Trump’s Polarizing US Attorney Targets Medical Marijuana
The prosecutor aligned with Trump has issued warnings to Wikipedia, medical journals, and Congressional Democrats. He is now extending his threats to a medical-marijuana dispensary as well.
TroibNews 
The Donald Trump era has led to significant challenges for the District of Columbia, resulting in the loss of thousands of jobs, a billion-dollar budget shortfall, and a downgrade of the city’s AAA bond rating.
Now, Trump's interim U.S. Attorney, Ed Martin, is targeting Washington’s marijuana laws, potentially disrupting an unspoken agreement where federal prosecutors have generally respected local regulations regarding cannabis use.
The initial move came through a letter from Martin to a D.C. medical-marijuana vendor. “Your dispensary appears to be operating in violation of federal law,” he stated, “and the Department of Justice has the authority to enforce federal law even when such activities may be permitted” by local laws. This effectively calls into question the legitimacy of the dispensary’s legal license.
This development should alarm anyone who believes the District's predominantly progressive electorate should have the freedom to determine its own lenient policies.
Martin's history as a staunch anti-abortion activist and his involvement with defendants from the January 6 events highlight his alignment with ongoing cultural disputes since his appointment as D.C.’s top federal prosecutor in January.
In this brief time, Martin has attracted media attention for his appearances on Kremlin propaganda television, his demotions of prosecutors involved in January 6 cases, his threatening communications with Congressional Democrats, and his confrontational interactions with medical journals regarding claims of bias.
The cannabis letter has received limited coverage, overshadowed by Martin's more controversial actions that week. It followed his letter to the nonprofit managing Wikipedia, questioning its tax status and demanding information about its editorial practices, and came before a video surfaced that contradicted Martin's assertion of being unaware of the Nazi history associated with a January 6 pardon recipient he had previously commended.
In response, Senate Democrats have called for a rare hearing to prevent Martin from being appointed permanently. On Wednesday, North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis expressed his concerns over Martin’s comments, reflecting on the Judiciary Committee's timeline to vote on his nomination. Reports indicate that the nomination may be vulnerable.
These hearings will likely focus more on Martin's political controversies than on the cannabis issue, but that aspect deserves attention due to its capacity to disrupt conventional ideological alignments in the U.S. political landscape. Notably, many conservatives utilize the city’s marijuana regulations as well.
The current situation began on April 24, when Martin intervened in a dispute involving a licensed medical-marijuana dispensary, Green Theory, situated in a residential area of Washington. The dispensary has faced ongoing opposition from local parents who argue it is too close to schools, an opinion Martin supports.
Federal officials typically do not handle local retail zoning disputes, which should be resolved at the city level. However, Martin reiterated his stance, stating, “I am concerned that you are in violation of federal laws, which are intended to protect children,” emphasizing that his office can enforce these laws despite local regulations.
What stands out in Martin's letter is the alarming language that suggests significant repercussions for businesses operating within the confines of local law.
“As you likely know, there are numerous federal laws governing and even prohibiting the distribution and possession of marijuana, including provisions of the controlled substances act,” Martin wrote. “Persons and entities owning, operating, or facilitating such dispensaries … may be subject to criminal prosecution and civil enforcement actions.”
This implies that nearly any store or even their landlord could face severe legal consequences for actions deemed permissible under local law, highlighting a tense legal landscape.
Traditionally, bipartisan federal budget provisions have precluded the prosecution of individuals adhering to state medical marijuana laws, but the peculiar status of D.C. allows Martin unique authority to initiate actions against local businesses, making his warning about controlled substances more than just partisan rhetoric.
“I think that letter is about the federal government attempting to go after home rule and take away my rights,” said Pamela Wexler, an attorney heavily involved with cannabis businesses in the area.
“Frankly, going after folks is chilling,” remarked David Grosso, a former city council member who helped draft many of D.C.’s cannabis regulations. “We are always more vulnerable.”
Thus far, the administration has steered clear of confronting the quasi-legal marijuana landscape across the country, likely due to its appeal among segments of Trump's base. However, D.C. may be treated as an exception. In fact, a fact sheet issued alongside President Trump’s March 27 “Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful” executive order specifically pointed to marijuana decriminalization as one of "D.C.’s failed policies."
“We should expect federal law to be abided by, and we’ll take a look at any situation where there’s questions,” Martin expressed in an email. “If the law is broken, we’re going to look closely at it.”
Martin further stated that “anybody who is selling marijuana better have a license and everything in order, otherwise we will pursue action against them.” While this indicates he won’t indiscriminately target licensed dispensaries, it offers little reassurance to medical-marijuana advocates, who pointed out that Green Theory is compliant and still received a threatening letter laden with implications of potential criminal prosecution.
This approach has been met with enthusiasm from those advocating for stricter cannabis regulations. “It’s a very big deal,” noted Smart Approaches to Marijuana president Kevin Sabet. “Any pot dispensary is on notice. Beyond that, anyone that owns a building where they lease it out to a pot dispensary is on notice.”
“I think the U.S. Attorney is sending a message that this is illegal and I’m recommending you to get out of the business,” Sabet added.
Notably, this sentiment is echoed by cannabis advocates as well. Meredith Kinner, a Capitol Hill attorney representing dispensaries, remarked that although prosecuting licensed sellers would be challenging, the intimidation factor could still adversely affect small businesses. “It would force small businesses to spend unnecessary funds to defend their rights,” she warned.
Green Theory did not respond to requests for comment, and the attorney representing one of the owners declined to discuss the matter. Martin’s letter provided the dispensary until May 12 to reply.
D.C.’s cannabis regulations have become a labyrinth of absurdity largely due to the city’s lack of statehood. For years, Congress has prevented the establishment of a legal cannabis sales framework but permitted the decriminalization of marijuana, leading to numerous makeshift stores that offer "gifts" of cannabis alongside other purchases. Meanwhile, only medical marijuana sales are allowed under a system where citizens self-certify for permits based on health reasons.
Consequently, this convoluted situation forces residents to either pretend to complete a purchase for a trivial item or create dubious health-related claims to acquire a product that is neither fully legal nor illegal.
The implications of Martin’s letter remain cause for concern, reflecting broader tensions surrounding D.C.'s governance and the balance of power between local autonomy and federal oversight.
The underlying context details that D.C.’s medical-marijuana rules require dispensaries to be positioned at least 300 feet from schools. A group of parents, lobbying for even more stringent distances of 1,000 feet—which coincides with federal drug penalties—led to Martin's involvement after the local government chose against changing the regulations.
In a democracy, when the elected body does not resolve a matter to everyone’s satisfaction, constituents typically wait for the next election cycle to vote differently. However, thanks to D.C.’s unique legal status, unelected officials like Martin can intervene, complicating local governance.
Martin has portrayed himself as a champion for concerned residents, sharing that he became aware of the situation regarding Green Theory through community feedback. “It was referred to me by a citizen who said: ‘Have you seen this?’” Martin recounted. “And when I looked into it, I thought the parents and the families in that community had not been heard well enough, so I thought I would go take a look at it.”
Despite his claims of merely seeking clarification rather than initiating an investigation, Martin's questions—including inquiries about compliance with federal law—undoubtedly create an atmosphere of apprehension.
Grosso suspects that a member of the parent group brought the issue to Martin’s attention. The group, known as 1,000 Feet, did not respond to inquiries, and its treasurer, Patrick Davis, is Trump’s nominee for an assistant attorney general role, potentially making him a colleague of Martin’s at the Justice Department. Davis also did not respond to messages.
This situation recalls a time before D.C. achieved home rule, where local matters were often swayed by those with connections or the ability to capture the attention of federal powers. This approach undermines effective city governance, and under the current climate highlighted by the Trump administration, it risks returning to prominence.
Thomas Evans for TROIB News
Now, Trump's interim U.S. Attorney, Ed Martin, is targeting Washington’s marijuana laws, potentially disrupting an unspoken agreement where federal prosecutors have generally respected local regulations regarding cannabis use.
The initial move came through a letter from Martin to a D.C. medical-marijuana vendor. “Your dispensary appears to be operating in violation of federal law,” he stated, “and the Department of Justice has the authority to enforce federal law even when such activities may be permitted” by local laws. This effectively calls into question the legitimacy of the dispensary’s legal license.
This development should alarm anyone who believes the District's predominantly progressive electorate should have the freedom to determine its own lenient policies.
Martin's history as a staunch anti-abortion activist and his involvement with defendants from the January 6 events highlight his alignment with ongoing cultural disputes since his appointment as D.C.’s top federal prosecutor in January.
In this brief time, Martin has attracted media attention for his appearances on Kremlin propaganda television, his demotions of prosecutors involved in January 6 cases, his threatening communications with Congressional Democrats, and his confrontational interactions with medical journals regarding claims of bias.
The cannabis letter has received limited coverage, overshadowed by Martin's more controversial actions that week. It followed his letter to the nonprofit managing Wikipedia, questioning its tax status and demanding information about its editorial practices, and came before a video surfaced that contradicted Martin's assertion of being unaware of the Nazi history associated with a January 6 pardon recipient he had previously commended.
In response, Senate Democrats have called for a rare hearing to prevent Martin from being appointed permanently. On Wednesday, North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis expressed his concerns over Martin’s comments, reflecting on the Judiciary Committee's timeline to vote on his nomination. Reports indicate that the nomination may be vulnerable.
These hearings will likely focus more on Martin's political controversies than on the cannabis issue, but that aspect deserves attention due to its capacity to disrupt conventional ideological alignments in the U.S. political landscape. Notably, many conservatives utilize the city’s marijuana regulations as well.
The current situation began on April 24, when Martin intervened in a dispute involving a licensed medical-marijuana dispensary, Green Theory, situated in a residential area of Washington. The dispensary has faced ongoing opposition from local parents who argue it is too close to schools, an opinion Martin supports.
Federal officials typically do not handle local retail zoning disputes, which should be resolved at the city level. However, Martin reiterated his stance, stating, “I am concerned that you are in violation of federal laws, which are intended to protect children,” emphasizing that his office can enforce these laws despite local regulations.
What stands out in Martin's letter is the alarming language that suggests significant repercussions for businesses operating within the confines of local law.
“As you likely know, there are numerous federal laws governing and even prohibiting the distribution and possession of marijuana, including provisions of the controlled substances act,” Martin wrote. “Persons and entities owning, operating, or facilitating such dispensaries … may be subject to criminal prosecution and civil enforcement actions.”
This implies that nearly any store or even their landlord could face severe legal consequences for actions deemed permissible under local law, highlighting a tense legal landscape.
Traditionally, bipartisan federal budget provisions have precluded the prosecution of individuals adhering to state medical marijuana laws, but the peculiar status of D.C. allows Martin unique authority to initiate actions against local businesses, making his warning about controlled substances more than just partisan rhetoric.
“I think that letter is about the federal government attempting to go after home rule and take away my rights,” said Pamela Wexler, an attorney heavily involved with cannabis businesses in the area.
“Frankly, going after folks is chilling,” remarked David Grosso, a former city council member who helped draft many of D.C.’s cannabis regulations. “We are always more vulnerable.”
Thus far, the administration has steered clear of confronting the quasi-legal marijuana landscape across the country, likely due to its appeal among segments of Trump's base. However, D.C. may be treated as an exception. In fact, a fact sheet issued alongside President Trump’s March 27 “Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful” executive order specifically pointed to marijuana decriminalization as one of "D.C.’s failed policies."
“We should expect federal law to be abided by, and we’ll take a look at any situation where there’s questions,” Martin expressed in an email. “If the law is broken, we’re going to look closely at it.”
Martin further stated that “anybody who is selling marijuana better have a license and everything in order, otherwise we will pursue action against them.” While this indicates he won’t indiscriminately target licensed dispensaries, it offers little reassurance to medical-marijuana advocates, who pointed out that Green Theory is compliant and still received a threatening letter laden with implications of potential criminal prosecution.
This approach has been met with enthusiasm from those advocating for stricter cannabis regulations. “It’s a very big deal,” noted Smart Approaches to Marijuana president Kevin Sabet. “Any pot dispensary is on notice. Beyond that, anyone that owns a building where they lease it out to a pot dispensary is on notice.”
“I think the U.S. Attorney is sending a message that this is illegal and I’m recommending you to get out of the business,” Sabet added.
Notably, this sentiment is echoed by cannabis advocates as well. Meredith Kinner, a Capitol Hill attorney representing dispensaries, remarked that although prosecuting licensed sellers would be challenging, the intimidation factor could still adversely affect small businesses. “It would force small businesses to spend unnecessary funds to defend their rights,” she warned.
Green Theory did not respond to requests for comment, and the attorney representing one of the owners declined to discuss the matter. Martin’s letter provided the dispensary until May 12 to reply.
D.C.’s cannabis regulations have become a labyrinth of absurdity largely due to the city’s lack of statehood. For years, Congress has prevented the establishment of a legal cannabis sales framework but permitted the decriminalization of marijuana, leading to numerous makeshift stores that offer "gifts" of cannabis alongside other purchases. Meanwhile, only medical marijuana sales are allowed under a system where citizens self-certify for permits based on health reasons.
Consequently, this convoluted situation forces residents to either pretend to complete a purchase for a trivial item or create dubious health-related claims to acquire a product that is neither fully legal nor illegal.
The implications of Martin’s letter remain cause for concern, reflecting broader tensions surrounding D.C.'s governance and the balance of power between local autonomy and federal oversight.
The underlying context details that D.C.’s medical-marijuana rules require dispensaries to be positioned at least 300 feet from schools. A group of parents, lobbying for even more stringent distances of 1,000 feet—which coincides with federal drug penalties—led to Martin's involvement after the local government chose against changing the regulations.
In a democracy, when the elected body does not resolve a matter to everyone’s satisfaction, constituents typically wait for the next election cycle to vote differently. However, thanks to D.C.’s unique legal status, unelected officials like Martin can intervene, complicating local governance.
Martin has portrayed himself as a champion for concerned residents, sharing that he became aware of the situation regarding Green Theory through community feedback. “It was referred to me by a citizen who said: ‘Have you seen this?’” Martin recounted. “And when I looked into it, I thought the parents and the families in that community had not been heard well enough, so I thought I would go take a look at it.”
Despite his claims of merely seeking clarification rather than initiating an investigation, Martin's questions—including inquiries about compliance with federal law—undoubtedly create an atmosphere of apprehension.
Grosso suspects that a member of the parent group brought the issue to Martin’s attention. The group, known as 1,000 Feet, did not respond to inquiries, and its treasurer, Patrick Davis, is Trump’s nominee for an assistant attorney general role, potentially making him a colleague of Martin’s at the Justice Department. Davis also did not respond to messages.
This situation recalls a time before D.C. achieved home rule, where local matters were often swayed by those with connections or the ability to capture the attention of federal powers. This approach undermines effective city governance, and under the current climate highlighted by the Trump administration, it risks returning to prominence.
Thomas Evans for TROIB News
