In Proclamation 10467 of October 6, 2022 (Granting Pardon for the Offense of Simple Possession of Marijuana), I exercised my authority under the Constitution to pardon individuals who committed or were convicted of the offense of simple possession of marijuana in violation of the Controlled Substances Act and section 48–904.01(d)(1) of the Code of the District of Columbia (D.C. Code). As I have said before, convictions for simple possession of marijuana have imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities. Through this proclamation, consistent with the grant of Proclamation 10467, I am pardoning additional individuals who may continue to experience the unnecessary collateral consequences of a conviction for simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana. Therefore, acting pursuant to the grant of authority in Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution of the United States, I, Joseph R. Biden Jr., do hereby grant a full, complete, and unconditional pardon to all current United States citizens and lawful permanent residents who, on or before the date of this proclamation, committed or were convicted of the offense of simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana, regardless of whether they have been charged with or prosecuted for these offenses on or before the date of this proclamation, in violation of:

(1) section 844 of title 21, United States Code, section 846 of title 21, United States Code, and previous provisions in the United States Code that prohibited simple possession of marijuana or attempted simple possession of marijuana;

(2) section 48-904.01(d)(1) of the D.C. Code and previous provisions in the D.C. Code that prohibited simple possession of marijuana;

(3) section 48-904.09 of the D.C. Code and previous provisions in the D.C. Code that prohibited attempted simple possession of marijuana; and

(4) provisions in the Code of Federal Regulations, including as enforced under the United States Code, that prohibit only the simple possession or use of marijuana on Federal properties or installations, or in other locales, as currently or previously codified, including but not limited to 25 C.F.R. 11.452(a); 32 C.F.R. 1903.12(b)(2); 36 C.F.R. 2.35(b)(2); 36 C.F.R. 1002.35(b)(2); 36 C.F.R. 1280.16(a)(1); 36 C.F.R. 702.6(b); 41 C.F.R. 102-74.400(a); 43 C.F.R. 8365.1-4(b)(2); and 50 C.F.R. 27.82(b)(2).

My intent by this proclamation is to pardon only the offenses of simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana in violation of the Federal and D.C. laws set forth in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this proclamation, as well as the provisions in the Code of Federal Regulations consistent with paragraph (4) of this proclamation, and not any other offenses involving other controlled substances or activity beyond simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana, such as possession of marijuana with intent to distribute or driving offenses committed while under the influence of marijuana. This pardon does not apply to individuals who were non-citizens not lawfully present in the United States at the time of their offense.

Pursuant to the procedures in Proclamation 10467, the Attorney General, acting through the Pardon Attorney, shall review all properly submitted applications for certificates of pardon and shall issue such certificates of pardon to eligible applicants in due course.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-second day of December, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-eighth.

JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.

99 points

Title is wrong: NOT future. Only “on or before the date of this proclamation.” (I don’t think it’s possible to pardon people in the future)

permalink
report
reply
20 points

Good point, I revised it to say “including those not yet prosecuted.” (Titles suck at giving context, I almost have some sympathy for title editors of newspapers.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

While I don’t know if this is legal, I think the poster is pointing towards the following line for the future part

regardless of whether they have been charged with or prosecuted for these offenses on or before the date of this proclamation

Looking at this site, the poster is misinterpreted the line

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Yep. I just fixed it. As I read it, future offenses are not covered, but future prosecutions of offenses having already occurred are covered.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Which, of course, is related to the criminal justice process against acts committed on or before this date. If you’re caught smoking a joint tomorrow, you don’t qualify for this blanket pardon.

However, the fact that this blanket pardon exists suggests that a “refresh” of this blanket pardon would likely exist in the future, extending the cutoff date further. That should have the effect of making simple possession or use charges at the federal level far less common, i.e., they would be used only to gain leverage on someone suspected of a greater crime, and not as the major charge. (I’m not saying that’s “right,” just saying that’s the reality.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

However, the fact that this blanket pardon exists suggests that a “refresh” of this blanket pardon would likely exist in the future, extending the cutoff date further.

In fact, this is the refresh of the 2022 pardon and he’s making a point to note that. This is as close as you can get to a yearly pardon without running into gnarly constitutional issues. It’s a new magic Christmas tradition.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

You can’t pardon future offenses. Would be a great way to setup crimes otherwise.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m pardoning you for that thing you’re gonna do in a few weeks. You’ll know.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

MTG thinks it does work that way though since she, and a few other Trump cronies, sought one out before J6.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

on or before the date of this proclamation, committed or were convicted of the offense of simple possession of marijuana

Not a pardon of future offenses.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Thanks, fixed it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

*on federal lands

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Like the airport?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Let’s find out. You first.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I figured there had to be a catch. It’s still a hell of a step I guess.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

president can’t pardon for states’ charges or convictions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

Basic civic concepts! I knew there was a catch. What’s the point in even voting though? ??

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Is this for federal charges only? (Ie Not state charges.)

permalink
report
reply
23 points

Yes, only gubernatorial pardons can apply to state offenses. :-/

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

now do it nationwide! just legalize it on the federal level already for christs sake

permalink
report
reply
18 points
*

Unfortunately that can only be done without a senate resolution. Please remember to write your congressman.

In the meantime Biden has appealed to the DEA to review rescheduling the drug to a lower classification. Along with these pardons he has done everything in his power.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

We declared war on half the planet without congressional approval. I don’t get how that can get done but legalizing marijuana can’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_of_2001

tl;dr it was with Congressional approval. Congress passed a blanket authorization of military force after 9/11 to do anything deemed necessary to go after some loosely defined terrorism.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Law

!law@lemmy.world

Create post

Discussion about legal topics, centered around United States

Community stats

  • 54

    Monthly active users

  • 95

    Posts

  • 211

    Comments

Community moderators