The homeowners of Standing Akimbo believed the IRS was surreptitiously trying to find proof for federal prosecutors to use in opposition to them for drug trafficking crimes. The IRS as an alternative requested product monitoring particulars from Colorado’s Marijuana Enforcement Division and the Marijuana Enforcement Tracking Reporting and Compliance system.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit decided that the Fourth Amendment, which protects in opposition to unreasonable searches and seizures, didn’t defend the privateness of Standing Akimbo’s enterprise information.
“Taxpayers chose to operate a marijuana business under Colorado law and, thus, agreed to provide certain information to the Enforcement Division,” wrote Judge Gregory A. Phillips in an opinion from April of this yr. The plaintiffs “have no ownership, possession, or propriety [sic] interest in them.”
In the petition for Supreme Court overview, Thorburn disagreed, arguing the IRS wanted to get hold of a search warrant and present possible trigger. He contended that the “sole question” was whether or not the Controlled Substances Act, which nonetheless outlaws marijuana on the federal degree, preempts Colorado’s regime of legalized cannabis.
“Absent the explicit direction by Congress prohibiting that which is expressly legal under Colorado law, Congress did not override Colorado [state] cannabis distribution laws in favor of the CSA,” reads the petition to the Supreme Court. While acknowledging Congress has the ability to prohibit marijuana gross sales, Thorburn didn’t consider Congress explicitly meant to prevail over state regulation.
Following Colorado voters’ legalization of retail marijuana in 2012, Robert A. Mikos, a professor of regulation at Vanderbilt University, published an essay suggesting state legal guidelines that regulate marijuana are per Congress’ intent in passing the Controlled Substances Act as a result of they equally prohibit the use, distribution and possession of the drug.
However, “[n]either the United States Supreme Court, nor any federal appellate court, nor the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has yet opined on Congress’s intent to preempt state marijuana reforms,” Mikos noticed.
Read extra at