• KombatWombat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Decriminalizing marijuana isn’t something that the president can do through an executive action. Unless Congress does it (which was always unlikely), it requires the Justice Department to propose rescheduling followed by acceptance from the DEA (which is part of the Judiciary). The Biden administration has worked to reschedule it to schedule 3, which would make it legally available with a prescription. The DEA hearing for this was delayed to early 2025 however. It’s also worth noting that Biden pardoned and released thousands of people from federal prison for marijuana possession around a year ago.

    Expecting the US to prevent other countries from going to war would require a level of intervention that could only be called imperialism, if it would even be possible. I would argue doing so would be endorsing oppression in some cases. Peace is an important goal but the price for it can only be so high.

    I feel like the Biden administration actually accomplished a lot over the last 4 years against heavy resistance but no one wants to give them any credit. I was not expecting much but have been impressed whenever I look into things.

    • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The president appoints the head of the DoJ and DEA. Just appoint someone who says “I’ll hold the hearing and we’ll have the judgement within the hour”. Instead they appointed someone who scheduled the hearing for after they’ll have been kicked out by Trump’s guy. There is no way to read that as anything but they never intended for it to be rescheduled at all.

      Expecting the US to prevent other countries from going to war would require a level of intervention

      Or just not sending them the weapons they’re using to carry out that war.

      • KombatWombat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        The president appoints the head of the DoJ and DEA. Just appoint someone who says “I’ll hold the hearing and we’ll have the judgement within the hour”. Instead they appointed someone who scheduled the hearing for after they’ll have been kicked out by Trump’s guy. There is no way to read that as anything but they never intended for it to be rescheduled at all.

        I would consider that corruption. People should be appointed based on competency, not dogmatic loyalty to the person appointing them. Sidestepping the review process would open it up to challenge and set a precedent that would allow it and other drugs to similarly be casually reassigned based on the whims of whoever is in power in the future. It’s also almost certainly illegal, since the process for reassignment was part of the laws passed from Congress. Additionally, Biden first instructed the Attorney General to re-evaluate its scheduling in 2022, so it didn’t just start now. The review process just takes a long time I guess, but it’s fair to assume it hasn’t been a priority.

        Or just not sending them the weapons they’re using to carry out that war.

        If you mean Gaza, that started long before Biden’s presidency, and Hamas instigated the most recent conflict. If you mean Ukraine, that also started before Biden’s presidency, but I would consider leaving the country to conquest from Russia to be abandoning a responsibility to safeguard peaceful nations’ sovereignty. I would compare it to European nations appeasing Hitler by allowing him to conquer Austria and Czechoslovakia without consequences.

        • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          People should be appointed based on competency, not dogmatic loyalty to the person appointing them

          People should be appointed based on what the people elected you to do, anything else is a betrayal of the constituents. If someone voted for you because they believed you would reschedule cannabis, and you don’t get it done, that is a betrayal of your voters.

          Sidestepping the review process would open it up to challenge and set a precedent that would allow it and other drugs to similarly be casually reassigned based on the whims of whoever is in power in the future

          And then they will face electoral consequences.

          The review process just takes a long time I guess, but it’s fair to assume it hasn’t been a priority.

          The review process takes as long as the head of the DEA wants it to.

          Hamas instigated the most recent conflict

          Israel instigated the conflict by ethnically cleansing a million Palestinians and driving them into Gaza, and then building a wall around it and responding to peaceful protests such as the march of return by shooting doctors, women, and children.

          They were only able to do this and are only able to continue to do this because of American weapons and diplomatic support.

          I would compare it to European nations appeasing Hitler by allowing him to conquer Austria and Czechoslovakia without consequences

          The western allies who gave up Austria and Czechoslovakia were expecting consequences; they were expecting Hitler (and Poland, who also got territory from Czechoslovakia) to invade their common enemy, the USSR.

          In any case, there’s a good chance we’ll get to see the consequences under the next administration. Spoiler:

          spoiler

          Russia isn’t going to invade Europe.