Medical Cannabis Protection: the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment

Medical Cannabis Protection: the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment

by: Michael “the Aging Ent” Schroeder
owner, Green Owl Media

First introduced in the US House of Representatives in 2001, the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment
is legislation intended to prohibit the US Justice Department from spending any funds on actions
designed to interfere with implementation of state level medical cannabis laws. It was not until
May 2014 that the law passed the House and was passed in an omnibus spending bill in
December 2014.

It was historic in that it was the first time both houses of Congress voted in legal protection for
medical cannabis patients. It’s also an incredible, hard-won victory for cannabis advocates, after
nearly two decades in the face of considerable opposition and multiple partnerships in
sponsoring the amendment. Another name for this legislation is the Rohrabacher–Blumenauer

An interesting point about this legislation is that it must be renewed each fiscal year to remain in
effect, making it quite vulnerable to changes in the political climate. It also does nothing to alter
the status of marijuana as a controlled substance – currently Schedule I, which indicates no
medical value.

The full text of the 2014 Amendment to this law reads: “None of the funds made available in this
Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to the States of Alabama, Alaska,
Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii,
Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi,
Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island,
South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, to prevent such States
from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or
cultivation of medical marijuana.

“Implementation and Interference

After the implementation, the Department of Justice attempted arguing, in April 2015, that the
amendment only protected state officials. The DOJ also argued, about this time, that the
amendment can clearly be extended to cover recreational cannabis use. Congress at no time
refuted this. The Justice Department continued to prosecute medical cannabis patients. This
lead to demands in July 2015 for a government investigation into the primary operatives in this,
as an act of harassment against medical marijuana patients and providers.
It took only 3 months for US District Judge Charles Breyer to affirm the intention of this
amendment. The decision criticized the DOJ interpretation. Judge Breyer said that it “defied language and logic”

as well as that it “tortures the plain meaning of the statute”. The DOJ
appealed this ruling, but less than 6 months later withdrew the appeal.

Further, and in key support of this amendment, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in April 2016
consolidated the appeals of 10 medical cannabis providers in Washington and California, and
granted the appeal. The Ninth Circuit covers nine western states, and the ruling in favor of the
cannabis providers was unanimous. It is expected to continue to hold influence on other circuit
courts, even after the repeal of the Cole Memo.

As the cannabis climate changes, and Federal law once again stands in opposition to State law,
this amendment and decisions supporting it will likely become a central component of the mass
defense of cannabis producers, processors, retailers, transporters, and others in the legal
cannabis industry.Double Click to Edit

Sign up for our newsletter
10 Tips for a Successful Trade Show