MARIJUANA LAWS BASED ON DISCRIMINATORY PAST

Marijuana has been illegal for a long time. However, unlike with most
drugs there has always been a rather distinguished movement to have it
legalized. In the American psyche, it lies somewhere between alcohol
and everything else. It recent years, doctors and patients touting its
medical benefits have brought it back to the forefront, causing some
states and cities to either decriminalize it or to allow doctors to
prescribe it for medical uses. It is time that the history and reasons
for marijuana prohibition be reexamined and hopefully significant and
serious debate can be reopened among politicians.

Any intelligent debate, especially in Congress, has been stifled by
the knee-jerk reaction to say that it is illegal and it should stay
that way. There is some fear marijuana will open a can of worms and
"corrupt our youth." However this argument has no firm ground to stand
on, especially when upon further examination - marijuana was made
illegal without any scientific basis. The passages of the first
prohibitive pieces of legislation regarding marijuana, the Uniform
Narcotic Drug Act (1932) and the Marihuana Tax Act (1937), were passed
based only on racist agendas against minority classes - especially
Mexicans - and by overly exaggerated tales of murder and mayhem caused
by the drug.

Marijuana legislation began primarily as a regional phenomenon based
in southern and western states. For the most part, the legislation was
racially motivated. Despite what people may think, Mexican immigration
is not a new issue. Today it may be based on nationalism and fairness
to the working class, though some may argue otherwise, but in the
1920s and 30s anti-Mexican sentiment was based on blatant racism.

It was generally known that marijuana use in these states was limited
to Mexican immigrants. During this time, with the Mexican population
growing in Southern and Western states, legislators saw their use of
marijuana as a way to stem this tide. There are two reasons that state
legislatures made marijuana illegal. The first is that during this
time the Temperance Movement was in full swing. This was at the height
of alcohol prohibition in the United States. Legislators wanted to
ensure with the influx of Mexican immigrants, there was no rise in use
of marijuana among the white middle- and upper-classes. Second, the
onset of the Great Depression, created an enormous of resentment among
the white populations competing for jobs with Mexican immigrants.
Marijuana prohibition was the perfect to tool to prevent the loss of
jobs among the white populations, because it only affected Mexicans
workers.

The second leg of marijuana prohibition involved yellow journalism,
mainly under the leadership of William Randolph Hearst, the owner of
one of the largest newspaper chains in the United States. In many
stories, writers often tied marijuana to violent crimes, including
rapes and murders, earning its reputation as the "killer weed." Often
these reports were unsubstantiated. There was never any scientific
proof cited that marijuana caused the violence. Many of the culprits
tried to pin their behavior on their marijuana use, claiming it made
them crazy. This was good enough for many reporters despite the lack
of scientific evidence. This could allow states to rationalize the
deportation, imprisonment, and immigration quotas of Mexican workers.

The stories of minority perpetrators often added to the marijuana
hostility by whites. In 1935, a Sacramento, Calif. reader wrote to The
New York Times stating "Marijuana, perhaps the most insidious of
narcotics, is a direct by-product of unrestricted Mexican immigration
. Mexican peddlers have been caught distributing marijuana
cigarettes to school children." The racist sentiments even reached the
floor of Congress. Harry J. Anslinger, the commissioner of the Federal
Bureau of Narcotics, the organization in charge of instituting
marijuana prohibition, presented a letter he received from the editor
of a Colorado newspaper as part of his testimony in favor of the
Marihuana Tax Act. The letter described an attack by a
Mexican-American under the influence of marijuana on a girl in the
region and went on to state, "I wish I could show you what a small
marijuana cigarette can do to one of our degenerate Spanish-speaking
residents. That's why our problem is so great; the greates! t
percentage of our population is composed of Spanish-speaking persons,
most of whom are low mentally, because of social and racial
conditions."

Eventually, the Marihuana Tax Act was overturned by the Supreme Court.
According to the law it was illegal to possess marijuana, but in order
to obtain the necessary tax stamp, one had to have the marijuana
present. This meant a person trying to obtain the stamp was in direct
violation of the law while trying to do so.

Despite the racial motivations for the first marijuana legislative
measures, this not did not stop Congress from passing the Controlled
Substances Act in 1970, making marijuana a Schedule I drug (along with
heroin, while cocaine is a Schedule II). This is not to say Congress
was motivated by racial intolerance. However, the previous laws which
had their basis in racial prejudice contributed unconsciously to the
mindset that marijuana is evil. This mindset has unfortunately lasted
in the psyches of people to this day, who refuse to look at marijuana
legislation with an open mind. However, since marijuana is illegal, it
will be very hard to overturn such a law. Alcohol prohibition lasted
13 years, and was repealed after an exhausting fight. Despite this
pitfall, any laws that have a historical basis in racial prejudice
need to be reexamined and reevaluated.

Weekly columnist Greg Pivarnik is an 8th-semester molecullar and cell
biology major. His columns run on Tuesdays.