Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-645_9p6b.pdf
Page Number: 2.0

2 

STANDING AKIMBO, LLC v. UNITED STATES 

Statement of THOMAS, J. 

ical-marijuana  dispensary  in  Colorado,  as  state  law  per-
mits.  And, though federal law still flatly forbids the intra-
state possession, cultivation, or distribution of marijuana,
Controlled  Substances Act, 84 Stat. 1242, 1247, 1260, 1264, 
21  U. S. C.  §§802(22),  812(c),  841(a),  844(a),1  the  Govern-
ment, post-Raich, has sent mixed signals on its views.  In 
2009 and 2013, the Department of Justice issued memoran-
dums outlining a policy against intruding on state legaliza-
tion schemes or prosecuting certain individuals who comply 
with  state  law.2    In  2009,  Congress  enabled  Washington
D. C.’s government to decriminalize medical marijuana un-
der  local  ordinance.3  Moreover,  in  every  fiscal  year  since
2015,  Congress  has  prohibited  the  Department  of  Justice 
from “spending funds to prevent states’ implementation of 
their own medical marijuana laws.”  United States v. McIn-
tosh,  833  F. 3d  1163,  1168,  1175–1177  (CA9  2016)  (inter-
preting  the  rider  to  prevent  expenditures  on  the  prosecu-
tion of individuals who comply with state law).4  That policy 
—————— 

1 A  narrow  exception  to  federal  law  exists  for  Government-approved 
research projects, but that exception does not apply here.  84 Stat. 1271, 
21 U. S. C. §872(e). 

2 See Memorandum from Dep. Atty. Gen. to Selected U. S. Attys., In-
vestigations and Prosecutions in States Authorizing the Medical Use of
Marijuana  (Oct.  19,  2009);  Memorandum  from  Dep.  Atty.  Gen.  to  All 
U. S.  Attys.,  Guidance  Regarding  Marijuana  Enforcement  (Aug.  29, 
2013).  In 2018, however, the Department of Justice rescinded those and 
three other memorandums related to federal marijuana laws.  Memoran-
dum  from  U. S.  Atty.  Gen. to  All  U.  S.  Attys.,  Marijuana  Enforcement 
(Jan.  4,  2018).    Despite  that  rescission,  in  2019  the  Attorney  General 
stated that he was “ ‘accepting the [2013] Memorandum for now.’ ”  Som-
erset, Attorney General Barr Favors a More Lenient Approach to Can-
nabis Prohibition, Forbes, Apr. 15, 2019. 

3 See  Congress Lifts  Ban  on  Medical  Marijuana  for  Nation’s  Capitol, 

Americans for Safe Access, Dec. 13, 2009. 

4 Despite the Federal Government’s recent pro-marijuana actions, the 
Attorney General has declined to use his authority to reschedule mariju-
ana  to  permit  legal,  medicinal  use.  E.g.,  Krumm  v.  Holder,  594  Fed. 
Appx.  497,  498–499  (CA10  2014)  (citing  §811(a));  Denial  of  Petition  to 
Initiate  Proceedings  to  Reschedule  Marijuana,  81  Fed.  Reg.  53688