Massachusetts’ Municipal Mayhem on Marijuana [OPINION]
The 2016 voters approved the use of recreational marijuana by adults in the Commonwealth. The voters rebelled against the federal government's pot prohibition.
When the voters of Massachusetts voted to rebel against the federal government in 2016, they set their local elected officials up for failure. The federal government isn't going to prosecute the voters over marijuana, but the feds could prosecute local officials.
The ballot initiative and the legislation that came from the favorable vote put the weight of the rebellion on the shoulders of Massachusetts mayors, selectmen, city councilors, and town meeting voters. The process of legalizing marijuana for retail sale also drafted municipal workers and appointed members of planning and zoning boards into the rebellion.
The Boston Globe has reported that at least six Massachusetts communities have had their records requested by Massachusetts U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling. The Globe has reported a federal grand jury is probing the process that has granted marijuana companies local host agreements to sell recreational marijuana in certain cities and towns.
Multiple sources have confirmed to me that the U.S. Attorney has requested records from more than just the six municipalities the Globe named in their story. Some of these records are from communities in Bristol and Plymouth county.
What will the U.S. Attorney do with this evidence of local officials and marijuana business entering into a conspiracy to profit from violating federal drug laws? According to reports, the federal grand jury has written evidence of numerous highly organized, multimillion-dollar federal drug crimes conducted by government officials in conjunction with sophisticated retail drug sales to the public.
This legal collusion was predictable.
Chris McCarthy is the host of The Chris McCarthy Show on 1420 WBSM New Bedford. He can be heard weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon. Contact him at email@example.com and follow him on Twitter @Chris_topher_Mc. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.