Kamala Harris Declares Support for Cannabis Legalization

Vice President Kamala Harris now believes it is time to legalize cannabis in the United States. This marks the first time she has publicly stated her position on cannabis since being named the Democratic candidate for the upcoming presidential election in November.

In an interview on the “All the Smoke” podcast, Kamala Harris emphasized that she believes people should not be imprisoned for smoking marijuana, reiterating her long-standing support for the need for federal cannabis reform.

For more news like this, along with all the latest in legalization, research, and lifestyle, download our free cannabis news app.

The Kamala Harris Position on Cannabis

Vice President Kamala Harris does not seem to have changed viewpoint on cannabis, as she previously sponsored federal legalization bills when she was a U.S. senator.

She believes it is time to end the criminalization of cannabis-related activities, highlighting the disproportionate impact these laws have historically had on marginalized communities. According to Ms. Harris, her position is based on her long-held belief that legalization is essential, further suggesting that the current legal framework is outdated and harmful.

“People should not go to jail for smoking weed,” she stated, underscoring the inherent injustice of such policies. This public stance could play a significant role in her campaign for the White House, as her opponent, Donald Trump, has already taken a position on this issue.

Her remarks likely reflect her personal convictions but also signal a broader shift in the Democratic Party’s approach to cannabis legislation.

The Debate Over Federal Authority and State Authority

The issue of cannabis legalization in the United States remains complex.

Democratic vice-presidential candidate Tim Walz, for example, has stated that decisions regarding cannabis legalization should be left to the states. Tim Walz, who is currently the governor of Minnesota, emphasized the importance of progressive reforms, such as providing veterans access to medical cannabis through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and implementing federal banking protections for cannabis.

Tim Walz also suggested that a Democrat-controlled Congress could facilitate progress on these issues, particularly regarding federal laws on cannabis banking, which would make it easier for cannabis businesses to access financial services. According to Tim Walz, securing a Democratic majority in both chambers of Congress could help address long-standing challenges related to cannabis reform.

Kamal Harris vs Donald Trump: Evolving Positions on Cannabis

In contrast to Kamala Harris, former President Donald Trump has presented a more ambiguous approach to the issue. During his campaign for a second term, Trump made statements in favor of a federal reevaluation of cannabis and banking access for cannabis businesses.

Specifically, he expressed support for moving cannabis to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), a less restrictive classification that would facilitate research and expand the drug’s medical applications. Additionally, Mr. Trump indicated that Florida’s proven cannabis program was a model for other states.

Donald Trump’s support for cannabis legalization has raised skepticism among Democratic leaders, particularly within the Kamala Harris and Tim Walz campaign, which has accused him of pandering to voters while neglecting his administration’s track record on the issue.

The Kamala Harris campaign has noted Mr. Trump’s “flip-flops” on cannabis policy, highlighting inconsistencies between his current stance and previous actions. The Kamala Harris campaign has characterized Trump’s change of position as political opportunism, calling for a closer examination of his proposals.

During his presidency, Mr. Trump largely maintained his belief that cannabis policy should remain in the hands of the states, despite initial concerns that his administration would crack down on legal state cannabis programs. On multiple occasions, Mr. Trump supported states’ rights, allowing them to manage their cannabis laws without significant federal interference.

However, critics of Trump’s approach point out that, while he tentatively supported bipartisan legislation to protect states’ rights, he also issued signing statements reserving the right to challenge legal state medical cannabis programs.

Federal Reevaluation and Ongoing Political Developments

As the debate over federal cannabis legalization continues, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has recommended placing cannabis in Schedule III of the CSA. However, this proposal has faced resistance from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which has scheduled a hearing on the issue for December 2. This date has raised concerns that the process could be delayed until a new president is inaugurated.

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have both taken positions on cannabis reclassification, but the difference lies in their broader political strategies and priorities. Harris’s advocacy for full legalization contrasts with Trump’s more cautious approach, which focuses on the medical benefits of cannabis and its role in state legal systems.

Moreover, the Kamala Harris campaign has emphasized the role of racial justice in the cannabis debate, criticizing Donald Trump’s attacks on her record in prosecutions and highlighting the larger issue of mass incarceration related to cannabis offenses.

“She put thousands and thousands of Black people in jail for cannabis offenses,” Donald Trump stated, referring to the tenure of Kamala Harris as a prosecutor in California. While this claim is true, it underscores the growing attention to the racial implications of cannabis policy.

Criminal justice reform and racial disparities in drug enforcement are becoming central issues in the cannabis legalization debate in the United States, as candidates like Kamala Harris attempt to address the long-term social impacts of drug laws.

—

(Featured image by Gage Skidmore (CC BY-SA 2.0) via Wikimedia Commons)

DISCLAIMER: This article was written by a third-party contributor and does not reflect the opinion of Hemp.im, its management, staff, or its associates. Please review our disclaimer for more information.

This article may include forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements generally are identified by the words “believe,” “project,” “estimate,” “become,” “plan,” “will,” and similar expressions. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks as well as uncertainties, including those discussed in the following cautionary statements and elsewhere in this article and on this site. Although the company may believe that its expectations are based on reasonable assumptions, the actual results that the company may achieve may differ materially from any forward-looking statements, which reflect the opinions of the management of the company only as of the date hereof. Additionally, please make sure to read these important disclosures.

First published in Newsweed, a third-party contributor translated and adapted the article from the original. In case of discrepancy, the original will prevail.

Although we made reasonable efforts to provide accurate translations, some parts may be incorrect. Hemp.im assumes no responsibility for errors, omissions or ambiguities in the translations provided on this website. Any person or entity relying on translated content does so at their own risk. Hemp.im is not responsible for losses caused by such reliance on the accuracy or reliability of translated information. If you wish to report an error or inaccuracy in the translation, we encourage you to contact us.