslie Bonilla Muniz and Tom Davies, Indiana Capital Chronicle A ban on intoxicating and synthetic hemp-derived products died Monday after Indiana House lawmakers failed to call it down ahead of a second reading deadline. Senate Bill 250 would have mirrored a recent federal law that was designed to close a so-called loophole allowing potent delta-8, THCA and other cannabinoid products to proliferate. Sen. Aaron Freeman, R-Indianapolis, was openly critical of his colleagues across the hall for killing his bill. All he would say: “Another example of why we should be a unicameral Legislature.” The hemp measure previously passed the Senate in a 35-13 vote. Rep. Garrett Bascom, the bill’s sponsor in the House, said although he wouldn’t speak for other members, he felt there weren’t enough votes to pass it through his chamber this year. He didn’t offer any specific sticking points, but hoped to try again. The language could be amended into another bill in conference committee. The proposal also would have laid out a regulatory scheme for any low-potency, field-grown products—although industry representatives testified no customers would want them. This story was first published by Indiana Capital Chronicle. Unrelated content excised. The post Indiana Bill To Ben Hemp THC Products Dies As Key Deadline Passes appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

President Donald Trump’s pick to serve as U.S. surgeon general says that, while she wouldn’t recommend that Americans experiment with psychedelics like she has, there’s “exciting” research indicating that substances such as psilocybin can effectively treat serious mental health conditions that she would continue to follow if confirmed for the job. During a confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (HELP) Committee on Wednesday, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) pressed the nominee for surgeon general, Casey Means, on a section of a book she wrote that described an experience using psilocybin and how that helped her emotionally process news of her mother’s diagnosis with a terminal illness. Collins said she was concerned about Means’s suggestion that other people may benefit from using the federally illicit substances, and the senator asked whether she stood by that message and how she would communicate with the American people about the use of controlled substances if confirmed as surgeon general. “This is a very important question, and I would start by just saying that I believe what I would say as a private citizen is, in many cases, different than what I would say as a public health official joining a team where the purpose of this role is to communicate absolutely the best evidence-based science to the American people to keep them safe, thriving and healthy,” Means said. “And when it comes to psychedelic therapy for mental health issues, I think the science is still emerging—and so it would certainly not be a recommendation to the American people to do that, under under no circumstances,” she said. However, the nominee said she does “believe that there is exciting work being done in this area that needs to continue on psychedelic therapies for PTSD and veterans for mental health issues.” .@SenatorCollins to Surgeon General nominee Dr. Casey Means: "In your book…you urge readers to consider psilocybin-assisted therapy…Do you stand by what you said?" Means: "The science is still emerging…There is exciting work being done in this area that needs to continue." pic.twitter.com/1XyebRxSyV — CSPAN (@cspan) February 25, 2026 “Some of the researchers who are doing this work have said it’s some of the most promising and exciting of their entire careers, so I look forward to following that,” she said. “But to be very clear: Under no circumstances would I recommend that to the American people in this role. Our illicit drug use problem in our country is monumental and severe, and I I look forward to working with you on on these issues that are so important.” In a follow-up, Collins asked Means what she meant in her book, “Good Energy,” when she described hearing an “internal voice” advising her to prepare for something, motivating her to take psilocybin just one week before the nominee learned about her mother’s diagnosis. “In that passage of the book, I’m referring to my mother’s passing, which happened. She got a diagnosis of pancreatic cancer about a week after after that experience, and in my meditations and prayers at that time, I was having a deep sense that something ominous was coming, so that’s what that’s referring to,” Means said. “I think when I speak of spirituality—and I do believe Americans are ready to hear about spirituality as it pertains to medicine; 80 percent of Americans are spiritual or religious—there’s amazing evidence coming out…that spirituality has a large impact on health outcomes.” “So certainly that’s a personal anecdote,” she said. “But, again, I’m committed to to sharing only the best solid science with Americans on how to be healthy.” For context, here’s a passage of Means’s 2024 book that discusses psilocybin: “If you feel called, I also encourage you to explore intentional, guided psilocybin therapy. Strong scientific evidence suggests that this psychedelic therapy can be one of the most meaningful experiences of life for some people, as they have been for me. If the word psychedelics makes you cringe, I used to be in your position. I spent my childhood and young adult life being extremely judgmental about the use of any type of drug. But I became interested in plant medicine and psychedelics after learning more about their extensive traditional use, analyzing the groundbreaking research… Our brains are profoundly suffering in modern society right now, and I believe that anything that can safely increase neuroplasticity and ground us in more gratitude, awe, connection, and a sense of cosmic safety should be taken very seriously.” In several blog posts on her website, Means has also talked about “plant medicine,” specifically psilocybin, as one of “the modalities I’ve gone deepest in,” in addition to therapy, reading, writing, yoga and more. The Wall Street Journal reported in 2024 that the nominee’s brother, Calley, “had a vision of dedicating his life to reforming healthcare after a high dose of the psychedelic drug psilocybin.” Despite her advocacy for psychedelic medicine, however, the prospective surgeon general has expressed opposition to marijuana, saying in her book that people who use cannabis, as well as tobacco products, should “stop these completely.” “They will hurt your mitochondria and vastly diminish your ability to make Good Energy,” she said. In another blog post, she reiterated her position that marijuana is among the addictions she views as reflecting “our spiritual emptiness,” preventing people from “being able to go within, connect with God, and experience the bliss that come from this.” Means apparently doesn’t view the cannabis plant as all bad, however, as she described hemp in her book as among the “best plant-based sources” of nutrition—including protein, omega-3, antioxidants and fiber. She also shared recipes featuring hemp seed, including a “Southwestern Tofu Scramble” and “Creamy Cauliflower and Celery Root Puree.” If confirmed, Means wouldn’t be the only Trump administration official who’s embrace psychedelics medicine. She’d join several others—including U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary Doug Collins, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Marty Makary—to that end. Meanwhile, support for legalizing the use of psychedelics might relatively low today, according to a new survey from the RAND Corporation, but public opinion on the issue seems be closely following in the footsteps of the marijuana reform movement before the first states started enacting cannabis legalization. Image courtesy of CostaPPR. The post Trump’s Surgeon General Pick Says She Doesn’t Recommend People Use Psychedelics Like She Has—But Will Follow ‘Exciting’ Research appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

The Virginia House of Delegates has passed a bill to allow patients to use medical marijuana in hospitals. While both the House and Senate earlier this month approved differing versions of the cannabis legislation, the sponsors of those bills have agreed on a compromise approach which cleared the House in a 97-1 vote on Tuesday. As amended, SB 332 from Sen. Barbara Favola (D) would build upon existing state law protecting health professionals at hospices, nursing homes and assisted living facilities that aid terminally ill patients in utilizing medical cannabis treatment from punishment by adding hospitals to the statute. It would also create a new working group under the Department of Health to “discuss the implementation process for providing cannabis products to patients within medical care facilities.” “The work group shall assess any available federal guidance or proposed regulations on the use of cannabis products or changes to the schedule for cannabis products under the federal Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.) as well as interaction with applicable state laws,” the bill says. Its members would include representatives of the Virginia Hospital & Health Care Association and the Virginia Health Care Association, as well as health care providers and palliative, hospice, and hospital volunteers familiar with issues associated with providing care to individuals experiencing chronic illness. The bill directs the working group to submit a report to key legislative committees including “written guidelines for the use of medical cannabis within medical care facilities and the safe operations of medical care facilities” by November 1. The House version of the proposal, HB 75 from Del. Karen Keys-Gamarra (D), is scheduled for action before the Senate Committee on Education and Health on Thursday. Lawmakers in multiple states are advancing similar bills meant to provide patients with access to medical marijuana in health care facilities, with legislators across the U.S. making the case this month for a policy change they say is necessary to ensure patients have a full range of cannabis treatment options at their disposal. Meanwhile, the advancement of the Virginia legislation comes as lawmakers are also considering bills to legalize recreational marijuana sales and provide resentencing relief for people with prior cannabis convictions. The post Virginia House Passes Bill To Allow Medical Marijuana Use In Hospitals appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Rescheduling…does not free a single person from prison, clear a single criminal record or repair the racial harm created by decades of cannabis prohibition.” By Stephanie Shepard, Last Prisoner Project Every Black History Month, we are asked to reflect on how far our country has come, and to honor progress, resilience and the long fight for racial justice. That history includes not only landmark civil rights victories, but also the policies that followed them, including the war on drugs, which for decades has been used to police, punish and destabilize Black communities under the guise of public safety. This year, that reflection comes at a moment of real movement on cannabis policy. President Donald Trump’s decision to move forward with rescheduling marijuana under federal law signals a long-overdue acknowledgment that cannabis never belonged alongside the most dangerous substances in our criminal code, a classification that helped justify decades of racially disproportionate arrests, prosecutions and prison sentences. That step deserves credit. But it also demands honesty. Rescheduling may shift policy going forward, but it does nothing for the people still living with the consequences of the past. It does not free a single person from prison, clear a single criminal record or repair the racial harm created by decades of cannabis prohibition. I know this firsthand. More than a decade ago, I was sentenced to ten years in federal prison for a first-time, nonviolent cannabis offense. I lost nearly a decade of my life for conduct that is now legal in much of the country. When I came home, cannabis storefronts were opening across the country, investors were getting rich and politicians were patting themselves on the back for “ending prohibition.” Meanwhile, people like me were expected to quietly rebuild our lives while thousands of others remained behind bars. That contradiction sits at the heart of cannabis policy in America today. The war on drugs has always been a racial justice issue. For decades, Black and Brown communities were disproportionately targeted, policed, prosecuted and incarcerated for cannabis, despite similar usage rates across racial lines. Black Americans are still more than three times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than white Americans. Those arrests led to convictions, lengthy prison sentences and lifelong barriers to housing, employment, education and voting. Today, cannabis is a multibillion-dollar industry. States collect tax revenue, companies go public and politicians celebrate “progress.” But tens of thousands of people remain incarcerated for cannabis-related conduct, and millions more live with the collateral consequences of past convictions. Legalization has created opportunity for some, while leaving behind the very communities that paid the highest price for prohibition. That is why reform cannot stop at rescheduling or legalization alone. If we are serious about justice, cannabis reform must include retroactive relief for those serving sentences that would never be imposed today. It must include automatic expungement of criminal records that continue to lock people out of jobs, housing and education. And it must include meaningful reentry support so that people coming home are not punished again for surviving incarceration. At Last Prisoner Project, a national nonprofit dedicated to freeing people incarcerated for cannabis offenses and repairing the harms of cannabis criminalization, I work every day with people who have been waiting years, sometimes decades, for relief. Our organization provides direct legal representation to those still behind bars, supports families separated by incarceration and helps people returning home access housing, employment and other critical resources. Almost every day, I hear from mothers who missed their children growing up, from fathers who have watched the world change through prison walls and from people who were punished not for violence, but for participating in an underground economy created by prohibition itself. Their lives were shaped by laws that lawmakers now openly admit were wrong, yet they remain trapped by their consequences. I believe we can do better, because I have seen what justice looks like when it finally arrives. I have watched people walk out of prison after decades and reunite with their families. I have seen records cleared, doors reopened and futures restored. That work does not happen on its own. Organizations like Last Prisoner Project depend on public support, and on partnership from the legal cannabis industry itself, to provide legal representation, support families separated by incarceration, help people returning home rebuild their lives and push for the policy changes needed to end these injustices for good. As companies profit from a legal market built on the end of prohibition, they have both the opportunity and the responsibility to help repair the harm prohibition caused. As we reflect this month on freedom, resilience and progress, we should remember that the fight for racial justice did not end with the passage of a bill or the opening of a dispensary. It continues wherever people remain incarcerated and excluded for conduct that society has legalized, normalized and turned into profit. Stephanie Shepard is executive director of the Last Prisoner Project, a nonprofit dedicated to freeing those incarcerated for cannabis offenses and repairing the harms of cannabis criminalization. She served nearly ten years in federal prison for a first-time, nonviolent cannabis offense. The post This Black History Month, Simply Rescheduling Marijuana Isn’t Enough While Cannabis Prisoners Remain Behind Bars appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

President Donald Trump delivered a lengthy State of the Union address on Tuesday, touching on a wide range of policy issues he’s championed in the first year of his second term. But to the disappointment of advocates and stakeholders, the president did not take the primetime opportunity to promote his work around marijuana rescheduling. Trump did bring up drugs in the context of militarized enforcement actions targeting alleged traffickers, preventing fentanyl smuggling across the border and the addressing pharmaceutical costs. Yet despite the bipartisan popularity of cannabis reform, he declined to mention a December executive order he issued directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to expeditiously complete the process of moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). That hasn’t happened yet, and the Justice Department has been largely silent on the issue in the weeks since Trump signed the order. Some hoped the president would use the high-profile speech before a joint session of Congress to reiterate his directive to finalize the rulemaking, but the issue was ignored altogether. Adam Rosenberg, chairman of the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA), said after the speech that the State of the Union represented a “missed an opportunity to highlight a major gap between federal policy and state law.” “Nearly every state has legalized cannabis in some form, yet federal rules continue to create uncertainty for legitimate operators. The industry has heard promises before, including support for rescheduling. What’s missing is delivery,” he said. “Federal inaction continues to punish state-legal businesses with punitive tax treatment and banking barriers, while the illicit market operates without consequence. That imbalance is unsustainable.” Trump during his first term used the annual address to promote his administration’s tough-of-crime drug policy position. But it was his predecessor, former President Joe Biden, who first raised marijuana rescheduling—a process he initiated that led to the Schedule III recommendation—at a State of the Union address. The rulemaking process has dragged on for years now, however, and neither Trump nor the White House have provided any further update. Ahead of Tuesday’s speech, Marijuana Moment asked the White House whether the president planned to bring up cannabis rescheduling, but a spokesperson simply pointed to a statement from Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt the generally described Trump’s intent to discuss the administration’s “many record-breaking accomplishments” and his “ambitious agenda to continue bringing the American Dream back for working people.” A DOJ spokesperson told Marijuana Moment last month, meanwhile, that it had no “comment or updates” to share on the topic. However, an agency official more recently told Salon that “DOJ is working to identify the most expeditious means of executing the EO.” That phrasing is notable, signaling that the department is uncertain about the administrative pathway to finalize rescheduling. The hope among advocates and industry stakeholders was that the process would be more simple, with a final signature on the existing reform proposal that was released following a scientific review initiated under the prior Biden administration. The Justice Department’s relative silence on the issue has left some wondering if the agency is aligned with the White House, which last month separately touted the president’s order as an example of a policy achievement during the first year of his second term. Separately, as the Trump administration works to finalize the rescheduling proposal and prepares to roll out a CBD coverage plan through Medicare under the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), the head of that agency, Mehmet Oz, recently raised concerns about non-intoxicating cannabidiol and hemp products overall. Oz said this month that “there are going to be consequences” as more Americans choose marijuana over alcohol—including problems caused by “high-dose hemp and CBD.” Meanwhile, the first-ever White House drug czar recently said that while he loves Trump and “almost everything he does,” that affection doesn’t extend to the pending proposal to federally reschedule marijuana, which he described as a “gateway drug” that’s harming youth. A White House spokesperson defended the administration’s rescheduling push in an earlier interview with Fox News Digital, stating that it’s part of his “pledge to expand medical research into applications of marijuana and cannabidiols.” “The president’s historic action paved the way for the development of promising new treatments for American patients, especially veterans—and the presence of several leaders from law enforcement and veterans groups at the Oval Office signing is indicative of how President Trump continues to push the envelope to support our nation’s heroes,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai said. The rescheduling plan has been met with mixed reactions on Capitol Hill. For example, prohibitionist Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD) half-jokingly told Marijuana Moment this month that he felt the Justice Department should “take about 20 years” to finish the rescheduling process. In December, Harris separately said Trump doesn’t have the authority to unilaterally reschedule marijuana via executive order. But while lawmakers could overrule any administrative move to enact the reform, it would be a “heavy lift” in the Republican-controlled Congress, he acknowledged. Another GOP lawmaker on the other side of the debate, Congressional Cannabis Caucus co-chair Rep. Dave Joyce (R-OH), recently told Marijuana Moment that while marijuana rescheduling might not be at the top of the agenda for the Justice Department or White House amid competing interests, he and bipartisan colleagues will be ready when “opportunity does present itself.” Joyce separately said last month that he doesn’t think the attorney general would seek to undermine the president’s executive order to move marijuana to Schedule III despite any personal reservations she may have about the policy change. Former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Trump’s first pick for attorney general this term who ultimately withdrew his nomination, raised eyebrows last week after posting on X that he’s been told the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is actively drafting a rescheduling rule and intended to issue it “ASAP.” There’s some confusion around that point, however, as a rule is already pending before the Justice Department—and a new rule would presumably be subject to additional administrative review and public comment. A Democratic senator told Marijuana Moment earlier this month that it’s “too early to tell” what the implications of Trump’s cannabis order would be—saying that while there are “things that look promising” about it, he is “very concerned about where the DOJ will land.” “The ability of the Trump administration to speak out of both sides of their mouth is staggering,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) said. “So I’m just going to wait and see right now. Obviously, there’s things that look promising—to end generations of injustice. I really want to wait and see.” — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Also last month, two GOP senators filed an amendment to block the Trump administration from rescheduling cannabis, but it was not considered on the floor. Meanwhile, last month, DEA said the cannabis rescheduling appeal process “remains pending” despite Trump’s executive order. A recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) report discussed how DOJ could, in theory, reject the president’s directive or delay the process by restarting the scientific review into marijuana. Bondi, the attorney general, separately missed a congressionally mandated deadline last month to issue guidelines for easing barriers to research on Schedule I substances such as marijuana and psychedelics. The post Trump ‘Missed An Opportunity’ To Promote Marijuana Rescheduling During State Of The Union, Industry Leader Says appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“It moves us closer to the day patients can speak openly with their doctors and families like mine can finally see the relief our loved ones have waited so long for.” By Juan Salinas II, Nebraska Examiner The Nebraska Legislature’s Health and Human Services Committee advanced a bill onto the floor that explicitly protects physicians who recommend medical cannabis to patients. The committee on Tuesday voted 5-2 to advance Legislative Bill 933 from State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha. The measure would grant medical practitioners immunity from civil, criminal or disciplinary action for stating that, in the provider’s professional opinion, a patient is likely to receive therapeutic benefit or symptom relief from using cannabis for a medical condition. State Sen. Brian Hardin of Gering, the committee chair, and State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln were the two senators who voted no. Hardin argued the bill might be a Trojan horse. Ballard questioned whether the bill was needed. The committee amended the bill to emphasize that a health care practitioner could still be “subject to civil penalty or disciplinary action” for not properly evaluating the medical condition of a patient. Tuesday’s vote was the latest in a years-long saga over medical cannabis in the state as Nebraska officials have slowed the implementation of two voter-passed laws. Nebraskans voted overwhelmingly to legalize possession of up to 5 ounces of medical cannabis with any health care practitioner’s recommendation in 2024. The law took effect late that year. Patients or caregivers following the state law are immune from state or local criminal penalties. Voters separately created the regulatory Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, which will eventually license in-state dispensaries, allowing legal sales of the drug in the Cornhusker State. Over the past 15 months, lawmakers and advocates say they are not aware of any in-state providers who have recommended medical cannabis, partially because of concerns about liability and potential risks to licensure, some have said. Cavanaugh’s bill borrows language from last year’s LB 677 from State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair. Hansen’s more expansive medical cannabis bill sought to give more structure to the Medical Cannabis Commission, including funding. The more comprehensive measure failed, falling short of the 33 votes needed to alter a state law passed by ballot measure. Nebraska also was left off a nearly annual congressional effort to protect states with medical cannabis programs, typically a noncontroversial addition to a federal spending bill that protects 47 other states with at least some form of medical cannabis laws. Crista Eggers of Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana, the group that led two 2024 ballot measures on medical cannabis, said the proposal is a “foundational protection that every medical cannabis program in the country provides so doctors can care for patients without fear.” “Without it, Nebraska risks having a program that fails to function… Advancing LB 933 through committee is only the first step,” Eggers said. “It moves us closer to the day patients can speak openly with their doctors and families like mine can finally see the relief our loved ones have waited so long for.” Now, it’s up to the speaker, John Arch of La Vista, to schedule it. The idea that the bill received bipartisan committee support could increase the pressure on Arch to let the bill reach the floor. Arch’s office said Tuesday that it was too soon for the speaker to set a timeline since the bill just came out of committee. This story was first published by Nebraska Examiner. The post Nebraska Lawmakers Vote To Protect Doctors Who Recommend Medical Marijuana appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

With the U.S. Supreme Court set to hear a case next week on the constitutionality of a federal gun ban for marijuana users, attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) are feeling “hopeful” that justices will take their side over the Trump administration’s Justice Department and ultimately declare the current policy unlawful. Oral arguments in the case, U.S. vs. Hemani, are scheduled for Monday. And after years of litigation on the issue in courts across the country, advocates are eager to see the cannabis and firearms issue resolved in their favor with justices agreeing that the statute known as Section 922(g)(3) violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Brandon Buskey, director of ACLU’s Criminal Law Reform Project, is part of the legal team representing Ali Danial Hemani, who challenged his federal conviction under 922(g)(3) for unlawful possession of a gun as a person who regularly used cannabis. Buskey discussed the case in an interview with Marijuana Moment on Tuesday, detailing how the organization plans to navigate the thorny legal issues that have divided lower courts, what questions it anticipates from the justices and how it is preparing to respond to DOJ’s likely claims. In case after case and filing after filing, DOJ has been steadfast in its position that the federal gun ban is appropriately enforced, insisting that even under the rigorous standards for gun laws that must be applied under recent Supreme Court precedent, restricting firearm rights for cannabis consumers is a public safety imperative. But on the other side of the debate, groups as politically diverse as ACLU and the National Rifle Association (NRA) have maintained that Section 922(g)(3) represents unconstitutional government overreach that ignores basic realities: That is, with cannabis now legal in some form in the vast majority of states—and even the federal government’s long-held prohibitionist policies gradually softening—it’s time to recognize that cannabis users aren’t part of some inherently dangerous caste whose Second Amendment rights must be categorically denied. “We don’t think that there’s any valid basis in history or tradition to justify that prosecution,” Buskey said. The following interview has been lightly edited for clarity. Marijuana Moment: Can you give an overview of the legal arguments ACLU plans to make challenging the current federal gun ban for cannabis users? Brandon Buskey: Our position is very basic and straightforward. It really consists of two parts. The first is that the statute in question prohibits gun possession by people based simply on marijuana use—but is unconstitutionally vague. It does not provide the kind of clarity that the Supreme Court requires of criminal statutes, especially statutes that expose an individual to up to 15 years of imprisonment. And because it doesn’t have that clarity, it lends itself very easily to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement, and that’s our first point court in terms of why this law can’t stand. Second, even if we could agree on a definition of unlawful user that would apply to our client, Mr. Hemani, the law does not comport with the Supreme Court’s test for gun rights regulation. On the Second Amendment, the court has made clear that modern gun rights regulations have to fit the history and tradition of firearms regulation, so the government has to be able to point to an analogous type of firearm restriction from around the time of the [country’s] founding in order to prohibit individuals in the present from owning a firearm. Now our position is that that leaves ample room for the government to implement reasonable prohibitions on gun possession that are directly attuned to public safety risks. But this law does not do that. Instead, this law instead imposes a categorical presumption of dangerousness for a whole category of responsible gun owners based simply on their use of a common intoxicant like marijuana. And we don’t think that there’s any valid basis in history or tradition to justify that prosecution. MM: What kind of questions do you expect justices will want to examine in this particular case? And are you confident they’ll be amenable to those arguments ACLU will be raising? BB: We are hopeful that our position will prevail in front of the court. and that’s in part, on the Second Amendment question, because the court has emphasized that the Second Amendment is a fundamental right—and so our position is that, because it is a fundamental right, the government can’t take it away based on these arbitrary definitions of what an unlawful user might be or with prohibitions that don’t have any analogous precedent from the founding era. I suspect the court will have questions teasing out how broad the rule might apply. Does it apply to other types of drugs? Things like that. However, our emphasis will be that our argument is very narrow, and it really is limited to how this law is applied to an individual like Mr. Hemani, for whom the government has only established two basic facts: One, that he is a regular user of marijuana and, two, that he had possession of a weapon that was safely secured at the time it was located. And, because of that, we are confident that the court will will see that our argument is narrow and doesn’t implicate other broader questions—perhaps more difficult questions—that aren’t before the court in this argument. MM: What about DOJ? What are you expecting from the government as you head into oral arguments? BB: We anticipate that the government will have a very difficult time meeting its burden of establishing a historical analog, because it is clear that the government has decided to double down on this analogy—that someone who uses a common intoxicant like marijuana, or potentially someone, in the government’s view, [who uses] an intoxicant like alcohol, can be disarmed and imprisoned for 15 years. In the government’s view, those individuals—based on their regular use—are the equivalent of what was known at the founding as habitual drunkards, individuals who were subject to civil commitment and criminal prosecution because they simply could not could not resist the compulsion to abuse alcohol. That’s going to be a very difficult analogy for for the government to sustain here. And I think it’s one that the general public would be very surprised to hear that the government views users of a substance that is legal to some extent in nearly every state, as habitual drunkards [and] as people who are inherently dangerous simply by use of a common intoxicant like marijuana. MM: This also comes two months after President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing the completion of a federal marijuana rescheduling proposal. To what extent do you think that issue will be addressed in this more narrowly focused gun and marijuana case? BB: I think it’s definitely relevant to the questions before the court, certainly, because the law makes it a crime for any unlawful user of a controlled substance to possess a gun. The rescheduling order directed by President Trump doesn’t technically shift the question in this case, because it would still be illegal for unlawful user of a Schedule III drug [to own or possess a] firearm. However, it does, in our view, undermine the government’s position that individuals who use marijuana on some regular basis, although it’s not totally defined, are categorically and presumptively dangerous. The president in that order made clear that there are valid purposes, or valid medical uses of marijuana, and it should be studied more in order to make it available to individuals who might need it for pain relief and other other purposes. And so it really strains credulity for the government to say that, notwithstanding that recognition, it should still be authorized to prosecute, for example, the veteran who is using medical marijuana legally under the laws of his or her state, but also owns a firearm. That individual, despite the president’s proclamation, would not be protected from prosecution under the statute. MM: Most people live in a state where cannabis is legal. Public opinion strongly favors reform over criminalization as it concerns cannabis. How should people understand why it is that DOJ continues to make such sweeping and stigmatizing generalizations about marijuana consumers to support this gun ban? BB: The best way to understand this, perhaps, is the government—under numerous administrations—almost always defends the constitutionality of criminal statutes, even when there are potentially major problems with those statues and even when it’s clear that they are not in step with the consensus of the popular will. So I think that underscores a point that we’re making throughout our brief, which is that it’s really up to Congress to write a clearer law—but I think it’s also up to the Supreme Court to make clear that the government does not have the authority to enforce this law and cannot claim such broad authority under the Second Amendment. And I think, because the executive almost always wants to maintain the power to prosecute in these cases, then the other branches of our government have to come forward and limit that authority. MM: Is there anything else you’d like to add about ACLU’s position on this issue? BB: I would only add that we want to make it very, very clear our position is that gun violence is a real problem. It deserves real solutions. That marijuana use is not purely innocuous. However, the prosecution of our client in this case does not serve public safety and is not in line with the kinds of valid prohibitions on gun possession or gun use that are open to states under the Second Amendment, and that’s why we’re arguing this law simply cannot stand. The post ACLU Attorney ‘Confident’ Supreme Court Will Strike Down Gun Ban For Marijuana Users After Oral Arguments Next Week appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

I used to worry about encountering fake profiles, but then I found a trustworthy agency offering Call Girl In Gurgaon services. They provide a real list of gorgeous, verified companions, from mature, experienced women to fresh, teenage beauties. Their round-the-clock availability means you can book tonight and have a stunning partner delivered to your hotel room, ready to provide endless joy.

With thanks just for offer a very awesome page! I stubled onto a web site ideal for great really needs. Its content has delightful and additionally important reports. Preserve acknowledge that there are succeed! iptv canada

I think this is an informative post and it is very useful and knowledgeable. therefore, I would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. ufabet เว็บตรง มือถือ

VA marijuana sales bill; OR medical cannabis in hospices; FL medical marijuana for vets; Psychedelic legalization poll; Op-ed calling out NYT’s stance Subscribe to receive Marijuana Moment’s newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning. It’s the best way to make sure you know which cannabis stories are shaping the day. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Your support makes Marijuana Moment possible… Your good deed for the day: donate to an independent publisher like Marijuana Moment and ensure that as many voters as possible have access to the most in-depth cannabis reporting out there. Support our work at https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW The House Agriculture Committee is set to consider an amendment to delay the federal recriminalization of hemp THC products by one year during a markup of the Farm Bill next week. The Virginia House General Laws Committee amended a Senate-passed bill to legalize recreational marijuana sales to be closer to the version approved in their chamber, with additional changes—setting the stage for bicameral negotiations. Virginia Republican lawmakers discussed their decisions to vote for legislation to legalize recreational marijuana sales in contrast with most other members of their party. The Oregon House of Representatives passed a bill to allow patients to use medical cannabis in hospices and other healthcare facilities. The Florida House Health & Human Services Committee approved a bill to slash medical cannabis registration fees for military veterans—with the sponsor saying that marijuana helps with “reducing the dependency on opioids.” A new poll shows that about a quarter of Americans support legalizing psilocybin, which is “similar to what it was for cannabis in the mid-1990s—just before state medical cannabis laws started to be implemented.” Jill Simonian and Codi Peterson of the Pharmacists’ Cannabis Coalition of California argue in a new Marijuana Moment op-ed that The New York Times editorial board is wrong to claim the U.S. has a “marijuana problem” when the real issue is actually a “regulatory deficit layered on top of decades of stigma.” “We have normalized widespread use without building the clinical and institutional structures needed to manage it responsibly, and then express surprise when problems emerge. This is not a failure of legalization. It is a failure of integration.” The South Dakota House of Representatives passed a bill to eliminate the Medical Marijuana Oversight Committee, with the sponsor saying the body has become an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. / FEDERAL The Drug Enforcement Administration is promoting a podcast episode about drug use in LGBTQ+ youth communities. The House bill to provide a pathway for patients to access Schedule I drugs got one new cosponsor for a total of 16. / STATES Ohio’s Senate president defended the legislature’s decision to enact restrictions on hemp products. The Nebraska legislature’s Health and Human Services Committee approved a bill to provide protections for doctors who recommend medical cannabis. The West Virginia House Finance Committee held a hearing on a bill to reallocate medical cannabis revenue. A Minnesota senator discussed her bill to require testing of recreational marijuana products. Florida’s health care administration secretary said the state reimbursed the federal government for Medicaid settlement funds that were spent to oppose a marijuana legalization ballot initiative. Rhode Island regulators are asking a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the state’s marijuana social equity business licensing system. Colorado regulators published guidance about the marijuana business license application process. The California State Fair is again hosting a cannabis awards competition this year—with a new home grow category. Washington, D.C. regulators suspended a medical cannabis business’s license over alleged violations. The Oregon Psilocybin Product Potency Workgroup will meet on March 3 and 17. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / LOCAL New York City’s mayor said officials worked to keep drug overdose prevention centers open overnight during recent cold weather to save lives. / INTERNATIONAL The Philippine House Committee on Dangerous Drugs and House Committee on Health approved a medical cannabis legalization bill, drawing concerns from the Department of Health. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study found that packaging films based on polysaccharides with cannabis flower extract “reduced the degradation of bioactive compounds during the storage of packaged fruit.” A study found that “chronic use of ayahuasca or cannabis is not associated with detectable lasting neuropsychological impairments in the executive and working memory tasks assessed in this study, and that personality characteristics—rather than cognition or psychopathology—most clearly distinguish chronic users from non-users.” / BUSINESS Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. reported quarterly revenue of $66.7 million. Village Farms International, Inc. amended and extended its Canadian credit facility by upsizing loan commitments with existing lenders. Glass House Brands Inc.’s board of directors established a special committee to explore new products and business expansion. Green Flower launched a cannabis employer network. Make sure to subscribe to get Marijuana Moment’s daily dispatch in your inbox. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: The post Congress will consider hemp THC product ban delay next week (Newsletter: February 25, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Great article Lot's of information to Read...Great Man Keep Posting and update to People..Thanks เว็บแทงบอล 888

Thanks for the blog loaded with so many information. Stopping by your blog helped me to get what I was looking for. แทงบอลออนไลน์888

ManagePro https://www.managepro.ma Application de gestion Maroc est une application de gestion

Pour la création site web, rendez-vous à la meilleure https://www.itlabspro.com/creation-site-web-maroc agence web à Marrakech, Maroc, cette dernière est la agence de communication et SEO à Marrakech, Maroc la plus expérimentée.

Spécialisée dans la https://www.redcityweb.com Vous cherchez une agence web au Maroc fiable ? Faites confiance à Red City Web , votre partenaire digital à Marrakech. Spécialisée dans la création site web Maroc, notre agence web à Marrakech propose des solutions sur mesure.

We arrived on your weblog whilst concentrating simply somewhat submits. Good technique for following, I'll be book-marking at the same time grab your own total increases. abonnement iptv hd

Combos flow naturally when you master positioning and stamina loops jacksmith