By Jack Burns

The Arizona State Supreme Court ruled this week that college students who are medical marijuana users will no longer have to live in fear of being arrested and labeled as felony drug users if they are caught on campus with their medicine. The ruling also has national implications in states where cannabis is legal for medicinal use but possession on campus is not.

The fight for justice in Arizona was led by Arizona State University (ASU) student Andre Maestas. His dorm room was raided in March 2015, and .6 grams of cannabis and paraphernalia were found. Despite having an MMJ card, Maestas was charged with felony possession of marijuana.

After medical marijuana was made legal in 2010, state lawmakers decided to expand the referendum’s prohibitions in 2012 to include K-12 campuses, city buses, correctional facilities and college campuses. Maestas and his lawyer, Thomas Dean, fought the felony charges all the way to the AZ Supreme Court, which sided with the student saying that the wishes of the people of Arizona must be respected and any modification to the original medical marijuana referendum must not further prohibit citizens from access to legal weed.

According to a report from AZ Capitol Times, the unanimous ruling “paves the way for any of the state’s other more than 160,000 medical marijuana patients to have their drugs on campuses without fear of arrest and prosecution under state law.” The court acknowledged universities still have the right to refer illegal drug users for prosecution but said MMJ users (who are AZ state-issued MMJ card holders) should not be “guaranteed” to be prosecuted if found in possession of legal weed.

The Arizona ruling has national implications as well as it sets a precedent for states who may also have legal marijuana programs in place but also fear the loss of federal funding because the federal government stubbornly maintains Cannabis as a Schedule I Narcotic as classified by the Drug Enforcement Agency. According to the ruling from the Arizona Supreme Court:

“A university does not have to guarantee prosecution for violations of its program. And it can refer violations of its program to the federal prosecutor,” the opinion states. “The State has not shown that a university would lose (or has lost) federal funding if a state prosecutor did not prosecute violations.

Arizona State University, Northern Arizona University and The University of Arizona have all indicated that they will continue to enforce board policy and applicable federal laws.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, The AZ Board of Regents issued the following statement, which indicates it will continue to respect federal laws, even though it is a state institution. The statement reads:

While the Arizona Supreme Court today has ruled that medical marijuana patients are not subject to criminal arrest if they have their drug on college and university campuses, the universities and the board may enforce administrative policies prohibiting drugs on campus.

The statement seems to indicate that medical cannabis users may still be kicked out of the conglomerate of universities. Such actions will also likely be challenged in court. For now, medical cannabis users may still want to medicate discreetly, being fully aware that the universities still have not resolved the details following the ruling.

Hitting the bong, firing up a joint, or using a vape pen may be legally allowed in someone’s dorm room, but Dean warned that students with MMJ cards should not immediately assume they can get away with it. Students may still be subjected to school discipline or even expulsion from the dorms if someone such as a Resident Assistant writes them up. They simply cannot be criminally charged with felonies even if the students choose do so.

“Bottom line—it’s not a crime to possess marijuana on university campuses. It’s not a crime to consume marijuana in a dorm room… The argument is very strong that vaping is not ‘smoking’ and may, in fact, be used on the college campus. The Supreme Court struck down the statute which criminalized MMJ on university campuses, for everybody, visitors, university professors and students alike,” Dean concluded, adding that a university professor could even vape MMJ in front of the class and not be charged with a felony.

Dean told The Free Thought Project that he is hopeful an initiative will put recreational marijuana on the ballot in November, but that he lacks funding to secure all of the signatures necessary for full adult-use legalization.

Phoenix’s Maricopa County District Attorney Bill Montgomery has yet to make any public comments on the ruling. Montgomery, whose office is estimated to receive up to $2 million per year from TASC, a private drug-treatment company, has been accused of being incentivized to charge anyone and everyone found in possession of marijuana with felonies—even if it is just residue.

The blatant conflict of interest does not seem to faze the DA who has publicly voiced his objections to medical marijuana, even though legal weed helps far more people than it harms.

Maestas rejected the drug diversion program offered by the DA and run by TASC, fought the charges, was found guilty, appealed to the AZ Supreme Court, and won. Now Arizona university students who are medical cannabis users no longer have to fear prosecution, but they also cannot light up a joint and smoke wherever they wish. Universities still must iron out those important details to answer the question of how, when and where they can legally take their medicine.

Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy

Even though Arizonans have voted to make MMJ legal, possession of cannabis is still considered a serious felony. Arizona is the only state in the United States where possession of cannabis in any amount, even residue, is still considered a felony. We repeat: It’s the only state. Every other state has decriminalized possession to a misdemeanor.

It is high time—pun intended—for the Arizona State Legislature to end the practice of making criminals out of its citizens for possession of small amounts of cannabis. Even MMJ users get caught up in TASC, forcing them to be subjected to legalized extortion of their financial resources all in an effort to avoid felony convictions on their arrest records. How can a state have a legal weed program and continue to charge everyone else with felonies? It just does not make any sense—unless, of course, it is all about the money.

Dean said he wants five things from future Arizona cannabis legislation: immunity from DUI charges for having metabolites in one’s blood, protection from having one’s children taken away for being a cannabis consumer, expungement of criminal records for prior marijuana offenses, marijuana crimes no longer being defined as “felonies” in the state, and home-growing as a legal option for marijuana consumers.

Dean told TFTP that he hopes other states refer to the Arizona decision for guidance. At any rate, history has been made in the state.

“We’ve been fighting the marijuana prohibition for 48 years—it’s a combination of the prison-industrial complex and Reefer Madness,” Dean said. “Medical marijuana has shown us the sky is not going to fall if people smoke marijuana legally. We’ve been lied to about this drug. It’s not true what they’ve told us about cannabis. The government has done the public a disservice when they lied to us about marijuana and they now run the risk of never being believed.”

Jack Burns is an educator, journalist, investigative reporter, and advocate of natural medicine. This article first appeared at The Free Thought Project.

By Jp Cortez

Sound money advocates rejoiced today as Arizona Governor Doug Ducey signed House Bill 2014 into law last night. The measure, which passed in the Arizona state Senate on May 10^th by a margin of 16-13, removes all income taxation of precious metals coins at the state level.

Under House Bill 2014, introduced by Representative Mark Finchem (R-Tucson), Arizona taxpayers will simply back out all “gains” and “losses” on any precious metals that are in legal tender form and reported on their federal tax returns from the calculation of their Arizona adjusted gross income (AGI).

If taxpayers own gold or silver to protect themselves against the devaluation of America’s paper currency, thanks to the inflationary practices of the Federal Reserve, they frequently end up with a “gain” when exchanging those metals back into dollars. However, this is not necessarily a real gain in terms of a gain in actual purchasing power. This “gain” is often a nominal gain because of the slow but steady devaluation of the dollar.  Yet the government nevertheless assesses a tax.

Sound Money Defense League, former presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul, and Campaign for Liberty helped secure passage of HB 2014 because it begins to dismantle the Federal Reserve’s monopoly on money.

“Arizona is helping lead the way in defending sound money and making it less difficult for citizens to protect themselves from the inflation and financial turmoil that flows from the abusive Federal Reserve System,” said Stefan Gleason, Director of the Sound Money Defense League.

Dr. Ron Paul noted, “HB 2014 is a very important and timely piece of legislation. The Federal Reserve’s failure to reignite the economy with record-low interest rates since the last crash is a sign that we may soon see the dollar’s collapse. It is therefore imperative that the law protect people’s right to use alternatives to what may soon be virtually worthless Federal Reserve Notes.”

A few state legislatures, including Utah and Idaho, have also taken steps toward eliminating income taxation on the monetary metals.  Other states are rolling back sales taxes on gold and silver or setting up precious metals depositories to help citizens save and transact in gold and silver bullion.

Read more about what states can do to promote sound money policies here.

Jp Cortez is the assistant director of the Sound Money Defense League, an organization working to bring back gold and silver as America’s constitutional money. Follow him on Twitter, @JpCortez27.

By Catherine J. Frompovich

Something very unusual and interesting has happened within the political sphere of Arizona state politicking:  “a utility regulator is asking the Arizona Supreme Court to void last week’s vote giving the state’s largest electric utility permission to immediately charge its customers an extra $7 a month.” [1]

According to published reports, Regulator/Commissioner Bob Burns is calling for the Court immediately to void the rate increase due to its being a violation of his rights and the constitutional duties of the other commissioners.

Wow!  Applause, applause, applause.  Finally, a public utility commissioner who understands, believes in, and works to uphold the constitutional rights of everyone affected by the four-to-one vote of the Arizona Corporation Commission [2] and which Commissioner Bob Burns is protesting.

Burns contends, “…any precedent set — is critical to providing voters and ratepayers information on how much utilities are spending to elect the people who regulate them.” [1]

“There hasn’t been interference or participation or whatever the proper term is of utilities in elections at the rate that APS decided to get into them up to this point,” he said.

“That includes the company’s admission it spent $4.2 million last year to elect a commission of its liking and questions about how much of $3.2 million filtered through “dark money” organizations that refuse to disclose their donors spent in the 2014 campaign came from the utility.” [1]

The admonition “follow the money” seems to apply, or ought to apply, especially when the following took place:

Company officials will neither confirm or deny they are the source of those dollars. But Pinnacle West in a 2015 statement to shareholders, all but admitted it played a financial role in that race, saying that spending by solar leasing companies on behalf of “anti-APS” Democrat candidates caused the firm to “reevaluate” how it would protect what it said were its interests and those of its customers and shareholders in the political process.

It was trying to get to the bottom of that 2014 spending Burns said, that led him to subpoena Brandt and company documents — the subpoenas that the other four commissioners quashed. [1] [CJF emphasis]

The question everyone who is having problems with their respective state utility commissions, whether it be rate hikes or AMI Smart Meter issues, e.g., no opt-outs, needs to be asking is: Have similar “money talks” shenanigans been going on, and ongoing, in order to keep public utility commissions not so honest!

Personally, I wonder how much money utility companies contributed to key Pennsylvania state legislators’ re-election campaigns.

That’s something a consumer advocacy committee needs to look into at every state level, especially in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania where a vested interest case is quite apparent and obvious in Consumer Affairs Chairman Robert Godshall, who prevents opt-out bills from passing into law since at least 2009.

Godshall’s son, Grey, works as a Project Manager for Exelon/PECO, the utility which is emotionally brutalizing customers with harassment techniques and threats of power turn off within a couple of days, or slapping new AMI Smart Meters on homes without the homeowner even knowing it!

One PECO Philadelphia customer was out of town on business; had a formal complaint filed with the PA PUC, which had not been resolved yet; and still PECO retrofitted an AMI Smart Meter while she was out of town, thereby depriving that customer of her federal and state Constitutional rights, plus granting PECO a “defacto” PA PUC decision!

Folks, the seemingly dirty politicking that goes on regarding AMI Smart Meters in numerous states, where there are no opt-out provisions, just may need more investigating into “follow the money,” as seems to be a significant factor in Arizona.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

References:
[1] http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2017/08/22/bob-burns-sues-to-void-aps-rate-increase/
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_Corporation_Commission

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on Amazon.com.

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)

Catherine’s NEW book: Eat To Beat Disease, Foods Medicinal Qualities ©2016 Catherine J Frompovich is now available

By Michael Maharrey

Last week, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey signed a bill into law that takes another step toward establishing gold and silver as money. The new law supplements Federal Reserve notes with honest money that has stable, constitutionally protected value.

Rep. Mark Finchem (R-Tucson) introduced House Bill 2013 (HB2013) on Jan. 9. The new law recognizes silver and gold as liquid capital for trust companies.

Practically speaking, the bill does two things.

1. Modifies the definition of “liquid capital” to include legal tender for trust company certification. (Sec. 1)


2. Defines legal tender as a medium of exchange, including specie, that is authorized by the U.S. Constitution or Congress for the payments of debts, public charges, taxes and dues. (Sec. 1) Specie is defined as coins having precious metal content.

Trust businesses act as “fiduciaries.” A fiduciary is a person who holds a legal or ethical relationship of trust. Typically, a fiduciary handles money or other assets for another party. A trust company in Arizona must maintain $500,000 of liquid capital reserves in order to operate. The bill would allow trust companies to count gold and silver specie as part of their liquid capital.

Under the current law, liquid capital is defined as capital in the form of certificates of deposit issued by banks, savings banks or savings and loan associations that do business in Arizona. These certificates of deposit are insured by the FDIC. HB2013 expands the definition to include gold and silver. Finchem explained the impact of the bill.

This would fortify the capital asset reserve of trust companies in Arizona. Since the FDIC only insures up to $250,000 of personal deposits in an FDIC insured bank, and they can take up to 99 years to pay a claim under federal law, this move permits investors in trust companies to place hard assets on deposit as ready, liquid capital reserve without converting the real money to fiat currency and then digital currency as in a deposit in the ACH system.

From a broader perspective, the passage of HB2013 recognizes hard money as a legitimate risk reducer. It also expands the role of gold and silver as money in Arizona, and further undermine the Federal Reserve’s monopoly on money.

Last month, the House passed HB2013 by a 33-24 vote. On March 14, the Senate approved the measure 17-13. Gov. Ducey signed the bill into law Friday. It will go into effect 90 days after the legislature adjourns sine die.