Drug Abuse and Traffic

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Canada Re-Criminalizes Public Drug Use in British Columbia

      by

      A province that was a global pioneer in harm reduction took a step back after a political backlash.The government of Canada on Tuesday walked back part of a program allowing people in British Columbia to possess small amounts of drugs, including heroin and cocaine, without fear of criminal charges. At the request of the province and after a public backlash, people in British Columbia are no longer permitted to use drugs in public places.Under the changes, which went into effect immediately, adults will still be allowed to possess small amounts of drugs. But they will now have to use them in legal residences, at safe injection sites and at other harm-reduction centers established by the health authorities.The re-criminalization of public drug use in British Columbia underscores the difficulties that governments face as they grapple with the opioid crisis. Even in a province that has been a global pioneer of the harm reduction movement, an approach that seeks to reduce risky behavior rather than to punish drug users, there are no easy answers.The province’s coroner estimated that there were a record 2,511 toxic drug deaths last year. Drug overdoses from toxic substances kill more people ages 10 to 59 than homicides, suicides, accidents and natural diseases combined in British Columbia, according to the provincial coroner’s office.The goals of decriminalizing possession were to enable police officers to focus their time on large drug distributors rather than users and encourage users to be open to treatment. But concerns about public drug use have quickly surfaced and raised repeatedly in the provincial legislature by members of opposition parties.Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes, a professor in the medical school at the University of British Columbia who studies addiction and public health policy, said the decision amounted to “three steps back” in dealing with the opioid crisis.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Biden’s Stance on Marijuana Has a Political Upside, Allies Say

      by

      The president’s allies say the Justice Department’s chill take on marijuana has a political upside.On Labor Day in 2022, John Fetterman found himself in a room in Pittsburgh with President Biden.Fetterman, a Democrat who was then the lieutenant governor of Pennsylvania and in the middle of his successful run for the U.S. Senate, had a simple message he wanted to share: Go big on legal weed.And how did the president respond? “He was just, like, ‘Yeah, absolutely,’” Fetterman told me yesterday.The Justice Department on Tuesday said it had recommended that federal restrictions on marijuana become a whole lot chiller. And while it is not clear that lobbying from Democrats like Fetterman has played any role, the move was the latest step by the Biden administration to liberalize the nation’s cannabis policy — something his allies believe comes with an obvious political upside when more than two-thirds of Americans support legalization of the drug.“High reward, zero risk,” said the perpetually sweatshirted Fetterman, joking that he advises Biden only on matters of fashion and weed policy.Biden, a suit-wearing president who is more statesman than stoner, has become something of the pot president. It could elevate his standing specifically with young voters, who support rescheduling, or reclassifying, marijuana as a less serious drug, as well as with supporters of changes to criminal justice laws.One of the president’s allies just wishes he would talk about it more.“He has pardoned people, he initiated this rescheduling, but he has not embraced it. It’s not too late,” said Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, the 75-year-old Democrat who has been pushing for looser cannabis policy for half a century. “The public needs to know that this is the single most significant step that has been taken by the federal government in the more-than-50-year-old war on drugs.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Senate Democrats Reintroduce Legislation to Legalize Marijuana

      by

      The bill, which reflects growing support for legalization, would end the federal prohibition on cannabis. But it is unlikely to pass in an election year and a divided government.Senate Democrats reintroduced broad legislation on Wednesday to legalize cannabis on the federal level, a major policy shift with wide public support, but it is unlikely to be enacted this year ahead of November’s elections and in a divided government.The bill, which amounts to a Democratic wish list for federal cannabis policy, would end the federal prohibition on marijuana by removing it from a controlled substances list. The government currently classifies the drug as among the most dangerous and addictive substances.The legislation would create a new framework regulating cannabis and taxing the burgeoning cannabis industry, expunge certain federal marijuana-related offenses from criminal records, expand research into marijuana’s health impacts and devote federal money to helping communities and individuals affected by the war on drugs.The measure, which was first introduced in 2022, was led by Senators Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader; Ron Wyden of Oregon, the chairman of the Finance Committee, and Cory Booker of New Jersey. Fifteen other Senate Democrats have signed on as co-sponsors.“Over the decades, millions of Americans, most often Americans of color, have had their lives derailed and destroyed by our country’s failed war on drugs,” Mr. Schumer, the first majority leader to call for federal legalization, said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. “In place of the war on drugs, our bill would lay the foundation for something very different: a just and responsible and common-sense approach to cannabis regulation.”He reintroduced the measure one day after the Justice Department recommended easing restrictions on cannabis and downgrading it to a lower classification on the controlled substances list. That move did not go as far as some advocates and many Democrats have urged, but it was a significant shift reflecting the Biden administration’s efforts to liberalize marijuana policy.“Reclassifying cannabis is a necessary and long-overdue step, but it is not at all the end of the story,” Mr. Schumer said. “It’s time for Congress to wake up to the times and do its part by passing the cannabis reform that most Americans have long called for. It’s past time for Congress to catch up with public opinion and to catch up with the science.”But despite support from top Democrats, the legislation is highly unlikely to move in Congress during this election year. Republicans, many of whom have opposed federal cannabis legalization, control the House, and none have signed on to the bill. Congress has also labored to perform even the most basic duties of governance amid deep divisions within the Republican majority in the House. And few must-pass bills remain, leaving proponents without many opportunities to slip it into a bigger legislative package.Kevin Sabet, who served as a drug policy adviser during the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations, warned about the dangers of legalization and argued that such a bill would “commercialize” the marijuana industry and create “Big Tobacco 2.0.”“Let’s not commercialize marijuana in the name of social justice,” said Mr. Sabet, now the president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, an anti-legalization advocacy group. While he supported certain elements of the bill, such as expunging criminal records and removing criminal penalties for marijuana use, he said legalization was ultimately about “supersizing a commercial industry.”“And we really have to think long and hard after our horrible experience with Big Tobacco in our country,” he said, “whether that’s going to be good for us or not.”Still, the legislation reflects growing support among Democrats and across the country in both Republican- and Democratic-leaning states for legalizing access to marijuana, in addition to the issue’s potential political value ahead of an expected election rematch between President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump.Legalization, in some form, is broadly popular across the country, with 88 percent of Americans saying marijuana should be legal for medical or recreational use, according to a January survey by the Pew Research Center. Twenty-four states have legalized small amounts of marijuana for adult recreational use, and 38 states have approved it for medicinal purposes. And where marijuana legalization has appeared on state ballots, it has won easily, often outperforming candidates in either party.Advocates of legalization have emphasized the issue’s political potency in trying to convince elected officials.“If anybody was looking at the political tea leaves, they would have to realize that obstructing cannabis policy reform — it is a losing proposition as a politician,” said Morgan Fox, the political director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, an advocacy group. “This is really a rallying point for people that care about cannabis policy reform.”At least one Democrat, Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, a leading cannabis advocate in Congress, has urged the Biden administration to embrace full legalization and make it a more prominent part of Mr. Biden’s re-election campaign. He has argued that the issue could help the president engage young people, whose support for him has faltered, but who could be crucial to victory in November.The Biden administration’s move to downgrade cannabis on the controlled substances list also reflects the president’s evolution on the issue. Mr. Biden has pardoned thousands of people convicted of nonviolent drug offenses in an effort to remedy racial disparities in the justice system. And Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, has emphasized that Mr. Biden had been “very, very clear he doesn’t believe that anyone should be in jail or be prosecuted just for using or possessing marijuana.”Mr. Trump’s record on legalization is more mixed. In 2018, his administration freed prosecutors to aggressively enforce federal marijuana restrictions in states that had eased prohibitions on the drug. Mr. Trump later appeared to break with his administration, saying he was likely to support a legislative proposal to leave legalization to states, and he pardoned several nonviolent drug offenders.“This has not been an issue that is really coming up in conversation, at rallies or in media appearances and whatnot,” Mr. Fox said. “It’s kind of an unknown, how a future Trump administration would deal with cannabis.”Congress is considering more incremental bills that would ease restrictions on marijuana — such as by allowing legal cannabis businesses to access financial services — several of which have bipartisan support. But most are not expected to move during this Congress, given Republican opposition. More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      The Town at the Center of a Supreme Court Battle Over Homelessness

      by

      A lawsuit by a group of homeless residents of a small Oregon town could reshape the way cities across the country deal with homelessness.Inside a warming shelter, Laura Gutowski detailed how her life had changed since she became homeless two and a half years ago in Grants Pass, a former timber hub in the foothills of southern Oregon.Her husband’s death left her without steady income. She lived in a sedan, and then in a tent, in sight of the elementary school where her son was once a student. She constantly scrambled to move her belongings to avoid racking up more fines from the police.“I never expected it to come to this,” Ms. Gutowski, 55, said. She is one of several hundred homeless people in this city of about 40,000 that is at the center of a major case before the Supreme Court on Monday with broad ramifications for the nationwide struggle with homelessness.After Grants Pass stepped up enforcement of local ordinances that banned sleeping and camping in public spaces by ticketing, fining and jailing the homeless, lower courts ruled that it amounted to “cruel and unusual punishment” by penalizing people who had nowhere else to go.Many states and cities that are increasingly overwhelmed by homelessness are hoping the Supreme Court overturns that decision — or severely limits it. They argue that it has crippled their efforts to address sprawling encampments, rampant public drug use and fearful constituents who say they cannot safely use public spaces.That prospect has alarmed homeless people and their advocates, who contend that a ruling against them would lead cities to fall back on jails, instead of solutions like affordable housing and social services.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Man Sentenced to 35 Years in Prison for Kidnapping F.B.I. Worker

      by

      Juan Alvarez-Sorto and two other people were on a drug trafficking trip in 2022 when they carjacked an S.U.V. belonging to a crime victim specialist, federal prosecutors said.Curt Lauinger, an F.B.I. employee, had just left a crime scene early one morning in May 2022, and was driving toward Rapid City, S.D., when he stopped on the side of the road because he thought he was being pulled over by the police, according to court documents.As he looked out the window, records show, a man pointed a rifle and ordered him to get out of his S.U.V.Mr. Lauinger was then forced into the back seat of his vehicle, and the man, Juan Alvarez-Sorto, along with two others — Deyvin Morales and Karla Alejandra Lopez-Gutierrez — drove off, according to court documents.The three were trying to hide from the police near Red Shirt, S.D., after a high-speed chase during a trip from Colorado in which the three had planned to distribute drugs, prosecutors said. They had pulled over and planned to carjack the next vehicle that drove by, prosecutors said, apparently to continue to elude law enforcement officers.Mr. Lauinger was later able to escape after the three stopped at a gas station in Hermosa, S.D., south of Rapid City, according to court documents.It was unclear whether the three knew that Mr. Lauinger worked for the F.B.I. as a crime victim specialist, whose responsibilities include offering emotional support and legal protection.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Kristi Noem, South Dakota Governor and Trump VP Contender, Is Barred by Tribes

      by

      Four of South Dakota’s federally recognized Native American tribes have barred the state’s governor, Kristi Noem — a Republican whose name has been floated as a potential running mate for former President Donald J. Trump — from their reservations. The latest blocked Ms. Noem on Thursday.Three of the tribes barred Ms. Noem this month, joining another tribe that had sanctioned the governor after she told state lawmakers in February that Mexican drug cartels had a foothold on their reservations and were committing murders there.Ms. Noem further angered the tribes with remarks she made at a town hall event last month in Winner, S.D., appearing to suggest that the tribes were complicit in the cartels’ presence on their reservations.“We’ve got some tribal leaders that I believe are personally benefiting from the cartels being there, and that’s why they attack me every day,” Ms. Noem said.The tribes are the Cheyenne River Sioux, the Rosebud Sioux and the Standing Rock Sioux and the Oglala Sioux, which in February became the first group to bar Ms. Noem from its reservation. Their reservations have a combined population of nearly 50,000 people and encompass more than eight million acres, according to state and federal government counts. Standing Rock Indian Reservation, the third tribal area to have restricted Ms. Noem’s access, extends into North Dakota.The tribes have accused Ms. Noem of stoking fears and denigrating their heritage when she referred to a gang known as the Ghost Dancers while addressing state lawmakers and said that it had recruited tribal members to join its criminal activities.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Former Correction Officers and Rikers Employees Charged With Corruption

      by

      Federal prosecutors said the defendants accepted bribes and smuggled in contraband, including drugs, for detainees at the troubled New York City jail.Five people who worked at the Rikers Island jail complex in New York City, as well as a detainee there, have been charged with corruption, including smuggling contraband into the jail, according to three complaints unsealed in Manhattan federal court on Tuesday.Federal prosecutors said that in 2021 and 2022, several former city correction officers, a Department of Correction employee and an employee of a department contractor accepted bribes to smuggle in cellphones, oxycodone, marijuana, fentanyl and a synthetic drug known as K2.Their actions made Rikers Island “less safe, for inmates and officers alike,” Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement, adding that the defendants “engaged in corruption for their own enrichment.”Five of the defendants were arrested on Tuesday; the sixth was already in state custody. Lawyers for the defendants could not immediately be identified.During the period in which the officers and other employees are accused of smuggling drugs into the jail, visitation had stopped because of the coronavirus pandemic, but the number of overdoses in the city’s jail system had spiked.In 2021, were 113 overdoses in city jails that required a 911 call — a 55 percent increase from the previous year, according to data from Correctional Health Services, the agency that provides health care to detainees. In 2022, five of the 19 people who died in the jails or soon after release had overdosed on drugs.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Ex-Honduras President Juan Orlando Hernández Denies Trafficking Drugs

      by

      Juan Orlando Hernández, who is accused of conspiring to import cocaine into the United States, also denied receiving a bribe from the Mexican drug lord El Chapo.The former two-term president of Honduras denied in court on Tuesday that he had trafficked narcotics, offered police protection to drug cartels or taken bribes — assertions that have been at the heart of a conspiracy trial taking place in Manhattan.The former president, Juan Orlando Hernández, has been on trial for two weeks in Federal District Court, facing charges that he conspired to import cocaine into the United States. Prosecutors said that he worked with ruthless drug gangs like the Sinaloa Cartel, led by the Mexican drug lord Joaquín Guzman Loera, better known as El Chapo.Government witnesses have included a string of former traffickers from Honduras who testified that they bribed Mr. Hernández in return for promises that he would insulate them from investigations and protect them from extradition to the United States.Dressed in a dark suit with a blue shirt and tie, Mr. Hernández sat up straight during his testimony and sometimes gave long, discursive answers that prompted the judge overseeing the trial to rein him in.At other times his answers were terse.“Did you ever receive a bribe from El Chapo?” one of Mr. Hernández’s lawyers asked at one point.“Never,” Mr. Hernández replied.He gave the same answer to successive questions about whether he had ever met El Chapo, his traffickers or anyone purporting to be a member of the Sinaloa cartel.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More