ACLU Applauds President Biden’s Announcement to Reclassify Marijuana, Calls for More Reform
WASHINGTON – President Biden announced today that he plans to reschedule marijuana into a category of controlled substances that have a currently accepted medical use and only a moderate to low potential for dependence, in line with recent reforms at the state level and growing scientific research. The rescheduling would move marijuana from a Schedule I substance (with drugs including heroin) to a Schedule III substance (with drugs including Tylenol with codeine).
The American Civil Liberties Union applauds the rescheduling, but more must be done at the federal and state levels to undo the decades of harm inflicted on individuals and communities due to unjust marijuana policies. Today's announcement by President Biden is an important step towards basing federal marijuana policy on evidence instead of fear.
“President Biden’s decision to reschedule marijuana is the most significant step any American president has taken to address the harms of the war on marijuana. This was a hard-fought win that could not have happened without the tireless advocacy of a decades-long movement for justice,” said Cynthia W. Roseberry, director of policy and government affairs at the ACLU’s Justice Division. “While it is an incredibly encouraging step in the right direction, the rescheduling does not end criminal penalties for marijuana or help the people currently serving sentences for marijuana offenses. It is time for the federal government to further reduce prosecution of marijuana and instead put more resources towards investments that help communities thrive.”
“State and local officials should follow this move by the president to scale back and reduce the harms of the war on marijuana in their state and move to decriminalize marijuana. Americans want policies that repair the communities torn apart through over-criminalization and over-policing. Restorative policies include those that prioritize commercial marijuana licenses for formerly incarcerated people, grant clemency to those convicted under unjust drug laws, and expunge criminal records so people have a fair shot at redemption,” Roseberry added.
At the state level, extreme racial disparities in arrests for marijuana possession persist throughout the country. A Black person is still at least three times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than a white person, even though Black and white people use marijuana at similar rates. These racial disparities in marijuana possession arrests exist across the country: in , in counties large and small, urban and rural, wealthy and poor, and with large and small Black populations.
“Congress must pass comprehensive legislation that addresses drug policies that have been selectively and disproportionately aimed at Black and Latine communities for decades,” said Nina Patel, senior policy counsel at the ACLU’s Justice Division. “Millions of Americans have lost their right to vote and are locked out of opportunities to seek housing, employment, and education as a result of racist and punitive marijuana policies. Passage of the Senate-led Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act (CAOA) and the House-led Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act would remove federal criminal penalties for marijuana and provide criminal history record clearing and necessary investments in communities disproportionately targeted for criminalization.”
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Prisoners' Rights
Criminal Law Reform
ACLU Sues Bureau of Prisons for Keeping People in Prison Longer Than the Law AllowsACLU Sues Bureau of Prisons for Keeping People in Prison Longer Than the Law Allows
WASHINGTON – A federal lawsuit brought today by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of D.C., and Jenner & Block LLP challenges the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) for unlawfully incarcerating people longer than the law allows under the First Step Act. The lawsuit contends that the BOP’s failure to implement the First Step Act according to its plain language violates the rights of thousands of people who should be returning to their communities and rebuilding their lives but instead remain incarcerated. Signed into law in 2018 by then-President Donald Trump, the bipartisan First Step Act was designed to reduce the population in federal prisons, reform extreme sentencing laws, and provide programming and reentry transition services to people in prison. Central to the First Step Act is a system of earned time credits, which allows people in prison to earn time off their sentences and time out of prison by participating in rehabilitation programs. Through the First Step Act, Congress unambiguously ordered BOP to move people out of prison when they meet certain requirements to use their earned time credits. Instead of faithfully following the mandatory law, BOP adopted a regulation treating the law as optional. As a result, thousands of people, who should already be back in their communities and with their families, remain in prison. “Every extra unlawful day our clients spend in prison is a serious injustice,” said Emma Andersson, deputy director of the Criminal Law Reform Project at the ACLU. “It is egregious that the Bureau of Prisons is imprisoning people for months longer than the law allows. The government must follow through on its legal obligation to get people out of prison on time and back into their communities, where they belong.” Additional comments below from: Vanessa Crowe, plaintiff: “Time is what I owed for my wrongdoing, and I have paid my time. But I should not have to spend more time in prison than the law allows. I often reflect on what I will miss during the months after when I should be out of prison. I will miss work and lose out on wages that would help me get back on my feet. I could be a tax paying citizen instead of a burden on society. But most of all, I will miss more precious time with my family. My family and I are ready to tum the page on this period in our lives — we are all ready to start a new life, a life with purpose, hope, and healing together. I want to start that life when I am legally entitled to start it-not five months later.” Arthur Spitzer, senior counsel at ACLU of D.C.: “There’s no excuse for the Bureau of Prisons to pretend not to understand Congress’s clear command that people who have earned the right to early release must be released. This law has been on the books for six years. The Bureau of Prisons has had plenty of time to understand it. Law enforcers should obey the law.” Betsy Henthorne, partner at Jenner & Block: “It has been six years since the First Step Act was signed, but despite Congress’s clear directives, the Bureau of Prisons continues to hold thousands of people in prison longer than the law allows. We should and do expect better—it’s past time for the BOP to ensure that those who have earned their release are able to return home to their families and communities according to the law Congress passed.” -
Maryland Supreme CourtDec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
Roland Branch v. State of MarylandRoland Branch v. State of Maryland
This petition to the Supreme Court of Maryland asked the court to reconsider its adherence to Whren v. U.S., 517 U.S. 806 (1996), which declared that a traffic stop undertaken for pretextual reasons does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution so long as the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation occurred. The ACLU, alongside the ACLU of Maryland, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant’s petition, in which the ACLU argued that the court should take up the question of whether pretextual stops violate the Maryland Constitution. In September 2024, the Court denied the petition. -
North Carolina Supreme CourtDec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
State v. WrightState v. Wright
This case in the North Carolina Supreme Court involves the question of whether the police violated the U.S. Constitution when they searched the defendant, Mr. Wright’s, backpack even after he repeatedly said no to the search requests. The ACLU alongside the ACLU of North Carolina filed an amicus brief arguing that the search was unconstitutional because Mr. Wright’s eventual “consent” was the result of police coercion. Our brief urges the court to consider the totality of the circumstances that make one more susceptible to coercion, including race and poverty. -
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
Disability Rights
Incarceration Should Not be a Death Sentence for Individuals Who Use OpioidsIncarceration Should Not be a Death Sentence for Individuals Who Use Opioids
New litigation centered on increasing access to substance-use disorder treatment in jails and prisons is helping to reduce mortality rates among incarcerated individuals.