is San Diegan James Stacy on Federal Trial or US President Barrack Obama?

By Dion Markgraaff

Do the words/orders of the United States President
matter?

The answer is no, according to San Diego Federal court Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz, who stated in a published ruling July 7th, that James Stacy listening to the President’s words was “unreasonable,” and deciding the President of the United States Barack Obama’s order of May 20th has no value to the citizens of this country. Unfortunately for Stacy, he will have to pay the price.

In additional rulings, Judge Moskowitz has denied this San Diego medical cannabis provider a defense in Federal Court.  Stacy is facing life in prison for helping to provide 10 grams of cannabis to an undercover San Diego Sheriff with a valid doctor’s recommendation. The collective he helped form was only 10 days old when the fake patient submitted all the required paper work to join the collective. The collective was open for 10 weeks before local Sheriff’s and Federal Drug Enforcement Agency raided, arrested, and jailed him.

Stacy believed the country had voted for a new president who had signed an order to the entire federal government on the preemption of state’s rights on May 20th, two days after the US Supreme Court refused to hear the San Diego County lawsuit dealing with the issue of conflicting powers. These events caused some people to believe there was some resolution to the question concerning the balance of power, seemingly answered by two of the three main branches of government.

Here are the words spoken by Obama on this issue of power, published weeks before Stacy opened the Movement in Action Collective;

“The purpose of this memorandum is to state the general policy of my Administration that preemption of State law by executive departments and agencies should be undertaken only with full consideration of the legitimate prerogatives of the States and with a sufficient legal basis for preemption. Executive departments and agencies should be mindful that in our Federal system, the citizens of the several States have distinctive circumstances and values, and that in many instances it is appropriate for them to apply to themselves rules and principles that reflect these circumstances and values. As Justice Brandeis explained more than 70 years ago, “It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.”

As we reported in the premiere issue of NUG Magazine in July 2009 – along with the President’s memo – according to a U.S. Department of Justice memorandum issued to the Counsel for the President in 2000,

“A presidential directive has the same substantive legal effect as an executive order. It is the substance of the presidential action that is determinative, not the form of the document conveying that action. Both an executive order and a presidential directive remain effective upon a change in administration, unless otherwise specified in the document, and both continue to be effective until subsequent presidential action is taken.”

After reviewing all of the evidence obtained by law enforcement before the September 9th raids in 2009, the government’s report indicated he was following state law. Therefore, if there was a question of him not obeying California law, then the local government should seek to prosecute him in state court.

A Good Person is Fighting for Our Rights

Yes, James Stacy is standing up and fighting for our rights. Win or lose, he is showing the courage our government and leaders do not have, when they do not follow the law and hide in the shadows, letting their citizens fall victim to random chaos and terror.

I was a member of the North County Collective. After growing up in Vista and then spending my adulthood working for sane cannabis policies, one of the happiest days I had was joining this association. I thought I was dreaming, when I had local access to my needed medicine.  I was pleasantly surprised at the fantastic facility where the collective was located – the old community center for farmers, the Vista Grange.

Meeting and getting to know James Stacy, the founder of the collective, was an added bonus. In the few short weeks before being raided and arrested, he led the Movement in Action Collective in organizing the Eugene Davidovich Defense Fund, hosted North County ASA meetings and had the best medical cannabis farmers market every other Saturday, where members could cooperatively interact directly with each other.

The local government sting investigation of the collective – reads like a movie script. Stacy engaged with the cop in a long talk on how the collective worked and how he was following the law as closely possible. He even pointed out how he was following the ongoing case of Eugene Davidovich and had a jar on the table to raise money for Davidovich’s defense. The undercover patient/cop responded by putting $3 in the jar to keep up appearances.

Judge Moskowitz ruled he will force Stacy’s case to follow the US federal policies of heavily censoring the full information in all medical cannabis cases. However, Judge Moskowitz said, “One way or the other the jury will hear that this was a medical marijuana case.”

The judge also stated some interesting thoughts in his ruling saying Stacy could have talked to the US Attorney, who was vacant at the time. He also ruled the October 2009 Justice Department Policy Directive on medical cannabis was not relevant in this case because it came after his arrest.

“With a new enforcement policy on medical marijuana, the federal government should not be trying this case at all,” said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access. “At the very least, Mr. Stacy’s case should be tried in state court where he’s guaranteed a defense against his charges.” Because of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on medical marijuana, defendants are prevented from entering evidence of medical use or state law compliance in federal court.

A congressional bill would change this fact. The H.R. 3939–Truth in Trials Act is to amend title 18, United States Code, to provide an affirmative defense for the medical use of marijuana in Federal court in accordance with the laws of the various States, and for other purposes.

“Stacy’s prosecution and denial of a defense underscores the importance of developing a comprehensive federal policy on medical marijuana, which will also allow states to care for the health and welfare of their people without unnecessary federal interference,” said Caren Woodson, Director of Government Affairs at Americans for Safe Access. “It’s not the purview of the federal government to enforce local or state laws.”

Rx Cannabis Raid Relief Concert & Expo
Aug. 14th 4:30pm 9:30pm
Palisades Balboa Park – Ball Room
Admission is Free.

For more information about James Stacy’s case visit
www.movementinaction.org

Steve

Author: Steve

Built Like That!

Share This Post On

Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
Notify of
Skip to toolbar